BOOK 43 Page 15881 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 1998, AT 6:00 P.M. ADJOURNED TO JANUARY 6, 1998 AT 2:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Gene Pillot, Vice Mayor Jerome Dupree, Commissioners Mollie Cardamone, David Merrill (arrived at 2:20 p.m.), and Nora Patterson (arrived at 2:04 p.m.), City Manager David Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT : None PRESIDING: Mayor Gene Pillot The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 2:01 p.m. 1. CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0009) through (0123) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Changes to the Orders of the Day: A. Add under Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. VII A-2, Approval Re: Amendment to the Temporary Parking Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Water Club II, for parking in Ken Thompson Park, per the request of City Manager Sollenberger City Manager Sollenberger stated that the terms of the Temporary Parking Agreement with the City require Water Club II to construct a parking lot at Ken Thompson Park in exchange for the use of the Park for temporary parking for construction employees working on Longboat Key; that the Temporary Parking Agreement required the parking lot be completed by February 9, 1998; however, the bids for the construction work are greater than anticipated; that costs will be reduced if the following changes in the specifications are approved: Delete the requirement for the 6-inch thick LBR-40 subgrade to a 6-inch compacted subgrade of crushed concrete; Delete "F" curbs and use trenched "D" curb; Extend the completion date to April 24, 1998; and Eliminate the 90-day maintenance period for landscaping Commissioner Patterson arrived in the Commission Chambers at 2:04 p.m. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Sarasota County, the maintaining agency for Ken Thompson Park, has agreed to the elimination of the 90-day maintenance period for landscaping; that the management of Water Club II initially requested the City assume the costs of a $15,000 design fee and was informed that the Administration would recommend to the Commission that the construction workers be required to find a place to park on Longboat Key; that a January 5, 1998, letter from Michael Furen, Attorney, Law Firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen & Ginsburg, indicates the request regarding the design fee has been deleted. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends adding under Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. VII A-2, approval regarding the amendment to the Temporary Parking Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Water club II, for parking in Ken Thompson Park. On motion of Vice Mayor Dupree and second of Commissioner Patterson, it was moved to approve the Changes to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 2. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, AND 9 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (0124) through (0145) 1. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Gulf Coast World of Science for a twenty year lease for the Selby Library Building 2. Approval Re: Amendment to the Temporary Parking Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Water Club II, for parking in Ken Thompson Park 3. Approval Re: First Amendment to the Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Anne Atwill for Cable Television Franchise Renewal Consulting Services 4. Approval Re: Proposed 1998-99 Budget Calendar 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Loan Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Community Redevelopment Agency, in the amount of $20,000, to fund a transportation modeling study for establishment of a concurrency exception area 6. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 98-4039, amending regulations pertaining to parking for certain disabled persons sO as to be consistent with the Florida Statues relating thereto; creating a procedure for dismissal of a disabled person's parking BOOK 43 Page 15882 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15883 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. citation under certain circumstance; providing for an administrative fee for such dismissal; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of parts hereof; etc. 7. Approval Re: Award of contract and authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract with Weeks Marine, Inc., d/b/a Weeks Dredging, Inc., Camden, New Jersey, (Bid #97-58) in the amount of $2,227,500 for construction of the Lido Key Beach nourishment project 8. Approval Re: Funding Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Water Management District in the amount of $133,000, for identification of Toxic Loads, Wetlands Habitat Restoration projects and wastewater reclamation plan development in the Sarasota Bay watershed 9. Approval Re: Cooperative Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Water Management District in the amount of $200,000, for restoration and enhancement of Palmer Point Park On motion of Commissioner Cardamone and second of Vice Mayor Dupree, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1 through 9, inclusive. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0) : Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 3. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 98R-1028) = ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (ORDINANCE NO. 98-4023) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (ORDINANCE NO. 98-4034) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (0145) through (0208) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 98R-1028 in its entirety and proposed Ordinance Nos. 98-4023 and 98-4034 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 98R-1028, appropriating $20, 000 from the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the General Fund to make a loan to the Community Redevelopment Agency to fund a transportation modeling study for the establishment of a concurrency exception area; etc. 2. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 97-4023, amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Boards, Commissions and Committees, Division 3, Performing Arts Hall Committee by clarifying the purpose for said committee and setting forth the procedure for appointment to said committee; providing for the severability of the parts hereof if declared invalid; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) 3. Adoption Re: : Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 98-4034, amending the City of Sarasota Local Amendments to the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code, 1985 Edition, as adopted by reference in Chapter 11, Article II, Sarasota City Code; setting forth procedures for the demolition or removal of abandoned, unsafe or unused commercial wireless telecommunication towers as set forth herein; setting forth findings as to intent and purpose; providing definitions; repealing ordinances in conflict; etc. (Title Only) On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Vice Mayor Dupree, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1 through 3, inclusive. Mayor Pillot requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 4. ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE PASSING OF JACK CONWAY Commissioner Cardamone stated that this morning, the community lost a man of vision and energy who contributed greatly to the City he grew to love; that the passing of Jack Conway is announced with great sorrow; that each Commissioner spent a great deal of time with Mr. Conway whose illness did not prevent a constant stream of creative ideas. Commissioner Cardamone continued that although a public funeral will not be held, a memorial service will be planned at a later date; that friends will gather at the home of Jeanne Nunn, a close family friend, at 4 p.m. on Friday, January 9, 1998; that a memorial resolution should be adopted at the January 20, 1998, regular Commission meeting. Mayor Pillot stated that Mr. Conway's experience and knowledge was extremely unusual and benefited the City tremendously; that Mr. Conway was a friend and leader who applied experience gained at the national level to the redevelopment of the City. Commissioner Cardamone stated that Mr. Conway watched with interest the regular Commission meeting last evening regarding proposals for development of the North Tamiami Trail neighborhood in which he lived; that the community has suffered a number of recent losses of leaders whose shoes will never be filled by people of equal caliber; that others will come along and contribute to the City; however, the recent losses will be difficult to endure. Mayor Pillot stated that individuals who contribute to the community will always be present; however, the strength of people BOOK 43 Page 15884 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15885 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. like Mr. Conway, Andrew "Sandy" Sandegren, and Dr. Robert Perkins is irreplaceable; that such losses leave a void which can never be completely filled. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: FUNDING FOR THE GREATER NEWTOWN REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; REQUESTED ADMINISTRATION TO PRESENT MATERIALS AND INFORMATION RELATING TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN PROPOSED BY THE GREATER NEWTOWN REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (GNRC) INCLUDING MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS, BY-LAWS, AND BUDGET AND ENSURE THE DIRECTOR OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND REDEVELOPMENT ATTENDS THE GNRC MEETINGS (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #1 (0209) through (3666) Commissioner Cardamone stated that at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, a motion was approved to allocate $128,000 to the Greater Newtown Community Redevelopment Corporation (GNRC) with the remaining $72,000 of the requested $200,000 to be considered when more specific plans for the consultants are submitted to and recommended by the Administration; that although confidence exists in the ability of the GNRC to achieve development of the community in which the members live and work, public funds should be allocated in an appropriate manner; and distributed to the Commission, the Administration, and representatives of the GNRC, the following letter written by herself on December 31, 1997; Because the Greater Newtown Redevelopment Corporation funding support request was a last-minute agenda item and we didn't have a lot of time to think it through and discuss it to my satistaction, I have some stipulations to be considered - especially if I am to maintain my, support for the request. I would like the following points/requests to be discussed and approved with additions you might make. The Greater Newtown Redevelopment Corporation should: 1. Act as an advisory board for at least six months to develop a plan with specific tasks and projects and costs. 2. Develop the plan in conjunction with Gregory Horwedel, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Redevelopment. 3. Present the plan to the Commission for approval prior to our making funding decisions. 4. Increase the GNRC Board membership to include members appointed or elected as representatives from Sarasota North Area Plan (SNAP), the Florida House-initiated redevelopment plan, the Newtown Task Force, the Newtown Ministerial Association, Men Against Destruction Defending Against Drugs and Social Disorders (Mad Dads), Goodwill, North Trail Association, Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Association, Bayou Oaks Neighborhood Association, a person from the banking/Financial community, a representative of the Argus Foundation or Chamber of Commerce, Frank Tamberrino, Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce Committee of 100, a land-use planner, and others. 5. Develop a comprehensive set of by-laws with the assistance of City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 6. Make regular monthly progress reports to the Commission under Board Actions, Agenda Item II. 7. Be prohibited from employing or compensating a past or current member of the GNRC Board. 8. Operate/Function under the Florida Sunshine Laws and public records laws. If the City Commission approves funding for GNRC positions, those employed must work directly with the Department of Neighborhoods and Redevelopment as well as the GNRC and the community. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that he would be unwilling to support the stipulations or conditions for funding listed in the letter as many have already been fulfilled; that he has regularly attended meetings of the GNRC, a bona fide community redevelopment corporation with completed by-laws; that representatives of many of the organizations listed in the letter have already been included in the membership of the GNRC; that a representative of the GNRC should be provided the opportunity to provide a status report and respond to the requested conditions for release of the funding approved by the Commission at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission. Commissioner Merrill arrived in the Commission Chambers at 2:20 p.m. Commissioner Cardamone stated that although some of the conditions may have been fulfilled, the by-laws are unsatisfactory and require revision; that although representatives of some of the organizations listed in the letter are currently members of the GNRC, representation from some of the other organizations is absent. Commissioner Patterson stated that Item 3 states the redevelopment plan should be presented for approval before funding decisions are made; that at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, $128,000 in funding was approved by a 3 to 2 vote, including Commissioner Cardamone's affirmative vote; and asked if presentation of a definite plan is recommended as a condition preceding the release of the approved funds? Commissioner Cardamone stated yes. BOOK 43 Page 15886 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15887 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson asked if the hiring of salaried personnel for which the funding was requested would be postponed until a plan is presented to the Commission? Commissioner Cardamone stated that is correct; that community groups requesting funding for conceptual proposals have always been advised to return with a specific plan; however, the GNRC funding request was approved absent a specific plan; that presentation of exact details is not necessary; however, currently, the fundamentals of the proposal are unknown; that the minutes of the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting indicate Commissioner Merrill advocated requiring presentation of a well-grounded plan prior to granting funding approval; that although Commissioners Patterson and Merrill indicated a potential willingness to support a concrete plan, the GNRC proposal was presented in a conceptual state. Commissioner Patterson stated that the GNRC is the only group for which open-ended funding has been allocated for a plan the specifics of which would be presented in the future; that the funding was requested to establish salaried positions intended to assist in development of the plan; however, the same result is achieved in other neighborhoods absent salaried personnel; that the conditions recommended by Commissioner Cardamone indicate a plan should be developed and presented to the Commission prior to release of the funding approved at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting; and asked how the function of the salaried positions proposed by the GNRC is perceived? Commissioner Cardamone stated that an accurate answer is unavailable; however, the assumption is made that the function of the salaried personnel would be clarified after development of a plan in which the types of appropriate businesses, private funding sources, and properties proposed for purchase will be recommended. Commissioner Cardamone continued that redevelopment of Newtown by design of the resident community is the desirable goal; that after casting the swing vote on the motion approved at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, she spent the rest of the evening worrying about approval of a concept so lacking in detail; that the ability of salaried personnel to function without specific direction is unknown; that her continued support is contingent on approval of the conditions for funding included in the letter. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that a plan has already been presented by the GNRC which has expended considerable time and effort in refining the by-laws; that GNRC meetings have been attended and the determination made that the action strategies presented to the Commission are proceeding as promised. Commissioner Merrill stated that at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, a plan to develop a plan was presented by the GNRC; that a recent Tampa Tribune editorial reported on redevelopment efforts proposed in St. Petersburg, beneficiary of a $20 million Federal redevelopment grant; that St. Petersburg researched redevelopment proposals in other urban areas which disbursed to consultants millions of dollars in Federal grants for plans never implemented; that Watts and other urban areas are still blighted. Commissioner Merrill continued that the City should establish the community redevelopment plan on which the Newtown plan will be modeled; that great strides to redevelop local retail uses have been made in Harlem, New York; that the Newtown plan should be patterned on a successful model; that the hiring of salaried personnel to implement a concrete plan based on a definitive goal would be supported; that existing concerns would be alleviated and the expertise of the GNRC broadened if the release of the approved funding is contingent on meeting the conditions recommended by Commissioner Cardamone; that the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK) Way corridor could become a commercial district for the entire north side of the City; however, success will depend on attracting an influx of commercial spending by residents of surrounding areas. Mayor Pillot stated that the conditions for funding requested for approval by Commissioner Cardamone have been developed with a clearly constructive intent; that the recommendations requiring development of the plan in conjunction with the Department of Neighborhoods and Redevelopment, the development of a comprehensive set of by-laws, and presentation of regular monthly progress reports warrant Commission support; however, Item 4 requires inclusion of representatives of various community groups on the GNRC Board and Item 8 requires the GNRC to operate under the Sunshine Law; and asked if the same conditions have ever been required of other private organizations funded by the City? City Manager Sollenberger stated that other private organizations receiving City funding are not required to operate under the Sunshine Law; that the geographical limits included in the GNRC study area extend from Tuttle Avenue to Sarasota Bay and from Myrtle Street to 10th Street; that Item 4 is apparently an attempt to include representation from community groups throughout the entire study area and should be approved or disapproved by Commission discretion. Commissioner Cardamone stated that each of the community groups listed in the letter greatly desire and will benefit by the successful redevelopment of Dr. MLK Way; that expertise can be provided by residents of surrounding areas; that before the formal incorporation of the GNRC, the people involved in the original Newtown redevelopment group included Kerry Kirschner, Executive Director of the Argus Foundation, representing the business BOOK 43 Page 15888 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15889 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. community, Stephen Kunk, Chief Executive Officer and President, Provident Bank, representing the banking community, Bruce Franklin, AIA, Principal, ADP Associates, Inc., representing the land-use community, and Terry Copeland, representing T & W Realty Management, Inc., who wanted to invest in the purchase and redevelopment of property in Newtown; that the individuals included in the original group are no longer involved; that the current GNRC Board lacks representation from many of the recommended groups; that the success of Newtown redevelopment is sO important to the City that denying expansion of the Board would be a mistake on the part of the Commission; that private organizations are not usually requested by the Commission to revise by-laws and expand Board membership as a condition for funding; however, no other group has presented a redevelopment request of this magnitude. Mayor Pillot stated that increasing the GNRC Board membership to include representatives from the community groups listed in the letter would be highly constructive; however, he is reluctant to require any private agency to include certain members on the voting board even though funding is provided by the City; that the GNRC will most likely solicit input from the community groups recommended in the letter on a routine basis whether or not representatives of those groups are included on the voting Board. Mayor Pillot continued that the condition prohibiting employment or compensation of past or current members of the GNRC is the item of greatest concern; that the intent is clearly correct; however, strong leadership ability and knowledge may be lost if GNRC Board members, whose knowledge of the community is great, are prohibited from employment; that the GNRC should have flexibility to hire whomever they choose as long the legality of doing sO is confirmed by the City Attorney. Commissioner Patterson stated that two communities in West Palm Beach comprised of 4,000 to 5,000 people each elect the Board members of the redevelopment agencies representing those communities; that Board members creating positions to salary themselves is a concern; that a much larger expenditure than approved for the salaried positions will be required to fund the overall redevelopment project and whether the community is appropriately represented by the existing Board is unknown; that an election would assure adequate representation and eliminate concerns regarding salaried positions. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a community-wide meeting to elect Board members was previously suggested; however, ensuring adequate participation by residents is difficult; and asked if 50 percent of the community could be convened at a meeting to elect the membership of the GNRC Board? Commissioner Patterson stated that 50 percent could not be found to determine a Commission race; that Commissioner Cardamone was elected by a small percent. Mayor Pillot stated that five percent of the City electorate voted for Commissioner Cardamone. Commissioner Cardamone asked what percentage would suffice and could a large enough group be persuaded to participate? Vice Mayor Dupree stated that answers can be provided by the GNRC Board members; that the community groups listed in the letter do not include people who are education specialists. Jetson Grimes, President, and Pauline Hodges, Dorothy Clark, and Fredd Atkins Board Members of the Greater Newtown Redevelopment Corporation (GNRC) came before the Commission. Ms. Hodges stated that the issues raised at this meeting have long been discussed by the GNRC; that City Commissioners have constantly been invited to attend the GNRC meetings held at 7:30 a.m. every Tuesday morning; that the GNRC wishes to meet the Commission's expectations and is structuring the redevelopment project to ensure trust and accountability, that proposals developed by the original redevelopment group are under review, individuals who served on the original redevelopment group are being contacted, and a list of people from a wide spectrum has been developed; that an annual Board meeting has been scheduled for January 13, 1998; that the GNRC is incorporated; that articles and by-laws, a requirement of incorporation, have already been developed. Ms. Hodges continued that requiring the GNRC to revise the by-laws, inferring the existing by-laws are not good enough, is rather an insult; that the by-laws have been reviewed by only one Commissioner; that Commissioners are requested to attend meetings, at which the by-laws are reviewed and refined for fairness and clarity, to determine the necessity of further modifications. Ms. Hodges further stated that prohibiting the hiring of staff from the Board membership currently working as volunteers is difficult; that prohibiting the hiring of a Board member with good secretarial skills who needs a job will tie the hands of the GNRC Board; that prohibiting employment to a Newtown resident in favor of someone from another jurisdiction is illogical; that good people currently serve on the GNRC Board which wishes to provide accountability to and earn the trust of the Commission; that the Board will have no problem complying with some of the conditions for funding listed in the letter. Mr. Grimes stated that Newtown is unique; that the GNRC has met each week over the last four months and understands what is necessary to revitalize the Newtown community; that at the BOOK 43 Page 15890 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. : BOOK 43 Page 15891 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, an outline of the plan was provided to the Commission; that the redevelopment will occur in 15 to 16 phases; that the following social problems must be addressed by grass-roots activists whose understanding is complete: Public Safety Mr. Grimes stated that businesses cannot be motivated to develop on Dr. MLK Way if the general population is apprehensive about shopping in Newtown; that a community patrol is assisting the Police Department; that the crime rate has dropped 50 to 60 percent in the last six months. Education Mr. Grimes stated that only 108 Newtown students graduated from high school last yeari that an Education Committee has been organized and is hard at work. Jobs Mr. Grimes stated that 400 people have become employed through a jobs program developed by the GNRC absent any outside funding. Mr. Grimes continued that all existing programs have been implemented on a strictly volunteer basis; that a redevelopment plan has been developed and is being implemented by the GNRC; that the Commission is requested only to provide funding for salaried personnel to expedite redevelopment and alleviate the burden of having to constantly solicit volunteers; that every member of the GNRC is a volunteer and willing to continue on that basis; that the redevelopment efforts of the GNRC will continue even if funding is withheld; that the Commission is requested to fund a small amount necessary to facilitate revitalization and create a prosperous commercial center attractive to the entire City. Ms. Hodges stated that job descriptions have already been developed for the salaried positions approved for funding at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting; that the GNRC has met with Carl Weinrich, Chief Executive Officer of the YMCA; that education specialists have apparently been excluded from Commissioner Cardamone's list of conditions for funding. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the exclusion of education specialists was an oversight. Ms. Hodges stated that the educational component can never be forgotten by GNRC Board members; that the lack of success in the educational realm is in the forefront every day particularly as the Newtown community graduated from high school only 108 students in all of Sarasota County; that representatives of the school system have been contacted by the GNRC which is developing programs within the parameters of available facilities and resources; that the role and duties of the Executive Director and assistant are fully understood by the GNRC which works with people in public safety, education, social services, and drug-abuse counseling. Ms. Clark stated that she is a former member of the Sarasota County School Board and a former supervisor of the Juvenile Detention Center for 20 years; that the GNRC redevelopment plan was presented to the Commission at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting; that the Commission appears to wish Newtown to be safe and comparable to Gillespie Park, the Rosemary District, and other redeveloping neighborhoods; that the Commission and everyone else in Sarasota knows that GNRC Board members and other families in Newtown cannot perpetually participate on a strictly volunteer basis; that the community is already below the poverty level; that the volunteer service has been a pleasure for each of the Board members and other people who help make decisions. Ms. Clark continued that her heart is heavy to think that the GNRC Board members are not worthy to be trusted with the guardianship of funds necessary to implement the redevelopment plan; that the proposed Executive Director will be required to answer to the Board; that Commissioner Cardamone, one of the people on the original redevelopment group, should ask why the redevelopment project did not materialize; that some of the people on the original redevelopment group and included in the list in the letter were not dedicated to redeveloping Newtown; that the GNRC meets at 7:45 a.m., every Tuesday morning; that the membership is extremely dedicated to improving the community even if the Commission withholds funds to redevelop Newtown. Ms. Clark further stated that the Commissioners would understand the reasons behind the funding request if they would visit Newtown; that instead, the Commissioners recommend bringing someone from the outside into the Newtown community in which she grew up to tell the residents what to do; that no one outside the community has any understanding of why children are dropping out of school; that she was in the school and juvenile justice systems and understands the conditions from which children are fleeing, the number of children involved, and the correct way to regain their trust; that community leaders are dedicated to encouraging children to return to school or apprentice to a trade; that not one Commissioner has attended a meeting; that the Commissioners should ask themselves why they are afraid to see what the GNRC is doing. Ms. Clark stated further that Newtown could become a national model of a community developed by indigenous residents; that no one who lives outside Newtown can come in and redevelop the area; that Mr. Horwedel, the new Director of Neighborhoods and BOOK 43 Page 15892 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15893 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Redevelopment, who was invited to attend a meeting, should be asked why he has yet to appear; that the Commission would have no problem with providing funding for salaried positions if the desire to successfully redevelop Newtown were sincere. Ms. Clark continued that true sorrow exists that the Commissioners do not feel Newtown should be redeveloped and the children of the community brought in off the streets; that increased public safety would attract residents Citywide to shop in Newtown; that the Commission would have come to visit if not for an ingrained fear of Newtown; that she is not a two-faced Christian but a Christian from her heart and an honest person who does not become involved with any unethical organizations. Ms. Clark further stated that a prayer will be said that none of the Commissioners go to sleep this evening; that the Commission is hurting the GNRC Board members by making them feel untrustworthy as during the time of slavery; that the Board members are well-trusted, educated people; that the Board members will remove the children from the streets whether or not funding is provided by the Commission; that the GNRC meets regularly in the mornings with some Board members taking time off from work; that honest jobs for a worthy cause are being sought for currently unemployed people. Ms. Clark stated further that the Commission is asked to reconsider the recommendation to reverse the funding decision made at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting; that funding should be provided without conditions tying chains around their necks, ankles, and hands; that GNRC Board members allowed autonomy will not misuse their own tax dollars; that the GNRC will make an example of Sarasota on which the redevelopment efforts of other communities will be modeled; that a model is not required for the GNRC because Newtown is unique. Mayor Pillot requested Ms. Clark to not include him in her prayers petitioning sleeplessness for the Commissioners. Ms. Clark stated that Mayor Pillot who always tried to convince Newtown children to stay in school will be excluded from those prayers; and expressed appreciation for his efforts and requested his continued support. Mayor Pillot stated that several months ago, he met with and informed Mr. Atkins, Mr. Grimes, and Vice Mayor Dupree that he cannot know Newtown even though he has been in and out of Newtown for 35 years, first as Principal of Sarasota High School, and then as Superintendent of Schools; that Professor Dr. Roland Rogers, former Principal of Booker High School and Director of Community Relations for the Sarasota County School Board, is remembered with affection and still missed; that Newtown can be truly understood only by those who are a direct part of the community; that redevelopment will succeed only due to the leadership provided by the GNRC. Mayor Pillot continued that his support for the funding has not changed and will not change; that Commissioner Cardamone's request for the conditions to the funding, intended to make the redevelopment project stronger, are constructive; that some of the conditions can be supported; however, other cannot; that the $128,000 in funding approved at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting is a small sum of money relative to the needs of the Newtown community; that the reward will be many times that sum of money; that Newtown is unique; that unique circumstances justify taking actions in a slightly different way from those taken regarding other neighborhood associations whose members have acted strictly as volunteers; that Newtown is different; that crime and drug-related activities exist in other neighborhoods; however, the graduation rate of children in Newtown has always been tragic; that the GNRC will change the eduçational opportunities for Newtown children; that his support remains steadfast. Mr. Atkins stated that comments by other Board members adequately express his views. Mr. Grimes stated that he does not know what must be done to gain trust; that the contributions of his colleagues to the Newtown community exceed the call of duty; that the Commission is indicating the Board members who have given sO much to the community, asking nothing in return but the right to see the community prosper, are still not trusted. Mr. Grimes continued that Longboat Key and Siesta Key are often visited; that Newtown residents sometimes do not believe themselves deserving of the amenities available in other areas and believe such things are unattainable in Newtown; that the negative perception and the environment must change; that the Commission is requested to trust the GNRC which will not misuse the $128,000 in funding approved at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting; that the GNRC simply wishes to hire salaried personnel to implement the redevelopment plan; that salaried personnel are accountable; that Board members will be accountable as volunteers; that the City is requested to trust and allow the GNRC one year to prove an independent redevelopment project can succeed. Commissioner Merrill stated that different connotations can be attached to the word "trust"; that the honesty of the Board members is unquestioned; however, trust also relates to confidence; that a manager of General Motors wishing to build a plant in Thailand would not be provided a blank check for $1 billion by the Chairman of the Board on the basis of trust; that the manager would be expected to develop a construction proposal, a marketing plan, and financial statements; that the BOOK 43 Page 15894 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15895 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. issue is not trust as related to integrity or honesty but accountability; that Newtown redevelopment should be a success; that accountability should not be difficult; that the GNRC could present a plan at the next regular Commission meeting to enable the Commission to determine that required standards are met; that the conditions for funding listed in the letter simply indicate a desire by the Commission to approve the plan. Ms. Clark stated that the plan will be presented; however, Commissioner Merrill, who was invited, will not attend the GNRC's Tuesday morning meetings and will not even visit Newtown for a personal tour to ascertain the reasons for the funding request. Commissioner Merrill stated that the last time a request to attend a GNRC meeting was received from Ms. Clark, a memorandum was sent to the Commission secretary to arrange attendance; that the holiday season may have interfered with the arrangements; however, a desire exists to attend a meeting. Ms. Clark stated that a personal tour will be provided. Commissioner Merrill stated that accountability and achievement of the results desired for Newtown are the issues; that the Commission requires assurance that the proper steps to execute a plan are established; that Mr. Grimes and Mr. Atkins presented the outline of a plan and were requested to provide further detail; that public presentation of a specific plan modeled on an existing, successful redevelopment project should not be an onerous request. Commissioner Merrill continued that the GNRC cannot be successful without including as Board members representatives of all groups listed in the letter by Commissioner Cardamone; that new businesses need new customers; that the streets must be made safe to allow people residing outside Newtown to patronize the stores and restaurants; that the community-wide plan requires acceptance by representatives of the recommended groups to ensure success; that the GNRC Board members may be completely trustworthy; however, accountability is required before the plan can be implemented. Ms. Hodges stated that the GNRC wants to be accountable; however, a proposal can be presented in detail as to how the redevelopment plan will be implemented including educational, public safety, social services, and land-development components and the Commission may still disagree with the proposal; that the GNRC will be caught in a round robin of accountability. Commissioner Cardamone stated that expenditure of government funds requires accountability, that she totally agrees with Commissioner Merrill; that nothing in the letter listing conditions for funding indicates the GNRC is not trusted to autonomously implement a plan; that the Commission is accountable for public dollars collected by the City; that Commission approval of the details of the plan is not required; however, a definitive plan should be presented; that a budget including costs of rent and salaries was presented; however, no job descriptions relating to the salaried personnel were provided; that she supported the GNRC funding request and is willing to continue support; however, accountability should be provided; that the by-laws reviewed previously were inadequate for a redevelopment corporation; that perhaps the first draft has been improved. Ms. Hodges asked the specific problem with the by-laws perceived by Commissioner Cardamone? Commissioner Cardamone stated that the by-laws are insufficient to implement a plan of action. Ms. Hodges stated that an attorney experienced in the writing of by-laws wrote the by-laws for the GNRC. Commissioner Cardamone stated that eight pages were missing in the by-laws provided by Mr. Atkins. Mr. Atkins stated that the pages were misplaced by the Commission secretary when reproducing the by-laws. Commissioner Cardamone stated that reproducing documents for the Commission is not the secretary's responsibility. Mr. Atkins asked why a personal inference has been made that he is inept when the secretary was provided a complete copy of the by-laws? Commissioner Cardamone stated that the pledge by the GNRC to proceed forward with or without funding was encouraging; that the letter was presented this evening for discussion and not intended to establish absolute conditions for approval; that the conditions in the letter should be required of any community redevelopment agency requesting public funding; that the educational component was inadvertently excluded. Commissioner Cardamone continued that the City Attorney was consulted regarding the condition requiring the GNRC Board to operate under the Sunshine Law; that the GNRC would be required to keep minutes and function openly as a corporation in the manner of every advisory board in the City; that the Nuisance Abatement Board keeps excellent minutes and presents all agendas to the Commission; that the request to share every detail with the Commission is not unreasonable. