MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 1994, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Nora Patterson, Vice Mayor David Merrill, Commissioners Fredd Atkins, Mollie Cardamone and Gene Pillot, Deputy City Manager V. Peter Schneider, City Auditor and Clerk Billy Robinson, and City Attorney Richard Taylor ABSENT: City Manager David Sollenberger PRESIDING: Mayor Nora Patterson The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9 of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:00 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR AUGUST, 1994 RAYMOND N. ROBY, FIREFIGHTER, FIRE/RESCUE BUREAU, PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT #1 (0024) through (0122) Julius Halas, Chief of Fire-Rescue Bureau, and Raymond Roby, Firefighter, Fire-Rescue Bureau, Public Safety Department, came before the Commission. Fire Chief Halas stated that Firefighter Roby has served the Fire- Rescue Bureau in various capacities since 1982, as an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) and driver/engineer on fire apparatus; that Firefighter Roby has served as the Chairperson for the Public Safety Uniform Committee for more than a year; that Firefighter Roby was instrumental in the development and implementation of the new work shirt for Fire-Rescue personnel which is an attractive, comfortable, and practical light gray T-shirt to be worn while on duty; that the uniform T-shirt is estimated to save taxpayers more than $7,300 annually. Fire Chief Halas congratulated Firefighter Roby on receiving this award. layor Patterson presented Firefighter Roby with a plaque and ertificate for the Employee of the Month for August in appreciation of his unique performance with the City of Sarasota and congratulated him for his outstanding efforts. 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF SARASOTA FROM THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION #1 (0125) through (0199) Book 37 Page 10900 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10901 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Charles Jewett, President, and Pegi Cavanaugh, member of the Board of Directors, representing The Downtown Association, came before he Commission. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that she was the last recipient of the Panhandlers' Award; that Panhandlers is the name of a store formerly located on Main Street; that the owner of that store, Dirk Lippe, contributed much to the downtown area and was one of the founders of The Downtown Association; that the travelling Panhandlers' Award was developed in memory of Mr. Lippe; that the recipients have been people who have a great love and do all possible to foster the best for downtown with enthusiasm and perseverance; that the City Commission has made great efforts to improve the downtown area and is the most deserving group this year to receive this award. Mr. Jewett stated that the contributions which earned the City Commission this honor can be observed by walking down Main Street and viewing the planted trees, the sidewalks, and the way the area has been maintained; that the City of Sarasota has done a great job; that he hopes the trophy will be displayed for one year in a prominent place where people can acknowledge the efforts made by the City to help the downtown area. Mr. Jewett and Ms. Cavanaugh presented the Commission with the Panhandlers' Award. Mayor Patterson thanked The Downtown Association on behalf of the Commission and stated that the award was originally presented to the Commission at The Downtown Association's annual meeting which she, Vice Mayor Merrill, and Commissioner Cardamone attended; that the presenters were requested to make a formal presentation for the benefit of the other two Commissioners who were not present at that meeting. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: : MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 6, 1994 = APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0226) through (0240) layor Patterson asked if the Commission had any changes to the inutes. Hearing no objections, Mayor Patterson stated that the minutes of the regular City Commission meeting of September 6, 1994, were approved by unanimous consent. 4. BOARD ACTIONS : REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S SPECIAL MEETING OF AUGUST 31, 1994 = ACCEPTED (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0240) through (0314) Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, and Ron Annis, Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning (PBLP) Agency, came before the Commission. Ar. Annis presented the following item from the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of August 31, 1994: Limited Review of Ordinance No. 94-3792, pertaining to Adult Entertainment Uses Mr. Annis stated that the PBLP found proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan by a vote of (3 to 2); that the decent was concerned with the limited time available to prepare and analyze the proposed ordinance; that the PBLP was not requested to make a recommendation on approval to the Commission. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to accept the report of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency's regular meeting of August 31, 1994. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 5. BOARD ACTIONS: APPROVAL RE: RINGLING CAUSEWAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT = AESTHETIC TASK TEAM DESIGN CONCEPT - REFERRED THE SIDEWALK WIDTH ISSUE TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR A REPORT BACK AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING; REQUESTED ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS BE PRESENTED BY FDOT AT THEIR EARLIEST CONVENIENCE (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (0319) through (2473) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, representing the Ringling Causeway Bridge Aesthetic Task Team, came before the Commission and used the overhead projector to give an overview of the names of the Aesthetic Task Team members, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) representatives, architects and consultants involved with the project. Mr. Daughters stated that the Aesthetic Task Team has held several meetings; that a conceptual presentation was made by the FDOT consultant and architect; that the task team was pleased with that zoncept; therefore, a wide range of alternatives were not reviewed; hat the concept presented by FDOT was refined at subsequent eetings; that a consensus building process rather than a voting process was used by the task team to determine a recommendation; that the design concept which will be presented to the Commission tonight was recommended by unanimous consensus of the Aesthetic Task Team. Gerald Carrigan, FDOT District Director of Production; and David Edwards and Fred Sweatland of Kunde, Sprecher & Associates, Inc. Book 37 Page 10902 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10903 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. (KSA), the design consultants on the project, came before the Commission. Mr. Sweatland stated that KSA and the Aesthetic Task Team are proud of the design developed for the Ringling Causeway Bridge replaçement; that KSA's services were retained by FDOT in response to the public desire to have the new bridge reflect the history and values of the Sarasota community; that KSA spent time in Sarasota and studied local history and the attitude of what the citizenry wanted this bridge to project; that the bridge concept adheres to the FDOT design requirements for a fixed bridge, but flexible elements were addressed; that the bridge will have a 65-foot clearance at mean high tide, two 12-foot wide traffic lanes in each direction