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that Commissioner Cardamone has not requested to review the minutes or the agendas. BOOK 43 Page 15896 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15897 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she does not need to ask. Ms. Clark stated that Commissioner Cardamone was invited and will not attend the meetings. Mr. Atkins stated that everything necessary to say has already been expressed by the other three Board members; that members of the Newtown community sit humbly and take these whippings every time they come before the Commission; that a response seemed appropriate when Commissioner Cardamone associated him by name with a shortcoming which was not of his doing; that the public should know that the eight missing pages of the by-laws were misplaced by the Commission secretary. Commissioner Patterson stated that the conditions for funding requested by Commissioner Cardamone are not unreasonable; however, the underlying philosophy on which approval of the funding request is based differs from her own; that her decision regarding the funding was based on whether a neighborhood group should be provided public funds to salary personnel to implement a redevelopment project; that other neighborhoods are also led by low-income residents. Commissioner Patterson continued that the integrity of the individuals involved is not questioned; that the primary issue is the appropriateness of a group of neighborhood residents requesting public funds to create salaried positions because they cannot afford to donate their time to implement a redevelopment plan; that a larger city with more dollars could afford to do sO in several of the underprivileged neighborhoods; however, denying a funding request by the leaders of Gillespie Park or Park East Neighborhood Associations after having approved the same for Newtown would be difficult; that her perception of the similarities between the neighborhoods may be incorrect; that sufficient distinction may be lacking. Commissioner Patterson further stated that the condition requiring inclusion of representatives from Indian Beach/Sapphires Shores or Bayou Oaks neighborhood is not relevant; that the primary goal is the redevelopment of Newtown; that although the by-laws may not be acceptable to her, determining the format for the by-laws is the Board's decision and not hers; that she could probably be persuaded to support a request for funding to hire Board members for salaried positions if the Board were elected by the Newtown community; that the recommendation to hold an election may not be palatable to the Board members of the GNRC; however, the integrity of the leadership is not the issue; that her decision regarding the funding request is based on criteria fundamentally different from those cited by Commissioner Cardamone; that a GNRC meeting will be attended soon; that the past two weeks have been difficult; that she is not the least bit afraid of coming into Newtown and has done so on previous occasions. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Commission could facilitate a community meeting to share the goals of the GNRC with the community and request an election; that the Newtown community may not extend to Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores but does include Bayou Oaks, SNAP, and the Chamber of Commerce; and asked if an election would be feasible? Vice Mayor Dupree stated that at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, the GNRC was requested to extend their Board; that the Commission is now saying that extending the Board is not sufficient and that the community must be called together to elect the Board; that a Board already exists; that the articles of incorporation and by-laws have been reviewed and revised; that the GNRC has been working extremely hard in good faith and is at the point of presenting a detailed redevelopment plan comprised of eight to ten components each of which is being addressed by qualified people appointed to specific tasks; and asked why an election is necessary when the Commission voted to approve the GNRC request for funding and would entirely new members of the Board be elected with no consideration to the efforts of existing Board members? Commissioner Patterson stated that knowing in advance of funding whether the community supports the redevelopment project is difficult; that when Mr. Atkins was on the Commission, approximately $1 million was allocated to install a median on Dr. MLK Way without knowing beforehand whether the streetscaping project was appropriate and with the assumption that the project was designed by the leadership in conjunction with the community; that many complaints were received and, supported by Vice Mayor Dupree, another large sum of money, between $500,000 and $1 million, was recently allocated for the second streetscaping of Dr. MLK Way; that at the January 5, 1998, regular Commission meeting, a prominent member of the Newtown community requested the newly installed streetscaping improvements be removed. Mr. Atkins stated that complaints are constantly received by the Commission which has never taken an action of which the public is unanimously supportive; that some complaints have been generated regarding the new streetscaping design; that part of the problem is the radius of the turning areas designed by traffic engineers and traffic abatement Staff who are supposed to know what they are doing; that the median portion of the streetscaping project was constructed exactly in the design requested by community leaders and the goal of slowing down the traffic accomplished; however, the radius of the turning areas at certain intersections was badly designed. Commissioner Patterson stated that the medians may have been badly designed; however, the roadway is now sO narrow that traffic is BOOK 43 Page 15898 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15899 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. blocked by vehicles stopping to converse with pedestrians; that the Commission has been requested to remove the streetscaping improvements; that real representation from the community is required when major funds are expended. Mr. Atkins stated that the Dr. MLK Way streetscaping project was designed by a traffic engineer with input from an advisory group. Mr. Atkins continued that a statement was made earlier that 50 percent of the community would be required to elect the GNRC Board membership at a community meeting; that 50 percent of the population has never turned out for anything. Commissioner Patterson stated that a 50 percent turnout is not a reasonable expectation; however, a 2-percent turnout would be sufficient as long as the community is provided the opportunity to select their representatives. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Board members of the GNRC should present the minutes of the meetings, the redevelopment plan, and the budget to the Commission; that although a GNRC meeting has not yet been attended, an invitation was not received until December 15, 1997, just before the holidays. Ms. Clark stated that an invitation was issued to Commissioner Cardamone during a SNAP meeting months ago. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a definitive plan should be presented to the Commission including the direction of the GNRC and the duties of an Executive Director; that one condition for funding which she is committed to requiring is Item 7, the prohibition against employing or compensating a past or current member of the GNRC Board; that problems can arise if individuals create a Board, volunteer to serve as Board members, and then hire staff from the Board membership; that a convincing argument is required to change her mind. Mayor Pillot stated that a great deal of talent exists on the GNRC Board which can be utilized as salaried leadership; that examples exist throughout the local and wider community of good, constructive Board members who leave to become salaried employees. Mr. Grimes stated that he disagrees with the prohibition against employing or compensating a current or past member of the GNRC Board; that certain individuals in the Newtown community have the ability, the skills, and support of the community; that the opportunity to hire a qualified person should not be eliminated. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration plans to draft an agreement with the GNRC to ensure accountability and intends to proceed based on Commission approval of $128,000 in funding at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting; that a draft document can be prepared and presented at the January 20, 1998, regular Commission meeting for discussion; that Mr. Horwedel will be requested to work in conjunction with the GNRC to return a redevelopment plan to the Commission. Commissioner Cardamone stated that materials and information relating to the GNRC redevelopment plan should be presented to the Commission prior to presentation of the funding agreement by the Administration; that the funding request could be delayed to another meeting. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Administration should be requested to ensure that Mr. Horwedel attend the GNRC meetings; that Newtown redevelopment comprises a major portion of his job description. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Mr. Horwedel intends to attend the meetings but has been occupied with relocation. Commissioner Patterson stated that no accusations are being made; that the request is simply that Mr. Horwedel attend the meetings. City Manager Sollenberger stated that Mr. Horwedel was informed prior to hiring that Newtown redevelopment is a high priorities; that he will not be directing the redevelopment effort but assisting the Newtown community in achieving a successful redevelopment. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: STATUS OF THE PROGRESS MADE IN IMPLEMENTING A COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SARASOTA BAY (AGENDA ITEM VII-2 #1 (3671) through #2 (0845) Susan Walker, Manager, Policy, Planning, and Administration, and Jaime Doubek, Public Affairs Director, Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program, came before the Commission. Ms. Walker stated that a report on the progress of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program (SBNEP) program was submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 1997; that the EPA determined the performance of the SBNEP was exemplary and awarded $300,000 in Fiscal Year (FY) 1999; that Senators Connie Mack and Robert Graham jointly proposed a bill in the United States (U.S.) Congress to increase and stabilize the funding for habitat restoration and coastal programs such as the SBNEP; that the bill, entitled the Estuary Habitat Restoration Partnership Act of 1997, if passed, will provide $40 million to $75 million to implement nationwide coastal programs; that following are some of the accomplishments of 1997: BOOK 43 Page 15900 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15901 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Florida Yards & Neighborhoods (FYN) Program Ms. Walker stated that the SBNEP entered into agreements with the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences to implement the FYN Program statewide, much of which was developed locally to provide a model for other areas in the State; that the Directors of the Manatee and Sarasota County Cooperative Extension and the SBNEP developed an action strategy including promotion of the FYN Program to key stakeholder groups such as real estate developers and landscape architects. Ms. Walker continued that a landscape design for City Hall utilizing Florida Yard principles was developed and approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board with additional funding recommended by the Citizens With Disabilities Advisory Board; that the design will be presented for Commission approval in early 1998. Hog Creek Habitat Restoration Ms. Walker stated that the Hog Creek Habitat Restoration project is progressing toward final design and construction pending selection of a consultant to conduct property appraisals to purchase land on the south side of Hog Creek; that the City will be provided with contiguous landholdings from Pioneer Park to the Tamiami Trail and across to Centennial Park; that a $325,000 grant from Florida Communities Trust has been awarded to purchase the property. Whitaker Bayou Stormwater Master Plan Ms. Walker stated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is working with the Sarasota County Stormwater Environmental Utility and the City to develop the Whitaker Bayou Stormwater Master Plan; that a task force of County, City, and SBNEP staff and area citizens has been assembled to gather information from residents affected by stormwater problems in the Whitaker Bayou Basin and to develop aesthetic or recreational opportunities; that the residents' ideas will be incorporated into the Stormwater Master Plan. Mayor Pillot stated that a local retired professional who canoes in Whitaker Bayou presented a plan to incorporate recreational and aesthetic opportunities into the Stormwater Master Plan; that the gentleman's name will be provided to the SBNEP. Sarasota North Area Plan (SNAP) Ms. Walker stated that the SBNEP is serving on the SNAP team to develop a long-term redevelopment and sustainability plan for the north side of the City. Wetlands Ms. Walker stated that in April 1997, the SBNEP and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) submitted to the USACE a request for $2 million to restore intertidal wetlands; that the proposal was approved by the USACE and a Preliminary Restoration Plan prepared; that the USACE also recommended national designation of Sarasota Bay wetlands restoration as a "Coastal America" project; that the "Coastal America" office is located in the office of the President of the United States; that "Coastal America" is used to designate extremely viable projects partnered with Federal agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which has advised that $650,000 in grants requested by SBNEP have been