with a 2-foot separation barrier, a five-foot wide bike lane and a 6-foot wide pedestrian path running in each direction. Mr. Carrigan distributed copies of the John Ringling Causeway Bridge Aesthetic Enhancement Proposal to the Commission and Mr. Sweatland gave a slide presentation explaining the various views and details of the proposed concept. Mr. Sweatland stated that the bridge does not significantly impact the horizon and view line of Sarasota; that elegant royal palms nave been selected for placement along the bridge to compliment the Roman/Greco influence of the design; that a 14-foot wide access oad and a 4-foot wide pedestrian path has been included for access to Hart's Landing; that the Aesthetic Task Team chose lantern-type light fixtures and an open-effect rail design; however, the code requirements for the railing design are being investigated; that the number of columns used to hold up the proposed bridge have been reduced by 60% over the number of pilings on the existing bridge; that the columns are detailed and the pads are stepped to give an appearance of the bridge rising out of the water. Mr. Sweatland continued that KSA and the Aesthetic Task Team feel that the concept provides a signature structure to tie into the urban fabric of Sarasota. Mr. Carrigan stated that the city Commission and the Aesthetic Task Team have done a wonderful job on a short schedule; that the FDOT is ready to implement the proposed concept with Commission concurrence; that Commission approval is requested. The following people came before the Commission: Jale Parks, 1221 N. Palm Avenue #107, stated that he is an architect; that as a result of being the most recently appointed Aesthetic Task Team member he has had little participation in the review of the design proposal presented by KSA for a fixed-span bridge over Sarasota Bay; that he has serious concerns regarding the direction of the design; that the 65-foot bridge will deny pedestrians access between the St. Armands/Lido beach areas and the mainland due to its extreme slope grading; that the signature proposal bears all the earmarks of various FDOT bridges existing throughout the State; that signature bridges have historically been set apart from others in originality and structural design and have served as lasting symbols in cities where they are located; that Sarasota's idéntity deserves more than generic ideas and contrived applique; that origins of the design being presented are not bounded to the ideas about proportion and scale that gives classicism its beauty; that other members of the task team feel that the proposed bridge is adequate and the impact on their prospective interests have been satisfactorily addressed; that he urges the Commission to reject the proposed design proposal in favor of one which not only would satisfy all interests at hand but additionally serve to enliven a sense of pride for the City of Sarasota. Vice Mayor Merrill asked Mr. Parks why he felt the bridge would deny pedestrian access? Mr. Parks stated that the height of the bridge will make it difficult for people to transverse the bridge by foot, bicycles, or skates. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he has concerns which may be caused by the 6-foot sidewalks proposed. Mayor Patterson stated that public hearings are scheduled for 6:30 p.m. and it is now that time; that the Commission will complete this agenda item and then proceed to public hearings. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Commission was previously told that a 5% grade was the maximum grade for pedestrian use; that :he Commission has previously expressed concerns with a bridge thich may not be inviting to people for recreational uses. vommissioner Cardamone requested that the Commission be shown a rendering depicting where the bridge lands on each end. Mr. Carrigan presented a drawing and site plans of the bridge which depicted the take-off and landing portions of the bridge, and stated that the bridge approaches have been extended further than the approaches of the existing bridge; that these issues have been discussed previously; that the FDOT is aware that the City Commission objected to a 65-foot fixed bridge; that the issue before the Commission tonight is the aesthetics proposal. Mr. Carrigan stated that the proposal provides a typical section for the bridge structure of two traffic lanes with a 10-foot inside and outside shoulder of which 5-feet is designated as a bicycle lane; that the 6-foot wide sidewalk is intended for pedestrian foot traffic. Book 37 Page 10904 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10905 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. 7ice Mayor Merrill stated that families with children do not prefer so ride on a bike lane that parallels a four-lane, busy roadway; that families currently travel on the side of the bridge with a separate lane away from the high-speed bicyclists and speed skaters; that the FDOT bridge recently built in St. Petersburg provides an extra-wide sidewalk on the north side of that bridge; that similar consideration should be given for the City of Sarasota project; that adequately-wide sidewalks should be provided on the bridge. Mr. Carrigan asked if a smaller sidewalk on one side of the bridge is desired? Vice Mayor Merrill stated that 10-foot wide sidewalks on each side would be preferable. Commissioner Pillot asked for clarification of a 5% grade. Mr. Carrigan stated that a 5% grade means there is a 5-foot rise for each 100 feet or 1-foot per 20 feet. Roger Compton, 506 Sunset Towers, Aesthetic Task Team member, stated that his comments are in rebuttal to Mr. Parks; that he was a member of the original Ringling Causeway Bridge Task Force for approximately 1.5 years and has participated in all meetings of the current Aesthetic Task Team; that the design presented tonight is a result of the task team's input and the best combined effort from KSA and the FDOT to provide a beautiful signature bridge for the City of Sarasota within a reasonable budget; that Mr. Parks expressed his opposition at the task team meeting last Thursday which was not a time during which any constructive changes could be made since the meeting before the Commission was scheduled for tonight. Mr. Compton stated that unlike the previous FDOT representatives with whom the original task force had to deal, the current FDOT representation has done an outstanding job and has been cooperative and attentive to the concerns of the task team; that he commends Mr. Sweatland for his architectural ingenuity and inner sole with regard to this project. Zommissioner Cardamone stated that she attended the last meeting of the Aesthetic Task Team; that the task team was working with the architects to have a picture of the entire bridge showing the scale and angle of the bridge presented to the Commission; and asked if Mr. Compton was satisfied with what was presented tonight? Mr. Compton stated that he was not completely satisfied with the presentation. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she shares Mr. Compton's feeling; that the views presented reflect a flat angle; that alternative views and angles depicting the bridge, i.e., from a boat, should have been presented. Commissioner Pillot asked if the City Commission has the opportunity to make constructive changes to the proposal at this time? Mr. Carrigan stated that a time frame was not established to present the design concept to the Commission; that the task team had achieved its goals and accepted the concept prior to last their meeting; that the last meeting focused on putting the concept into graphical form for presentation; that Mr. Parks was appointed subsequent to the task team reaching consensus on the design zoncept; that the FDOT is requesting Commission endorsement or non- andorsement of the Aesthetic Task Team's recommendation; that directives on changes are requested if the Commission does not endorse this proposal; that the FDOT is a partner in this project and wants to work with the City; that the FDOT can delay the project for 30 days if additional graphics are necessary; that the FDOT is not trying to force the Commission to accept this proposal; that this proposal is the appointed Aesthetic Task Team's recommendation; that the FDOT is strictly the facilitator; that the FDOT has worked hard and is ready to implement the proposal recommended by the task team. Commissioner Pillot asked what would happen if the Commission votes against the proposal? Mr. Carrigan stated that the 65-foot bridge has been decided by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the FDOT is committed to build a 65-foot high structure; that the FDOT committed in its anvironmental document to work closely with the City of Sarasota to levelop an aesthetics package; that the Commission appointed a task team to perform a job and he hopes that recommendation is taken into consideration; however, the FDOT could review other alternatives if that is what the City Commission desires. Mayor Patterson stated that the FDOT will take the time and energy necessary to bring alternatives back to the Aesthetic Task Team if the Commission denies the task team's recommendation and provides the FDOT with specific direction on this project; and asked if this statement is accurate? Mr. Carrigan stated that the proposal would ordinarily be brought back to the Commission since the Aesthetic Task Team has already reached a consensus on a proposal; that the FDOT has worked long and hard to provide a workable package which is within the FDOT's budget and means, and within the guidelines established by the task team; that the FDOT is willing to work with specific direction given by the Commission if it is workable. ommissioner Cardamone stated that the Commission unanimously voted against a 65-foot high bridge; that it will be difficult to approve an aesthetic package for something that is not wanted. Mark Smith, 5562 Care Aqua Drive, stated that he is President of the Florida Gulf Coast Chapter of American Institute of Architects (AIA) i that the AIA is represented on the Aesthetic Task Team by Book 37 Page 10906 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10907 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mark Halstead who was unable to attend this meeting; that the architects reviewing the bridge have not been happy with the proposal; that the Roman and Greek decor proposed for the bridge does not work within the design of the City's downtown area; that the City of Sarasota is a contemporary city; that the history contained in the Ringling Museums is not justification for the decor of the bridge; that the span and placement of the columns are good concepts; however, the ornament placed on the bridge should be addressed; that alternative design sketches should be requested without redesigning the engineering or the structure; that prior working sketches developed by the design consultants could be used. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the decor should be placed on the element which will be most visible; that the beams running horizontally across this bridge be will be most visible and should not be a standard FDOT precast beam; that he does not envision the bridge as a signature bridge but more like a standard FDOT bridge with something on it. Marcelle Wolf, 445 McKinley Drive, representing the Lido Key Residents Association, stated that she is a former member of the original Ringling Causeway Replacement Bridge task force and had looked forward to participating on the design phase of the project; however, that task force was discontinued and she was not chosen as a member of the Aesthetic Task Team; that she purchased her first lome in Sarasota in 1959; that Sarasota was then known as the city of contemporary architects; that the Greek column design of the proposed concept does not coincide with the design or feeling of Sarasota; that she strongly suggests that the Commission review alternative designs. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission needs to address two issues, one of which is the sidewalk width issue raised by Vice Mayor Merrill. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to refer the sidewalk width issue to the Administration for a report back from the Engineering Department within the time frame of the FDOT. Commissioner Atkins asked for clarification on what is expected of the Engineering Department. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the Engineering Department will review the design to determine a width which would be adequate for he citizens of Sarasota. Commissioner Atkins stated that the Engineering Department has already agreed to the proposal presented with the 6-foot wide sidewalks; that Vice Mayor Merrill should include the 10-foot width he desires in the motion rather than referring the issue to the dministration. Mr. Daughters stated that the width of the cross section, including the width of the sidewalks, was not discussed at the Aesthetic Task Team meetings; that the task team meetings addressed only aesthetic issues; that the site plans are currently being reviewed by the Engineering Department, and comments will be sent to the FDOT; that comments regarding the location and width of the sidewalk on the land portion of the bridge were developed; that the width of the sidewalk on the bridge was not addressed, but can be done at this time. Vice Mayor Merrill stated the City of Sarasota will have a stronger chance of justifying the width of the sidewalks to the MPO if the Administration reviews the standards set by the State. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy city Manager, stated that the sidewalk width information can be presented at the next Regular Commission meeting if the Commission so wishes. Commissioner Cardamone stated that it would be her wish to revisit the entire bridge issue. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission has unanimously expressed their wishes in regard to the height of the bridge; that the Commission will be spinning their wheels and risk losing their say in the design of the bridge or the sidewalks if a position is taken which has already been voiced in the strongest manner possible by the Commission. Mayor Patterson called for a vote on the motion to refer the sidewalk width issue to the Administration for a report back. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson stated that the second issue which needs to be addressed is the design which has been recommended by the Aesthetic Task Team. )n motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Vardamone, it. was moved to follow the recommendation of Mark Smith and request that reasonable, feasible to the people involved, alternative designs be presented to the Commission. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he agrees with Mr. Smith's basic philosophy, but not necessarily with the concept of keeping the design simple and clean; that the standard FDOT bridge was perceived as beautiful when the first bridges which replaced the old truss bridges were built; that those bridges have now become ordinary and less beautiful to the people; that as a home builder, he uses Roman/Greco columns regularly because people love them; that he does Book 37 Page 10908 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10909 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. not object to the style used for the proposed design; however, the style has not been carried through far enough; that the style should be added to the horizontal element. Vice Mayor Merrill continued that he has no expectations of receiving a true signature bridge in Sarasota; that Sarasota will be limited to a standard FDOT bridge or a standard FDOT bridge with a particular decor. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the FDOT previously told the Commission that money was no problem; that Sarasota could have any type of bridge the City of Sarasota decreed was wanted; that the City should not back off on that offer; that the beams underneath the bridge should be covered so that all of the beams are not exposed to the people who live in the areas that will view them. Mayor Patterson stated that a simpler version of the columns should be presented. Commissioner Pillot stated that the consultant's working sketches could be brought before the Commission without additional work. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission's request for other alternatives does not minimize the time individuals have put forth on this project or the respect the Commission has for the various opinions that have been expressed. Mayor Patterson called for a vote on the motion to request the FDOT :o report back at their earliest convenience with alternative proposals which follow the Commission's direction and previous direction received at presentations to the Aesthetic Task Team. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson stated that a view depicting the impact of the bridge as requested by Commissioner Cardamone should be included in the next presentation given to the Commission. Commissioner Atkins left the Commission Chambers at 7:08 p.m. Mayor Patterson requested City Auditor and Clerk Robinson to explain the public hearing process. Mr. Robinson stated that at this time petitioners have 15 minutes to address the Commission and 5 minutes for rebuttal; that any citizen who has signed up to speak has 5 minutes. 111 individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were equested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 6. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 94R-765, OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, FLORIDA CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER OF SARASOTA COUNTY THE RATES OF MILLAGE TO BE LEVIED BY THE CITY OF SARASOTA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1994 - ADOPTED AND 7. SECOND PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 94-3819, ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF SARASOTA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1994, AND ENDING ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1995; SAID BUDGET TO INCLUDE THE GENERAL FUND, SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, ENTERPRISE FUNDS, INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN; PROVIDING FOR CURRENT EXPENSES AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURES OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA, EACH BEING SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED HEREIN; ASSESSING AND LEVYING AD VALOREM TAXES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1994; SPECIFYING THE AD VALOREM TAX MILLS TO BE LEVIED AND ASSESSED FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN BONDED-DEBT SERVICE; SPECIFYING THE AD VALOREM TAX MILLS LEVIED AND ASSESSED FOR BONDED-DEBT SERVICE; MAKING AP- PROPRIATIONS FROM THE AD VALOREM TAX REVENUES COLLECTED: IDENTIFYING THE BUDGETS AND AMOUNT OF THE AD VALOREM TAX REVENUES WHICH ARE APPROPRIATED FOR THE PURPOSES ENUMERATED HEREIN; APPROPRIATING MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES AND SURPLUS REVENUES FOR THE PURPOSES STATED; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM IV-1) #1 (2473) through #2 (0832) Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that proposed Resolution No. 94R-765 certifies to the Property Appraiser and the Tax Collector the millage rates to be .evied by the City of Sarasota for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1994, and should be read in its entirety and adopted prior to the final reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 94-3819 which adopts the FY 94/95 budget; Mayor Patterson left the Commission Chambers at 7:10 p.m. Mr. Mitchell continued that Resolution No. 94R-765 certifies the following: Debt Service for 1990 0.904 mill Refunding Bonds Debt Service for 1994 0.331 mill Refunding Bonds General Fund Operation 5.339 mills 6.574 mills nr. Mitchell stated that the Truth in Millage (TRIM) bill requires that the millage rate for ad valorem taxes be measured in terms of Book 37 Page 10910 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10911 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. the Rolled-back Rate; that the Rolled-back Rate is the millage rate necessary to yield the same ad valorem tax revenue generated in. the 1993-94 fiscal year; that based on the Property Appraisér's preliminary certification of $2,624,218,660 Taxable Value for the Zity, the Rolled-back Rate would be 5.275 mills; that the proposed aillage rate of 5.339 mills is 1.21% greater than the Rolled-back Rate. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Code Enforcement Special Master budget was transferred from the Building Department budget to the city Manager's budget; that the Special Master has requested that the Administration change the $30,000 proposed budget into an operation which does not appear to report to the City Manager; that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson has agreed to put the Special Master account in his budget with which the Special Master has been agreeable; that the City Attorney has advised that this slight modification can be allowed at this time since there is no change in the total dollars. Vice Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: ayor Patterson returned to the Commission Chambers at 7:13 p.m. Audrey Lucker, 729 Tyler Drive, stated that she is disgusted with the services received for her tax dollars which are huge; that one police vehicle patrols Lido Key, Lido Shores, St. Armands, Bird Key, and Coon Key; that citizens are required to do more work sorting garbage than the refuse personnel, and the solid waste rates are increasing; that she purchased her home with the intent of remaining there until her death, however, she can no longer afford to stayi that residents paid separately to have street lighting installed, but her neighborhood has inadequate street lighting; that the City is using less chlorine in the water supplied to Lido Key; that the difference is noticeable; that someone will sue the City if the drinking water is not safe; that home sales in her neighborhood have decreased with the increase in taxes and the absence of services; that services are not what they used to be; that she has been in Sarasota since 1944 and wants the old Sarasota back; that the budget should concentrate on repairing he damaged roads and on services the citizens require. Ms. Lucker continued that the City should concentrate on programs for children and focus less on building parks; that the land used by the City to create parks is not included in the tax base and decreases the amount of money which could be received by the City; that no more parks are necessary; that people come to Sarasota for the beaches and to participate in water sports; that parks and the beautification of landscaping is not as important as safety. Commissioner Atkins returned to the Commission Chambers at 7:18 p.m. Mayor Patterson stated that expenditures for parks do not relate to public safety expenditures; that 75% of the current budget is spent on Police and Fire services; that other areas of the City would compete for additional police officers if the Commission were to address that issue, and taxes would be increased further; that the City has taken great strides in developing a resurfacing program to address those road surfacing needs which have fallen behind. Ms. Lucker stated that the Lido Key residents are double taxed for police services although police services are not received from the County. Mayor Patterson stated that decision is made annually by the County Commission during their budget sessions; that the tax for the Sheriff Road Patrol services is the highest of the many services City residents pay for but do not receive from the County; that the City Commission continually tries to attack that issue; however, it is necessary for all the City citizens to tell the County Commission that they want to be treated fairly in the County's budgeting process. Commissioner Atkins stated that City citizens could have greater unput on the County Commission by approaching the District County Commissioner who can advocate for the City citizens and their causes. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she spoke with Ms. Lucker previously regarding employee salary increases. Ms. Lucker stated that she is against salary increases for City employeesi that the employees can maintain themselves on the salaries contained in the list which she received; that there should be no salary increases until the necessary things in the City are attended to; that in addition to the listed salaries, the employees receive many other benefits. Isidore Kirshenbaum, 603 Indian Beach Lane, stated that he and his wife purchased their Indian Beach Lane property 14 years ago with the assumption that the two lots for which taxes were assessed were puildable; that a house was on one lot and one lot was vacant; that 1 permit to build on the vacant lot were denied due to the location f a sewer pipe on the propertyi that the sewer pipe was relocated; nowever, a building permit still cannot be secured; that three tax increases have been assessed on that nonbuildable lot in the past; that he understands that the City wants to increase the taxes on that piece of property by 30% this year; that the taxes on this nonbuildable lot are far greater than they should be; that any increase on this lot is not valid and should not be done. Mr. Kirshenbaum stated that an inspector measured and examined the lot and has stated that the lot is not buildable; and asked why the City is increasing the taxable value of this lot without knowing its condition? Book 37 Page 10912 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10913 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Zommissioner Pillot stated that the City of Sarasota does not place any values on property; that property is appraised for tax purposes by the Sarasota County Property Appraiser's office; that the City Commission establishes a millage rate; that the millage rate presented at tonight's hearing is identical to that of last year; that the City Commission is not proposing any tax increase; that neither the City Commission nor the Board of County Commissioners determines the values of properties within the City or the County; that those values are established by the Property Appraiser's office which is an office elected by the popular vote of the people of Sarasota County; that the proper appeal is taken to a board established for that purpose. Mayor Patterson stated that there are two components which make up the dollars paid on any piece of property in any county in the State of Florida; that the first component is the assessment or how much the tax assessor values that piece of property; that this is the component which has increased by 30%; that the second component is the millage which is a rate applied to the assessment; that the City could lower the millage, which is the City's portion of the sax bill, proportionately to compensate citizens for the assessment increase if the City received a windfall from the many large increases in assessment that people have suffered this year; unfortunately, the total income to the City of Sarasota in five years has only increased by 8%; that the total accumulated cost of living has increased by greater than 8% during that same time period; that while certain tax assessments have increased, others have been decreased; therefore, the City is unable to compensate the citizens for the large increases in assessments suffered. Mr. Kirshenbaum stated that the point is not whether another citizen is paying less in taxes; that no tax increase should be applied to his nonbuildable lot. Mayor Patterson stated that Mr. Kirshenbaum should contact John Mikos at the Sarasota County Property Appraiser's office of whom the request needs to be made. Commissioner Pillot stated that there is a Board of Property Adjustment to which a citizen may take in appeal such as Mr. Kirshenbaum's if discussions with the Property Appraiser's office do not provide satisfactory results. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 94R-765 in its entirety. On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 94R-765. Motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Pillot stated that his concern with the FY 94/95 budget is not with what it provides, nor the careful consideration, shought, and time which has gone into it by the Administration and the Commission, but with what it does not provide; that he cannot support this budget; that this budget is not adequately providing for public safety through an inadequate provision for increasing the City of Sarasota's Police Services Bureau in regard to the number of officers on the street. Mayor Patterson asked Commissioner Pillot what avenue he would have chosen to pay for the additional police service? Commissioner Pillot stated that he proposed increasing the millage rate by 2/10 of a mill to generate approximately $0.5 million which would have allowed for the hiring of 10 additional police officers which would have placed two additional officers, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week on the street; that his intent was to have those officers assigned, with the proper administrative approval, to the areas of greatest need in the City; that his proposal was not supported by the Commission; that he respects the decision of his fellow Commissioners not to raise the millage, but he disagrees with that lecision. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that during the June 22, 1992, budget hearing the following questions were asked of John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, who was then Police Chief, regarding the level of police staffing being increased or decreased: 1. Do you see that the crime rate will change from historical levels based on changes you are proposing? "Crime rates are generally unaffected by police staffing. There have been numerous studies to show that crime rates have a cycle of their own." 2. If you had unlimited resources could you eliminate crime in the City? "Yes, I could reduce it to very little." 'ice Mayor Merrill continued that the proposal submitted by commissioner Pillot would put two additional officers on the street; that the Police Chief does not believe this would not have an impact on crime; that there are only 17 police officers, at best, on the City of Sarasota streets at one time; that 10 officers on the payroll are necessary to provide one officer on the street for 24 hours per day, 7 days per week since vacations, the three shifts, sergeants and lieutenants, etc., must be incorporated; that the 10/1 ratio was included in the information contained in President Clinton's proposal to increase the police force by 100,000 officers; that the City of Sarasota has 180 sworn police officers, but only 17, at best, are patrolling the streets; that Book 37 Page 10914 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10915 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. the Sarasota County Sheriff's office has 350 sworn deputies, but only 40 to 50 deputies patrol the streets; that there is a big gap between hiring 10 officers and the actual increase of street patrol. Vice Mayor Merrill continued that saturation policing is necessary to achieve the reduction in crime mentioned by former Police Chief Lewis; that doubling the number of police officers currently on the streets would have minimal impact on crime and would require doubling the City's millage rate to fund; that police officers serve several functions; that the public perceives that police officers are the number one avenue to reduce crime; that police officers arrest people; that the City's police force is doing a good job arresting people; however, most of the criminals have been arrested time and time again; that the problem with crime is that the judges and the courts are not putting these criminals in jail and not providing a deterrent to stop the reoccurrences. Vice Mayor Merrill further stated that a better approach to loubling the millage rate to provide additional police officers is to advocate that the criminal justice system do its job. Commissioner Pillot stated that Vice Mayor Merrill has made a sophisticated and appropriate argument; however, the current Police Chief, Gordon Jolly, has explained that hiring five officers, taking into consideration vacations, etc., would provide one officer on the street; that historically, crime has never been eliminated in the world; that he realizes that crime would not be eliminated from decisions made by the City Commission; however, people do not speed when there is a highway patrol officer behind their vehicle on Interstate 75. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that in order to get to that level, saturation policing is necessary; that people will speed when the highway patrol officer is not there; that the following statement in regard to crime in public housing areas was made by the Sergeant of the Community Resources Team during the recent joint City ommission/Housing Authority workshop: "when we have police fficers on shift during the night, the drug dealers operate during the day; when police officers are on shift during the day, the drug dealers operate during the night." Vice Mayor Merrill continued that criminal activities will be moved around until necessary funding is available for saturation policing. Commissioner Pillot stated that there is nothing feasible that the Commission can do tonight; therefore, a motion should be made to approve the millage. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to adopt Resolution No. 94R-765. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 94-3819 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to adopt Ordinance No. 94-3819. Commissioner Cardamone stated that this budget was originally presented to the Commission as a no-layoff, no salary increase, no Kax increase, and no deficit spending budget which she fully supported; that this Commission is remiss in providing a 2.5% across-the-board salary increase to all City employees with the additional revenue which became available during the budget process; that the additional revenue should have been used to provide additional services to the community, i.e, street lighting which was mentioned earlier by a citizen; that other needs of the City are more important to the overall well-being of this community and the citizens who own the City of Sarasota than salary increases across-the-board to all City employees. Commissioner Pillot stated that the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, Finance Director, and other City staff should be commended on the difficult job of bringing forth under the dollar constraints this sensible, functioning budget. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the City has survived a recession without increasing the millage rate significantly over the past few years; that the millage rate was increased slightly one year; that the overall operating expenses for the City budget have increased by 1.7% while inflation las increased by 2.5%; that the City will provide the same services as last year with 1.7% more dollars although the cost of living has increased by 2.5% and the budget includes a salary increase for employees; that he thanks all the City employees for this budget. Commissioner Atkins stated that it is important to continue thanking the City employees; that the employees play a more important role; that not only do the citizens own the City of Sarasota, but the employees are the overseers and the caretakers of the City of Sarasota without whose motivation and enthusiasm the City would not be much to own; that employees should be treated in a fair and generous wayi that a 2.5% salary increase is not enough; that this is a bare-boned budget by which the quality of life has not been enhanced; that the Commission is trying to hold the line and have the employees respond by keeping up the good work with the hope of reaping benefits in the future. Mayor Patterson stated that the Consent Agendas are ordinarily addressed prior to the public hearings; that she intended to pull he Consent Agenda item that allocates raises to the City Manager, the City Auditor and Clerk, Department Heads, and other non-union represented staff; that the higher salaried staff should not receive automatic cost of living adjustments (COLA), but rather a COLA in association with a satisfactory performance evaluation; Book 37 Page 10916 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10917 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. that a COLA has a deeper meaning for an employee whose salary is $20,000 to $30,000 annually than to an employee whose salary is $70,000 or higher; that the cost of living impacts the price of items such as food by which higher income individuals are not as affected as lower income individuals. Mayor Patterson asked if voting in favor of this budget will nullify her vote on the consent agenda item referenced? Mr. Mitchell stated that this budget funds the salary increases which have been discussed; that those salary increases would be implemented if the resolutions contained in the Consent Agenda items are adopted by the Commission; that the decisions are separate. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 8. PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 94-3792, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE BY REGULATING ADULT BOOKSTORES, ADULT PHOTOGRAPHIC STUDIOS, ADULT THEATERS, ADULT VIDEO STORES, ADULT MODELING STUDIOS, SPECIAL CABARETS, PHYSICAL CULTURE ESTABLISHMENTS, COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS ADULT USES: SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AS TO INTENT AND PURPOSE; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS: REGULATING THE LOCATION OF ADULT USES: REQUIRING THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR ADULT USES; PROVIDING FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF APPLICATIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND DENIAL OF PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR A PERMIT FEE; PROVIDING FOR INSPECTIONS OF PERMITTED ESTABLISHMENTS: PROVIDING FOR THE EX- PIRATION OF PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR THE SUSPENSION OF PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR THE REVOCATION OF PERMITS; PROVIDING IN-STORE VIEWING BOOTH REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR HOURS OF OPERATION; REGULATING PRIVATE PERFORMANCES; PROVIDING CRIMINAL PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS OF PERMIT DENIALS; PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSFER OF PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR CHANGE OF BUSINESS NAME; PROVIDING A PERIOD OF TIME WITHIN WHICH NONCONFORMING ADULT BUSINESSES MUST OBTAIN A PERMIT; PROVIDING FOR ENFOR- CEMENT; PROVIDING FOR CONSENT; PROVIDING FOR IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION: PROVIDING FOR NOTICE; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PARTS HEREOF; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING WITH STIPULATION THAT THE SCHOOL DEFINITION EXCLUSION BE ELIMINATED PRIOR TO SECOND READING; DIRECTED CITY ATTORNEY TO REVIEW REGULATING ADULT BUSINESS ACTIVITY AT HOTEL AND MOTELS (AGENDA ITEM IV-2) #2 (0833) through #3 (1342) City Attorney Taylor stated that this ordinance is the third in an ongoing series of regulations by the City of Sarasota relating to the basic subject of nudity and control of adult-type activities; that the first ordinance which prohibited nudity in establishments which sell or dispense alcoholic beverages was adopted in 1992; that the second ordinance regulating nudity in business and commercial establishments regardless if the establishment sells or dispenses alcoholic beverages was adopted in 1993; that the proposed ordinance is a land use regulation which: 1) addresses the zoning aspect of allowing adult uses, as defined in the ordinance, in certain zone districts of the City, 2) addresses distance requirements from other uses inconsistent with adult-type activity, and 3) institutes a regulatory mechanism for the permitting of the adult use businesses. City Attorney Taylor continued that the process for this ordinance is unique compared to a standard rezoning ordinance; that a workshop was held on this subject with the City Commission on June 29, 1994, at which time direction on refining aspects of the ordinance was given; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency reviewed Ordinance No. 94-3732 for consistency only and found it consistent with the Sarasota City Plan; and in accordance with procedural requirements of Florida State Statute Section 166 regarding land use regulations that affect more than 5% of the land area of a city, two public hearings have been scheduled before the City Commission; that the next public hearing on this subject is scheduled for the next Regular City Commission meeting on October 3, 1994. Sarah Schenk, City Attorney's office, stated that this proposed ordinance has a zoning component and a licensing component; that the zoning component restricts adult uses solely to three commercial zone districts: Commercial General (CG), I Commercial Intensive (CI), and Commercial Shopping Centers, Community and Regional (CSC-C and CSC-R) i that the Commercial Shopping Centers Neighborhood (CSC-N) zone district was deleted at the request of the Commission at the workshopi that this adult use ordinance regulates seven types of uses: 1) adult bookstore, 2) adult video store, 3) adult modelling studio, 4) special cabaret, 5) adult theater, 6) adult photographic studio, and 7) physical culture establishment; that these adult uses are distinguished from non- adult uses by the explicit nature of their activities as defined in the ordinance relating to the performance of specified sexual activities or explained specified anatomical areas common to adult uses; that theater, performing arts hall, opera or other like activities presenting or staging a performance will not be characterized as sexual in nature or regulated by this ordinance; that the distance requirement requires that adult uses within the CG, CI, and CSC zone districts must locate at least 1,000 feet along the same right-of-way or 500 feet along an intersecting right-of-way from residentially zoned property, real property used for residential purposes, churches/synagogues, schools, child care centers or another adult use; that the distance requirements were increased as a result of the Commission workshop. Ms. Schenk continued that zoning code regulations are required to provide a reasonable number of locations for adult uses within the city; that this ordinance would provide for adult uses to be allowed on Book 37 Page 10918 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10919 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. approximately 4% of the total acreage within the City; that approximately 31% of the total commercially zoned acreage in the City which permits retail would allow adult uses; that these percentages and the opinion of the City Attorney meet the applicable judicial requirements for providing an adequate number of locations. Ms. Schenk stated that the second component of this ordinance is a permitting requirement; that permits will be issued by the Building, Zoning, and Code Enforcement Department after payment of the permit fees which are: $900 for the initial permit and $340 to renew the permit; that these fees were increased based on a study of administrative costs; that the use must be located in a CI, CG, or CSC zone district and meet the distance requirements; that a criminal background check will be performed prior to permit issuance; that after the permit is issued certain operational requirements must be met; that there is a restriction on the hours of operation such that the adult use is prohibited from operating between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m.; that certain uses such as modeling studios, bookstores, and video stores are required to have permanently opened viewing booths and meet standards for lighting and a manager's station. Ms. Schenk stated that this ordinance provides for criminal sanctions resulting in a fine or imprisonment if: 1) an adult use operates without a permit; or 2) performers engage in straddle or lap dancing, engage in specified sexual activities or display specified anatomical areas, or engage in private performances without an open entranceway. Ms. Schenk continued that the Building and Zoning Department may revoke a permit for reasons including the sale of controlled substances which result in a conviction of either employee or patron or if an employee or patron are convicted of prostitution. Ms. Schenk stated that there are existing adult use establishments which will on the effective date of this ordinance be rendered nonconforming as to location; that the existing adult use establishments will either be in an improper zone district and/or will not meet the distance requirements; that existing establishments will have 45 days from the effective of this ordinance to obtain a permit and may continue to operate for a one- year period from the effective date; that those establishments will be required to relocate to a zoning district where distance requirements are met after that one-year period has expired. Ms. Schenk continued that the City is required to demonstrate substantial governmental interest regulating adult use establishments based upon the adverse, secondary effects these adult. use establishments cause in the community; that this means blighting of the neighborhood, downgrading of the businesses in the community, and increased criminal activity, including, but not limited to, prostitution, caused by a concentration of these adult use establishments. Ms. Schenk presented the following exhibits to the City Auditor and Clerk for entry into the record: I. MINUTES Minutes of the City Commission Meeting March 7, 1994 (citizen input on need for regulation of Adult use establishments Exhibit 1 Minutes of August 31, 1994 planning Board Meeting (proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 found consistent with Sarasota City Plan) Exhibit 2 Minutes of Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County for October 6, 1992, and October 20, 1992 (public hearing held on adult use regulations set forth in Ordinance 92-065) . Exhibit 3 Transcript of Public Hearing held by Board of County Commissioners of Pinellas County on January 15, 1991 (on adult use. regulations in Ordinance No. 90-65) Composite Exhibit 4 II. STUDIES OF ADVERSE SECONDARY EFFECTS OF ADULT USES Seattle Department of Construction and Land Use Report on Adult Cabarets (March 1989) Composite Exhibit 4 Austin City Council Report on Adult Oriented Businesses in Austin (May 1986) Composite Exhibit 4 Oklahoma City Community Development Department Survey of Real Estate Appraisers Regarding Adult Entertainment Businesses (March 1986) Composite Exhibit 4 Legislative Report of the Houston Committee on the Proposed Regulation of exually Oriented Businesses Book 37 Page 10920 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10921 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. (November 1983) Composite Exhibit 4 Beaumont, Texas Planning Department's Report on the Regulation of Adult use establishments (September 1982) . Composite Exhibit 4 Phoenix Planning Department's Adult Business Study (May 1979) . Composite Exhibit 4 Amarillo, Texas Planning Department's Report on Zoning and Other Methods of Regulating Adult Entertainment in Amarillo (September 1977) . Composite Exhibit 4 A Summary of National Survey of Real Estate Appraisers Regarding the Effect of Adult Bookstores on Property Values conducted by the Division of Planning, Department of Metropolitan Development, Indianapolis (January 1984) Composite Exhibit 4 III. JUDICIAL OPINIONS: ADVERSE SECONDARY EFFECTS OF ADULT USES City of Renton, et al. V. Playtime Theaters, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 106 Sup. Ct. 925, 89 L.Ed. 2d 29 (1986) . Exhibit 5 International Eateries of America, Inc. V. Broward County, Florida 141 f.2d 1157 (11th Cir. 1991) Exhibit 6 Movie & Video World, Inc. V. Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County, Florida 723 F.Sup. 695 (S.D.Fla. 1969) . Exhibit 7 T Marc, Inc. V. Pinellas County, 804 F.Sup. 1500 (M.D. Fla. 1992) Exhibit 8 15192 Thirteen. Mile Road, Inc. V. Warren, 626 F.Supp. 803 (ED. Mich. 1985) Exhibit 9 Northend Cinema, Inc. V. City of Seattle, 585 P.2d 1153 (Sup.ct.Wash. 1978) Exhibit 10 7250 Corp. V. Board of County Commissioners, 799 P.2d 917 (Colo. 1990) . Exhibit 11 Islip V. Caviglia, J40 NE.2d 215 (N.Y. 1989) Exhibit 12 IV. CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AT ADULT USE ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN CITY OF SARASOTA Sarasota Police Services Bureau Case No. 94-038230: Defendant pled guilty or no contest to violation of Section 21-911, Sarasota City Code, and prostitution. Sarasota Police Services Bureau Case No. 94-038390: Defendant pled guilty or no contest to violation of Section 21-91. Sarasota Police Services Bureau Case No. 94-039743: Defendant pled guilty or no contest to violation of Section 21-91. 1 Prohibits appearing nude in a business or commercial establishment. Commissioner Pillot stated that for the record the existing adult use proprietors have the option of going out of business rather than obtaining a permit within the 45-day deadline and/or relocating to another zoning district within one year of the effective date of this ordinance. Jane Robinson, Director of Planning and Development, came before the Commission and stated that the Planning and Development Department has found proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 consistent with the Sarasota City Plan; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency, at its meeting of August 31, 1994, determined that proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 is consistent with the Sarasota City Plan; that the Planning and Development Department has determined that allowing adult use establishments in the CI, CG, CSC-C, and CSC-R zone districts only as provided in this proposed ordinance provides a reasonable number of alternative locations for adult use establishments; that the four commercial zone districts comprise 31% of the total commercial acreage which permits retail in the Cityi and that adult use establishments would be allowed on approximately 4% of the total acreage within the City. Stan Carter, Captain, Public Safety Department, used the overhead projector to present an overview of the distance requirements, affected areas, and establishments affected by proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792. Captain Carter also referred to an area map display which was color-coded according to the probability of an adult use meeting the necessary requirements to locate in specific areas. Captain Carter stated that the distance requirements reflect the changes initiated by the Commission at the workshop; that the proposed ordinance provides a 1000-foot distance requirement along the right-of-way from the center of the parcel to the nearest prohibited use within a commercial zone; that the second distance requirement is 500 feet from an adult use to an intersection plus another 500 feet or to the point of prohibited zoning or a prohibited use within a commercial zone. Captain Carter continued Book 37 Page 10922 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10923 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. that the high and low probability areas were determined by use of 200-foot scalè aerial maps and knowledge of existing, prohibited 1ses within commercial zones; that only 1 of the 13 currently known adult use establishments within the City of Sarasota would meet the distance requirements necessary to remain if this proposed ordinance is adopted. Captain Carter further stated that Commissioner Pillot specifically asked at the workshop how the distance requirements would be applied to Sarasota High School which does not have a pedestrian crosswalk directly in front of the school; that the distance measurements, which are similar to measurements which have been held valid for alcohol-related uses, would be measured directly across the street, down the right-of- way, to the nearest prohibited zone or the nearest prohibited use within a commercial zone, even though directly across the street is in the middle of a block; that the measurement does not have to be a normal pedestrian route. Jack Viana, Lieutenant, Public Safety Department, came before the Commission, and stated that he is the Commander of the Vice Narcotics Unit of the Police Services Bureau; that a two-month investigation which specifically targeted the activities which were lleged to be taking place in the lingerie modeling shops which were operating in the City of Sarasota recently concluded; that of the six locations in the City which specifically specialize in this type of adult activity, five had employees, managers, or manager/employees, that were in violation of various and assorted city codes and Florida State Statutes; that seven females were arrested on eleven charges which ranged from exposure of sexual organs in a commercial establishment to soliciting for prostitution and included lewd and lascivious behavior; that three of those cases have been disposed of and were mentioned by Ms. Schenk; that the City's investigation determined that dependent upon the amount of money willing to be spent, unlimited services were available from some of the employees at most of the lingerie shop locations. Lieutenant Viana continued that he has reviewed the proposed ordinance which will not allow private viewing areas within these establishments; that an employee and a customer will not have a place to go and be alone which should curb the type of behavior liscovered during the City's investigation. layor Patterson opened the public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Bill Highland, 7348 Palomino Trail, representing