approved bringing to over $1 million the total grant amount for habitat restoration provided to the local area by that agencyi that $100,000 has been provided by the Manasota Basin Board of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) for habitat restoration at the Neville Preserve. Atmospheric Deposition of Nutrients Ms. Walker stated that Sarasota County will allow the SBNEP to locate a station at South Lido Park to collect data determining the regional sources of atmospheric deposition and the impact on algal growth in Sarasota Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. Toxic Substances Identification Ms. Walker stated that contractors have been selected to conduct research to identify current and historical sources of toxic substances in Whitaker Bayou, Hudson Bayou, and Phillippi Creek. Gulf Coast Heritage Trail Ms. Walker stated that on January 1, 1998, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune published a front-page article regarding the Gulf Coast Heritage Trail. Ms. Doubek displayed on the overhead projector Slides of various points of interest along the Gulf Coast Heritage Trail and stated that the SBNEP has attempted to increase public access to the Bayfront; that visitors will be provided access to wetland habitat restoration sites and educated regarding endangered species such as the manatee as well as the area's history and culture; that natural, cultural, and historical points of interest have been linked into a cohesive marketing and promotional package for tourists and residents. Ms. Doubek continued that the findings of a study commission by the 1990 Division of Tourism entitled "Who's Not Coming" show the widespread perception among visitors that the State has become BOOK 43 Page 15902 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15903 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. too urbanized and lacks diversity and historical, cultural, and natural resources; that the SBNEP wishes to provide to eco-tourists the opportunity to visit non-commercialized areas. Ms. Doubek further stated that 200 participants mapped out over 500 points of interest throughout Manatee and Sarasota Counties at the first SBNEP community forum in March 1997; that a full-time staff intern was hired to ensure the data collected from local residents met the criteria established by the Heritage Trail Advisory Committee; that the Gulf Coast Heritage Trail Program is also overseen by the SBNEP Policy Committee; that according to the World Wildlife Fund, eco-tourists take longer trips and spend up to $1,000 more during a two week-vacation than visitors to Busch Gardens or Daytona Beach; that the DeSoto National Memorial, Cortez Historic Fishing Village, a bird rookery, places to view bottle-nosed dolphins, Myakka Park, and Leffis Key, a 34-acre wetland habitat restoration site along Sarasota Bay, are sites to visit on the Heritage Trail; that Dr. David Ebitz, Director of the Ringling Museum of Art, and Larry White, Director of the Crosley Estate, are proposing revitalization of an old baywalk adjoining the two properties along the Bayfront; that Sarasota and Manatee Counties are collectively marketing points of interest; that vehicular routes and scenic drives will be developed to draw visitors away from U.S. 41 wherever appropriate; that the City's new bicycle path provides access to various points of interest along the Heritage Trail; that points of interest in South County and Venice have been incorporated on the Heritage Trail; that the SBNEP wishes to promote the Carlton Reserve which is seldom visited. Ms. Doubek stated further that previous brochures developed to promote the area were created in an extremely commercialized style; that new styles of marketing will provide alternative points of interest to the eco-tourist. Commissioner Cardamone stated that members of SBNEP Policy Committee traveled by bus from Spanish Point to all points of interest on the Heritage Trail in South County except the Carlton Reserve; that amenities for bicyclists and walkers are being developed by the SBNEP. Ms. Doubek stated that The Heritage Trail Community Forum II will be held at Sudakoff Hall at the University of South Florida from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. on January 14, 1998. The Commission recessed at 4 p.m. and reconvened at 4:15 p.m. 7. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: EVALUATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK = APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1) WRITE NARRATIVE EVALUATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S 1997-98 PERFORMANCE, 2) REQUEST CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK TO ACQUIRE FORMS FROM FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES FOR FUTURE EVALUATIONS OF CITY ATTORNEY, 3) REQUEST DISTRIBUTION OF FORM USED TO EVALUATE THE CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK, 4) USE THE EXISTING EVALUATION FORM OR DEVELOP A NARRATIVE ESSAY TO EVALUATE PERFORMANCE OF CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK DURING 1997-98, AND 5) SUBMIT COMPLETED EVALUATIONS TO THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES BY JANUARY 30, 1998 (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #2 (0845) through (1243) Commissioner Cardamone stated that evaluation of the City Attorney and the City Auditor and Clerk is required by the Charter of the City of Sarasota; that both Charter Officials were previously requested to research and provide to the Commission evaluation forms used by other municipalities; that Commissioners also indicated a willingness to write narrative essays evaluating each Charter Official. Mayor Pillot stated that the Charter requires Charter Officials be evaluated annually. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City Attorney and City Auditor and Clerk have not been evaluated in a year and a half. Mayor Pillot stated that the City Attorney and City Auditor and Clerk should not be requested to provide evaluation formats; that each Commissioner could submit individual evaluations written in a narrative style; that the Commission should specify a Senior Staff member to whom the evaluations will be submitted by a date certain. Commissioner Cardamone stated that determining criteria with which to evaluate the Charter Officials will ensure uniformity; that Commissioner Patterson previously recommended the City Auditor and Clerk obtain an evaluation format from the Florida League of Cities; that Charter Officials should not be requested to develop forms for their own evaluations. Commissioner Patterson stated that a form has been used by the Commission to evaluate the City Auditor and Clerk in the past. Mayor Pillot stated that writing a narrative essay is preferred. Commissioner Patterson stated that each Commissioner should determine whether to write a narrative essay or use the existing form which allows evaluation of the City Auditor and Clerk on a numerical scale; that blank copies of the evaluation form should be distributed to the Commission; that a narrative essay to evaluate the City Attorney should be written by each Commissioner; that the City Auditor and Clerk should be requested to research BOOK 43 Page 15904 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15905 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. existing formats available from the Florida League of Cities to evaluate the City Attorney next year. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved that the following actions be taken to evaluate the performances of the City Attorney and City Auditor and Clerk: 1. Write a narrative essay to evaluate the City Attorney's performance during 1997-98; 2. Request the City Auditor and Clerk to acquire forms from the Florida League of Cities to evaluate the City Attorney's performance during 1998-99; 3. Request distribution of the existing evaluation form providing an alternate format with which to evaluate the City Auditor and Clerk; 4. Use the existing evaluation form or develop a narrative essay to evaluate the performance of the City Auditor and Clerk during 1997-98; and 5. Submit completed evaluations to the Director of Human Resources by January 30, 1998. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Director of Human Resources should distribute copies of the five completed evaluations to each Commissioner. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Charter requires the evaluations be conducted by the Commission in public discussion. Mayor Pillot stated that public discussion of the evaluations could be scheduled at a regular Commission meeting in February 1998. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the evaluations should be withheld from public record until brought to the table for discussion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the Charter Review Board originally recommended evaluations of the City Manager, the City Attorney, and City Auditor and Clerk be conducted at a workshop meeting; that the written evaluations would be presented by the Commissioners immediately before the meeting to eliminate preview by the public; however, the recommended procedure was not adopted. Mayor Pillot stated that the evaluation forms immediately become public record when submitted to the Director of Human Resources. Vice Mayor Dupree asked the criteria by which the Charter Officials should be evaluated? Mayor Pillot stated that the existing evaluation form will indicate the criteria on which the City Auditor and Clerk should be evaluated; that the criteria could also be used as a reference for narrative evaluations. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Charter specifies the duties and responsibilities the City Attorney is required to fulfill; that Commissioners could develop individual methodology to judge the City Attorney's performance based on the requirements included in the Charter. 8. NEW BUSINESS: REPORT RE: STATUS ON AMENDING THE 1998 DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO DECLARE A TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA (CRA AREA), INCLUDING DOWNTOWN MOBILITY INITIATIVE DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO PURSUE THE REALIGNMENT OF U.S. 41 NORTH OF THE RENAISSANCE PROJECT, PROVIDE THE NAMES OF THE 10 FLORIDA CITIES WHICH HAVE ADOPTED THE CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA, AND PRESENT DETAILS OF THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2 #2 (1245) through (3547) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, and Asim Mohammed, Assistant City Engineer, came before the Commission. Mr. Mohammed gave a computer-generated slide presentation explaining the Downtown Mobility Initiative and stated that a comprehensive review of transportation needs in Downtown is required due to the construction of a new library and the upsurge of development activity along the North Tamiami Trail corridor; that the Downtown Mobility Initiative is comprised of three elements: 1. A Roadway Improvement Plan to maximize the performance of the existing road network while resolving existing and future level-of-service deficiencies. Mr. Mohammed stated that the following are included in the Roadway Improvement Plan for the Downtown area: Extension of 17th Street westward from Orange Avenue to U.S. 41 Additional left turns and modifications of signal timings at 10th Street and U.S. 41 Two left-turn lanes at the intersection of U.S. 41 and Fruitville Road traveling south on U.S. 41 Extension of Fruitville Road Mr. Mohammed stated that the City will work in conjunction with BOOK 43 Page 15906 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15907 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. the developers of the John Ringling Towers property to determine the available options and time frames for the Fruitville Road extension. Improvements on U.S. 301 at Fruitville Road, Main Street and Ringling Boulevard Mr. Mohammed stated that left-turn lanes will be lengthened, signal timings changed, and additional signage installed. Improvements at the intersections of Ringling Boulevard and Lime Avenue Improvements at intersections along Fruitville Road Mr. Mohammed stated that the Finance Department will determine which of the proposed improvements can be included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP); that some projects will be funded by impact fees, contributions from developers, or transportation impact fees paid to the County; that small improvements can be funded by the Gas Tax; that a more detailed report including costs, time frames, and funding sources will be presented at a later time. Commissioner Merrill stated that expanding the intersection of Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41 will result in a monstrous stretch of asphalt similar to Stickney Road at U.S. 41; that the character of the Bayfront will be totally changed. Commissioner Patterson asked why the addition of one lane would be considered a problem? Commissioner Merrill stated that the expansion will probably not be limited to one lane; that the intersection at Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41 will be expanded, one lane at a time, until the area becomes another monstrosity like the intersection at Stickney Point and U.S. 41. Mr. Mohammed stated that the addition of a right-turn lane is proposed on U.S. 41 southbound to enable motorists to turn right onto Gulf Stream Avenue; that the current right-turn lane is obstructed by heavy traffic during the season. Commissioner Merrill stated that the problem would not exist if the Fruitville Road extension is constructed. Mr. Mohammed stated that smaller projects such as the additional lane proposed at the intersection of Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41 should be completed during Phase I of the Roadway Improvements Plan; that the Fruitville Road extension would be constructed at a later time due to the size of and time frame required to complete the project. Commissioner Merrill stated that the Fruitville Road extension may never be built; that conditioning traffic improvements on the construction of a road which may never be built is a concern; that the natural beauty of the Bayfront will be ruined if the intersection at Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41 is expanded incrementally. Mr. Mohammed stated that the improvements to the intersection of Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41 should proceed as planned; that the City will negotiate with Robert Buford, the developer of the John Ringling Towers property, during the development plan review process to determine available access across the property; that the proposed improvement to the intersection of U.S. 41 and Gulf Stream Avenue could absorb some of the impact expected from the proposed development if the extension of Fruitville Road is not feasible. Commissioner Merrill stated that lengthening the right -hand turn lane on southbound U.S. 41 would not negatively impact the intersection where walkers and bicyclists cross U.S. 41; however, construction of an additional lane is a concern; and asked if proposed changes, including additional lanes, could be deleted from the proposal? Mr. Mohammed stated yes; that the Concurrency Exception Area would provide flexibility. Commissioner Merrill asked if the changes could be deleted today? Commissioner Patterson stated no; that changes to the proposed Roadway Management Plan are not supported at this time. Mr. Mohammed stated that a detailed, final Plan should be presented before proposed projects are deleted. Commissioner Merrill stated that an additional right-turn lane at the corner of southbound U.S. 41 and Gulf Stream Avenue will damage the Bayfront and not be supported. Mr. Mohammed stated that the Commission will have the opportunity to vote on the Roadway Management Plan in the future after details are returned illustrating exactly where the proposed lanes will be installed and the impact on pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Mayor Pillot stated that all authorities including the City, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) . and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) may determine that construction of a Fruitville Road extension across the John Ringling Towers property is necessary; and asked if the City has the legal right to take a portion of the property by eminent domain? BOOK 43 Page 15908 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15909 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. City Attorney Taylor stated yes; that the City has the right to take the property by eminent domain if funding is available. Mr. Mohammed stated that the financial feasibility of eminent domain is questionable. Mayor Pillot stated that a few years ago, a discussion regarding the possible realignment of U.S. 41 occurred; that traffic moving south on U.S. 41 would be moved east on 10th Street, University Parkway, or 17th Street and continue south on U.S. 301; that U.S. 41 north of The Renaissance project should be realigned; that the City should not surrender before defeat. Commissioner Cardamone and Commissioner Merrill agreed. Mayor Pillot stated that a consensus exists to pursue the realignment of U.S. 41 north of The Renaissance project. Commissioner Patterson disagreed; and stated that consensus does not exist. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a three-vote majority constitutes consensus. Commissioner Patterson stated that the MPO conducted an intensive study; that Manatee County refused to support any realignment of U.S. 41; that starting the process all over again is futile as U.S. 41 is a State highway requiring MPO approval of all changes. Mayor Pillot stated that he is unwilling to surrender before all necessary steps are taken to convince the MPO and FDOT to approve the proposal. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City was previously defeated after all the necessary steps were taken. Mayor Pillot stated that the City is battling the FDOT regarding the Ringling Causeway Bridge issue. Commissioner Patterson asked if the City should sue the FDOT oyer realignment of U.S. 41? Mayor Pillot stated that a lawsuit is not suggested; however, he does not believe the City should give up a worthy goal without a fight. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she totally agrees with Mayor Pillot and Commissioner Merrill; that the realignment of U.S. 41 should remain an option as the dynamics have changed since the previous discussion at the MPO several years ago; that many of the City's traffic problems would be solved if the signage could be changed to redirect traffic traveling southbound on U.S. 41 to move eastward on 10th or 17th Streets; that the City could present to the MPO evidence of an existing traffic concurrency problem; and asked why Manatee County would object if U.S. 41 is redirected onto U.S. 301 for a small stretch of roadway within the City? Mayor Pillot stated that Manatee County would probably not object. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the realignment of U.S. 41 should be explored. Commissioner Patterson stated that not one single lane of roadway would be reconfigured; that the roadbed of existing U.S. 41 would remain in the same location; that the City would have to assume maintenance of the stretch of roadway currently designated as U.S. 41; that the original recommendation brought before the MPO was to direct traffic from U.S. 41 to move east on Fruitville Road; that the proposal cannot be accomplished unless the City assumes maintenance of a long stretch of road currently maintained by the FDOT as part of the State's highway system. Mr. Mohammed stated that the City would be required to maintain U.S. 41 from 10th Street to Wood Street. Mr. Daughters stated that U.S. 301 currently terminates near Wood Street in the vicinity of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune building; that the previous plan devised by the FDOT would have terminated U.S. 41 at the intersection of U.S. 301 and U.S. 41 in Bradenton; that U.S. 41 would have become a City street from the Manatee County line. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City would be required to maintain an extremely long stretch of roadway. Commissioner Cardamone stated that is not what has been suggested at this meeting. Mr. Daughters stated that the current discussion relates to a realignment far more limited in scope; that the recommendation by the three Commissioners is to remove the signage indicating U.S. 41 from Wood Street up to 10th or 17th Streets. Mayor Pillot stated that Manatee County's previous objection to eliminating U.S. 41 from Bradenton all the way to the City is understood; however, the current recommendation is that U.S. 41 remains U.S. 41 until reaching 10th or 17th Streets in the City; that signage will route motorists east on 10th Street to U.S. 301 which will become U.S. 41/301 southbound until once again becoming exclusively U.S. 41 near Wood Street; that absolutely nothing is changed except that U.S. 41 will be routed eastward at BOOK 43 Page 15910 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15911 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. 10th Street to U.S. 301 which would, for a short distance, become both U.S. 41 and U.S. 301. Commissioner Patterson stated that the recommendation is the same as the one made when Jack Gurney served on the Commission except that U.S. 41 was at that time recommended to turn east on Fruitville Road; that the FDOT disapproved the recommendation and expanded the scope into an enormous plan rejected by Manatee County; that the newly proposed realignment may not mitigate current traffic problems. Mayor Pillot asked if data exists to determine the number of motorists currently traveling south on U.S. 41 along the Bayfront who drive past the Sarasota Herald-Tribune building and continue south? Mr. Mohammed stated that approximately 28 percent of the traffic continues southward on U.S. 41 beyond the Bayfront. Mayor Pillot stated that 28 percent is a large number of vehicles. Commissioner Patterson asked if 28 percent of the motorists would change direction due to a change in signage? Mr. Mohammed stated that he does not believe so as most of the motorists come from Manatee County, are familiar with Downtown, and will continue to use the path of least resistance. Commissioner Cardamone stated that construction of U.S. 41 along the Bayfront created a major disaster for Downtown; that the greatest number of vehicles as possible should be eliminated from traveling along the Bayfront; that a vehicle traveling from Bradenton to Southgate Mall may find U.S. 301 far easier to maneuver; that vehicles would turn east at 10th Street and continue south on U.S. 301 without enduring Bayfront and Downtown traffic congestion. Mayor Pillot asked if a sufficient number of vehicles could be redirected to make a significant difference to the existing congestion at Gulf Stream Avenue and U.S. 41? Mr. Daughters stated yes. Mr. Mohammed stated no. Commissioner Cardamone stated that a reduction of 100 vehicles would make the change worthwhile. Mr. Mohammed stated that U.S. 301 from Fruitville Road to U.S. 41 is extremely congested due to the intersecting of Ringling Boulevard and Main Street with U.S. 301; that U.S. 301 backs up from the intersection of U.S. 301 at U.S. 41 past Oak Street almost to Ringling Boulevard every weekday during rush hour; that six-laning U.sS. 301 would provide additional capacity; that motorists coming south on U.S. 41 could then be enticed to turn east on 10th Street to U.S. 301 south; that otherwise, motorists would not travel the realigned U.S. 41/301. Mayor Pillot stated that tourists will follow the signs; and asked if a sufficient number of out-of-town motorists would be redirected from U.S. 41 to make a discernible difference in the existing Bayfront congestion? Mr. Daughters stated no; that even tourists do not travel on the basis of signage but would take the most convenient route. Commissioner Cardamone stated that out-of-town motorists would follow a road map. Mr. Daughters stated that when driving to Tampa, he will not take Interstate 275 or Interstate 75 all the way but will drive on the roads known as most convenient. Mayor Pillot stated that Mr. Daughters is not a tourist and familiar with the area. Commissioner Patterson stated that local motorists familiar with the area will not travel the realigned U.S. 41/301 if the roadway is congested with all the out-of-town motorists who have been redirected from the existing U.S. 41. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that people are creatures of habit; that U.S. 41 can be redirected by signage; however, no guarantee exists that people will follow the signage; that some motorists drive by the Bayfront for the view; that congestion at the intersection of Main Street and U.S. 301 is increasing. Mayor Pillot asked if the recommendation to study the realignment of U.S. 41 is worth pursuing? Commissioner Merrill stated that three Commissioners have agreed the idea is worth studying. Commissioner Cardamone agreed; that traffic counts should be determined. Mr. Daughters stated that the recommendation to realign U.S. 41 east along 10th or 17th Street to U.S. 301 is worth studying. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City's lawsuit against the FDOT over the Ringling Causeway Bridge will not make petitioning the MPO to allow the realignment any easier. BOOK 43 Page 15912 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15913 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Mayor Pillot asked if Mr. Daughters feels the issue is worth studying a second time? Mr. Daughters stated yes; that the FDOT may not necessarily allow the realignment to U.S. 301; however, part of the proposed Roadway Improvement Plan includes installing dual, left turns southbound at 10th Street; that another proposed plan would six-lane U.S. 301 from 12th Street north to the County line and beyond; that some of the existing U.S. 41 traffic could be redirected to turn east on 12th Street and then south on Tuttle Avenue or Beneva Road; that redirecting traffic along Tuttle Avenue and Beneva Road would relieve congestion on U.S. 301 in Downtown; that although the FDOT may not approve redirecting the traffic east to a realigned, southbound U.S. 41/301, spreading the traffic further east to Tuttle Avenue and Beneva Road may be acceptable to the State. Mayor Pillot asked the possibility of an alternate U.S. 41 along one of the suggested routes? Mr. Daughters stated that providing convenient turns is the key to the success of such a proposal. Commissioner Patterson requested clarification? Mr. Daughters stated that congestion between 10th Street and the vicinity of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune building would be relieved by realigning U.S. 41 and redirecting traffic either to Tuttle Avenue, Beneva Road, or a six-laned, southbound U.S. 301,. Commissioner Patterson stated that Mr. Mohammed is the traffic engineer; and asked Mr. Mohammed's opinion? Mr. Mohammed stated that the MPO and the FDOT have limited resources and time; that the City would be best served by using existing resources and relationships with the MPO and the FDOT to complete the projects proposed in the Roadway Management Plan; that for the next few years, traffic improvements with measurable results should be implemented; that a great deal of time and resources would be expended on a speculative proposal to realign U.S. 41 with minimal positive impact on traffic congestion; that a plan clearly proving a successful resolution of traffic problems should be adopted. Mr. Mohammed continued that the issue of realigning U.S. 41 can be readdressed in five years after the improvements proposed in the Roadway Improvement Plan have been installed; that any proposal to realign U.S. 41 should be presented with the benefit of the argument that traffic was not mitigated by the improvements completed during the previous five years. Mayor Pillot stated that Mr. Mohammed wants to delay the recommendation for five years until he is no longer on the Commission. Commissioner Merrill stated that Mr. Mohammed has indicated some of the projects included in the Roadway Improvement Plan will clearly make a difference; that although some of the projects such as the addition of a right-through lane on U.S. 41 to U.S. 301 in the vicinity of Lukewood Park may make a positive impact, any of the proposed projects north of that intersection such as the realignment and four-laning of the existing two-lane portion of 10th Street will result in problems similar to those which currently exist. Commissioner Merrill continued that, for example, U.S. 301 in the City will remain four-laned; however, the FDOT proposal to six-lane a major stretch of U.S. 301 from Manatee County will result in a 40-percent increase in traffic volume on that roadway; that any plans such as the four-laning of 10th Street from Orange Avenue to U.s. 301 to redirect traffic from U.S. 41 will be thwarted; that the City should make only those roadway improvements which will have no negative impact on the community. Commissioner Merrill further stated that the proposed Roadway Improvement Plan does not show where 10th Street will be realigned; that the map in today's presentation indicates only that 10th Street will be realigned northward and signals installed at U.S. 301; that 10th Street should not be four-laned through Gillespie Park; that details of the proposed projects are not provided in the report. Commissioner Merrill stated further that the number of lanes on the Bayfront should not be expanded; that the Bayfront should be made more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly; that the City's road network is currently at the maximum comfort level; that none of the proposed changes to move traffic between U.S. 41 and U.S. 301 over 10th, 17th Streets, and Fruitville Road will result in any improvement unless U.S. 301 is improved to handle a greater capacity. Mr. Mohammed stated that some of the proposed projects in the Roadway Improvement Plan will relieve small segments of currently congested roadways by, for example, adding an extra lane; that the 17th Street extension and the extension of the emergency breakdown right-turn lane on U.S. 41 as a right-through lane to U.S. 301 at Lukewood Park are major improvements; that smaller improvements will have limited impact on the community. Mr. Mohammed stated that the Commission can decide if the impacts on pedestrians and the community-at-large are too great when the final details of the proposed Roadway Improvement Plan is presented; that the major projects included in the proposed Plan are the 17th Street extension, the additional right-turn lane on southbound U.s. 41 turning right onto Gulf Stream Avenue, and the BOOK 43 Page 15914 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15915 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. expansion of 10th Street. Commissioner Merrill stated that although the 10th Street improvement would significantly, reduce traffic congestion in that area, the section of U.S. 41 along the Bayfront is not currently congested. Mr. Mohammed stated that traffic on U.S. 41 currently backs up from the Bayfront to Orange Avenue during the season; that the congestion at the intersection of Fruitville Road and U.S. 41 is also heavy. Commissioner Merrill asked if a significant amount of the existing traffic is traveling to St. Armands Key? Mr. Mohammed stated no; that many motorists are driving south on U.S. 41 to Fruitville Road; that currently, no adequate roadway exists on which motorists can travel eastward from U.S. 41 to U.S. 301 between Fruitville Road and University Parkway; that Myrtle Street is in poor shape and 27th Street has too many traffic lights. Commissioner Patterson stated that complaints regarding traffic congestion have been received from people trying to travel west on Fruitville Road to U.S. 41. Mr. Mohammed stated that existing traffic congestion would be addressed either by the proposed Fruitville Road extension or by extending the left-turn lane on Fruitville Road at U.S. 41. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the number of signals on Fruitville Road will be reduced? Mr. Mohammed stated that the signal at Goodrich Avenue may be removed. Commissioner Patterson stated that the possibility of using eminent domain to take a portion of the John Ringling Towers property to provide access to the proposed Fruitville Road extension has been discussed; that a Ritz-Carlton Hotel may be developed on the John Ringling Towers property; that the Fruitville Road extension will never occur without the following three steps : 1) funding must be in place prior to beginning the eminent domain process, 2) the property must be taken by eminent domain before the development plans are submitted, and 3) the City must be prepared to eliminate a project like the Ritz-Carlton Hotel; that the proposal is as realistic as expecting the FDOT to demolish the Hollywood 20 theater complex to six-lane U.S. 301. Commissioner Patterson continued that access through the John Ringling Towers property has been discussed with the developers who have indicated no willingness to allow a highway through their property; that enough land to install a right-turn lane on southbound U.S. 41 at Gulf Stream Avenue may be provided to relieve current problems; that the public is being misled about the potential for a Fruitville Road extension; that U.S. 41 should not be widened at the pedestrian crossing; however, pedestrians do not cross U.S. 41 at the intersection with Gulf Stream Avenue; that the proposal to add a right-turn lane on southbound U.S. 41 at that intersection should not be eliminated at this time. Commissioner Merrill stated that a large number of people cross U.S. 41 at the intersection with Gulf Stream Avenue. 2. A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to reduce the number of single-occupant vehicle trips at peak hour. Commissioner Patterson stated that the proposed Transportation Demand Management area is a concern; that convincing people to car-pool and ride public transportation is extremely difficult; that MPO Staff has been working on a similar plan for years; that only 60 people are sharing rides after four years and several thousands of dollars in Staff salaries have been expended; that the City should not expend a similar effort for similar results; that City employees do not participate in the ride-sharing plan developed by the MPO; that City resources should not be wasted developing an independent Transportation Demand Management program when a program exists in which even City employees do not participate. Mr. Mohammed stated that shuttles are operated for employees of the Sarasota Memorial Hospital and the County. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the shuttles are a temporary measure. Commissioner Patterson stated that the shuttles are government- - sponsored; that the City should work with MPO Staff already funded by State and Federal monies instead of developing a new program; that the City should apprise the MPO if the Staff involved in the existing program are not performing to adequate standards. Mr. Mohammed stated that skepticism exists regarding the existing MPO program; that the City's program would be a challenge also. Vice Mayor Dupree requested clarification of the recommendation to improve 10th Street. Mr. Mohammed stated that 10th Street would be extended as a four-lane roadway from Orange Avenue, where the four-laned portion currently ends, all the way to U.S. 301; that 10th Street would be aligned further north of the current alignment to avoid any BOOK 43 Page 15916 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15917 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. negative impact on Gillespie Park by the increase in laneage; that beautification would be included as part of the proposed project to extend the roadway; that a similar plan would be implemented on 17th Street; however, the 17th Street extension between Orange Avenue and U.S. 41 would be constructed as two rather than four lanes; that beautification can be addressed by the Commission when the final details of the 10th Street project is presented. Vice Mayor Dupree asked if any plans exist to beautify Fruitville Road. Mr. Mohammed stated that Fruitville Road is a State road requiring FDOT approval of and funding for the installation of medians or landscaping. Vice Mayor Dupree asked if any of the proposed improvements can occur within the next five years? Mr. Mohammed stated that the Finance Director will provide direction as to available monies; that the Commission will have discretion at Budget time to determine funding sources and time frames. Mr. Daughters stated that some of the projects can be accomplished within five years. Commissioner Cardamone stated that some kind of arrangement can probably be negotiated with the developer of the John Ringling Towers property; that no one is suggesting the installation of a six-lane road through a property on which upscale condominiums and a luxury hotel are proposed; that existing City streets on the property could be expanded; that her conversations with the developers have indicated an interest in discussing the issue exists; that the impression should not be given that the entire Commission is disinterested in further discussion of a Fruitville Road extension. Commissioner Cardamone continued that the signage and lighting changes proposed in the Roadway Improvement Plan should be implemented quickly; that details of the proposed plan to four- lane the existing two-lane portion of 10th Street from Orange Avenue to U.S. 301 should be presented as soon as possible; that Gillespie Park is improving; however, the area west of Gillespie Park on. 10th Street is not; that she was originally opposed to the street improvements on Siesta Drive; however, the changes cleaned up the entire neighborhood; that street improvements in other neighborhoods may have the same beneficial impact. 3. A Transportation Concurrency Exception Area to modify the concurrency requirements in the redevelopment area and provide adequate time to make necessary infrastructure improvements to maintain an adequate level of mobility without missing economic development opportunities. Mr. Mohammed stated that City must submit to the Commission and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) a schedule for proposed improvements and funding sources to qualify for the Traffic Concurrency Exception area; that the Engineering and Finance Departments are working to determine available monies and possible funding from the FDOT and the MPO. Commissioner Patterson stated that she would have difficulty supporting adoption of a Concurrency Exception Area if improvements are not implemented for 10 or 20 years; that a formal plan is part of the requirement for approval of State funding for projects developed under Currency Exception Areas; that incremental improvements should be made within the next five years; that traffic conditions have been positively impacted by incremental improvements such as the left-turn lane on Osprey Avenue southbound to U.S. 41. Mr. Mohammed stated that adoption of a Currency Exception Area will provide the flexibility necessary to install incremental improvements; that Concurrency Exception Areas were created by the State legislature for exactly the kind of purpose proposed to manage traffic in the City. Commissioner Patterson requested a list of Florida cities with Concurrency Exception Areas. Mr. Mohammed stated that tomorrow morning, a list of 10 cities which have already adopted Concurrency Exception Areas will be provided. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Concurrency Exception Area has not been rejected by any city. Mr. Mohammed stated that is correct; that Daytona Beach, Pompano Beach, and Coral Gables have all adopted Concurrency Exception Areas. Commissioner Patterson asked the time frame for making improvements under Concurrency Exception Areas? Mr. Mohammed stated that none of the 10 cities are proposing the extensive improvements proposed by the City of Sarasota; that time frames and funding requirements will be presented to the Commission before the Concurrency Exception Area is returned for adoption. Commissioner Cardamone asked when the time frames and funding requirements will be presented? BOOK 43 Page 15918 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15919 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Mr. Mohammed stated that the concept of a Concurrency Exception Area has already been presented to the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP); that a public workshop will be held in the next two months; that a concrete proposal will be presented to the Commission after potential funding sources have been determined by the Finance Department. Commissioner Patterson asked the purpose of the public workshop? Mr. Mohammed stated that the plan presented this evening will be discussed at a public workshop; that a spreadsheet indicating the cost and time frames for each of the proposed improvements will also be discussed. Commissioner Patterson asked if the spreadsheet could be returned to the Commission before a public workshop is held? Mr. Mohammed stated yes; that a public hearing will be held after details including funding and time frames are presented to the Commission. Mayor Pillot asked if Commission action is necessary this evening? City Manager Sollenberger stated no; that the report was presented for discussion. Commissioner Patterson stated that the Commission should see a definitive plan as soon as developed by Staff. 9. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINPMENT RE: BUILDING/FIRE BOARD OF RULES AND APPEALS - REAPPOINTED BRIAN STIRLING AS LICENSED ENGINEER AND WILLIAM HALSTEAD AS LICENSED ARCHITECT: APPOINTED MICHAEL WALKER AS LICENSED GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND CHARLES RIEDINGER AS LICENSED MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR (AGENDA ITEM IX-1) #2 (3547) through (3767) Mayor Pillot stated that the terms held by Brian Stirling, Licensed Engineer and William Halstead, Licensed Architect, have expired; that both are eligible and have expressed an interest in reappointment; that additional vacancies exist for the seats requiring: 1) a licensed general or building contractor, 2) a licensed fire sprinkler contractor, and 3) a licensed mechanical contractor. On motion of Vice Mayor Dupree and second of Mayor Pillot, it was moved to reappoint Brian Stirling and William Halstead to the seats of licensed engineer and licensed architect on the Building/Fire Board of Rules and Appeals. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. Commissioner Cardamone nominated Michael Walker for appointment as the licensed general contractor and Charles Riedinger as licensed mechanical contractor. Ms. Cardamone stated that Mr. Riedinger owns Standard Plumbing Corporation on North Washington Boulevard and Mr. Walker is a City resident who builds construction projects throughout the County. Hearing no other nominations, Mayor Pillot announced the appointment of Michael Walker and Charles Riedinger as the licensed general contractor and licensed mechanical contractor on the Building/Fire Board of Rules and Appeals. Mayor Pillot stated that Steven Lee who is not a City resident has applied for appointment as the licensed fire sprinkler contractor. Commissioner Cardamone stated that Mr. Lee is unknown; that an introduction to the Commissioners should be arranged or additional applicants solicited for the appointment. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that names of possible appointees to the seat of licensed fire sprinkler contractor are requested; that finding qualified applicants has been difficult. Commissioner Cardamone stated that Mr. Lee should contact the Commissioners and present his reasons for wishing to serve on the Board. 10. BOARD APPOINTMENTS APPOINTMENT RE: SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD - REAPPOINTED PAUL THORPE AND LEON CAMPBELL (AGENDA ITEM IX-2) #2 (3777) through #3 (0134) Mayor Pillot stated that the terms held by Paul Thorpe and Leon- Campbell have expired; that both are eligible, have expressed interest in reappointment, and are recommended for Commission confirmation. On motion of Commissioner Patterson and second of Commissioner Merrill, it was moved to confirm the Mayor's reappointment of Paul Thorpe and Leon Campbell to the Sarasota Housing Authority Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. BOOK 43 Page 15920 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15921 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. 11. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: : VAN WEZEL PERFORMING ARTS HALL BOARD - REAPPOINTED GLENDA WILLIAMS (AGENDA ITEM IX-3) #3 (0135) through (0142) Mayor Pillot stated that the term held by Glenda Williams has expired; that Ms. Williams is eligible and has expressed and interest in reappointment. On motion of Vice Mayor Dupree and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to reappoint Glenda Williams to the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Dupree, yes; Merrill, yes; Patterson, yes; Pillot, yes. 12. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA = REQUESTED ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE INFORMATION RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS IN OTHER CITIES (AGENDA ITEM X) #3 (0147) through (0622) ÇOMMISSIONER CARDAMONE : A. stated that the applicability of the Sunshine Law to the operation of the Greater Newtown Redevelopment Corporation (GNRC) should be determined; that the GNRC funding request for salaried positions was approved at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting and readdressed this evening under Unfinished Business, Agenda Item VII-1; that further clarification from the City Attorney is requested. City Attorney Taylor stated that before the funding agreement between the City and the GNRC is approved, the corporation, the laws under which incorporation was achieved, and special requirements relating to redevelopment corporations will be researched; that the Commission can impose the requirements under the Sunshine Law on the GNRC as a condition for funding; however, caution should be practiced regarding the imposition of special conditions; that the activities of redevelopment corporations are not currently regulated by City procedure; that a solid basis must exist to require that the GNRC operate under the Sunshine Law as a condition of funding; that the City should not impose on the GNRC conditions for funding not imposed on other private agencies receiving public funds. Commissioner Cardamone stated that all advisory boards, the membership of which are appointed by the City, are required to operate under the Sunshine Law; that operating under the Sunshine Law should not hinder the GNRC any more than the requirement hinders the Commission; that the pained response of the Board members to her recommendations was unexpected; that she developed and recommended conditions for funding to ensure accountability; that a redevelopment corporation operating with public monies should do sO under the Sunshine Law; that the regulations governing the Ybor City Development Corporation funded by the City of Tampa are unknown. Commissioner Patterson asked the cost of holding a special election to allow the Newtown community the opportunity to select GNRC Board members? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the election of GNRC Board members would encompass three or four Newtown precincts; that the cost of an election is approximately $1,000 per precinct for an official election; however, the cost of an election to select Board members of a redevelopment corporation would probably be considerably less. Commissioner Patterson stated that although holding an election at a community meeting has been suggested, votes for Board members of a redevelopment corporation should be cast in secret. Commissioner Patterson continued that although the approach chosen by the GNRC is not the most appropriate way to implement a redevelopment project in a small city, a majority of Commissioners have approved the request by a group of neighborhood residents for public funds and decision-making power over the expenditure of those public funds; that the will and support of the community should be made known. Commissioner Patterson continued that two West Palm Beach community redevelopment agencies whose Board Members are elected by community residents approve projects absent the approval of the City of West Palm Beach; that construction projects may require the approval of the West Palm Beach City Commission; however, all decisions as to which projects will be funded are made by the Board members of the two community redevelopment agencies; that the GNRC request for $128,000 to fund salaried positions is the first phase; that extensive funding will be required to complete the overall Newtown redevelopment. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that the GNRC is not an advisory board whose members are appointed by the Commission and should not be required to operate under the Sunshine Law; that the Board of the community redevelopment corporation in Laurel receives funds from Sarasota County and private groups but is not believed to operate under the Sunshine Law; that the regulations regarding the Laurel Redevelopment Corporation will be researched. Commissioner Cardamone asked the funding sources for the community redevelopment corporation in Laurel? BOOK 43 Page 15922 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15923 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that funding is provided by private groups and the County of Sarasota; that private funds have been used to purchase vans. Commissioner Patterson asked if the community redevelopment corporation in Laurel has funded salaried positions? Vice Mayor Dupree stated that the answer is unknown. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Administration should provide a report regarding the operation of the community redevelopment corporation in Laurel and the Ybor City, Development Corporation; that residents of a Massachusetts community with far greater problems than those in Newtown elect the Board members of their community redevelopment agency on a rotation basis; that Board members campaign for election. Commissioner Cardamone continued that a large percentage of the Newtown community may not even be aware of the existence of the GNRC; that current Board members could automatically assume office as incumbents of a newly elected Board and stand for election in two years; that people from outside the Newtown community with expertise in specific areas such as land-use planning should be elected to designated seats. Commissioner Merrill stated that the GNRC Board should operate under the Sunshine Law to provide the public an awareness of ongoing redevelopment efforts; that Newtown redevelopment will not progress absent clear public support; that factions in the Newtown community external to the GNRC could raise opposition to plans proposed by the existing Board; that no way exists to ensure that public funds are expended according to the will of the majority if Board members are neither elected by the community nor appointed by the Commission. Commissioner Merrill continued that redevelopment projects funded by the City will appear to the public as having Commission endorsement; that a Greater Newtown Redevelopment Corporation would be viewed as a quasi-public organization by those unfamiliar with the facts; that a report should be returned regarding the redevelopment efforts of different communities; that community consensus and accountability should be required; that the redevelopment of Newtown is an excellent idea; however, no evaluation of the positive and negative aspects of redevelopment efforts in other communities has been presented; that the City Manager and the City Attorney should evaluate redevelopment agencies in other cities and report back. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the GNRC is unaware of the redevelopment efforts of other communities. Commissioner Merrill asked if Commission consensus exists to request from the Administration an evaluation of outside community redevelopment agencies? Commissioner Patterson and Commissioner Cardamone stated yes. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration will be required to shift emphasis from preparing a funding agreement between the City and the GNRC to providing an evaluation of redevelopment agencies in other communities. Mayor Pillot stated that the Commission, by a 3 to 2 vote at the December 15, 1997, regular Commission meeting, directed the Administration to prepare a funding agreement between the City and GNRC; that $128,000 in funding has been approved by a formal majority vote; that changing a formal vote by consensus subsequent to informal discussion is inappropriate; that the responsibility of the Administration is to develop a funding agreement based on the formal vote unless a Commissioner wishes to provide appropriate notice to formally rescind the existing approval of the GNRC funding request. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the information could be provided by a memorandum. Commissioner Patterson stated that another vote to appropriate the funding will be required. Mayor Pillot stated that a motion to direct the Administration to draft a funding agreement was approved; that the Commission should not by informal discussion request the City Manager to disregard direction approved by formal vote; that a vote to rescind should be required. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that the Commission is requesting additional information regarding redevelopment agencies in other communities. Mayor Pillot stated that the Administration has requested direction as to whether the emphasis should be changed from providing a funding agreement to providing a report and evaluation. Vice Mayor Dupree stated that he has not agreed to any change in emphasis. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the City Manager should provide that which is required by the formal Commission vote; however, more information regarding redevelopment agencies in other communities should be provided before the Commission votes on the funding agreement at the January 20, 1998, regular Commission meeting. BOOK 43 Page 15924 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. BOOK 43 Page 15925 01/06/98 2:00 P.M. Commissioner Patterson stated that the City Manager may be indicating that both tasks cannot be completed by January 20, 1998. City Manager Sollenberger stated that today is Tuesday; that the agenda deadline is on Friday; that the framework of a funding agreement can be drafted for the January 20, 1998, regular Commission meeting and the information requested by the Commission compiled in the interim period. Mayor Pillot asked what time the public hearing this evening should be convened? Commissioner Patterson stated that the public hearing should be convened at 6:15 p.m. 13. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #3 (0623) The Regular Sarasota City Commission Meeting of January 5, 1998, adjourned to January 6, 1998, was adjourned at 5:35 p.m. Rif GENE PILLOT, MAYOR ATTEST: 1lwE Robere O BILLY Ed ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK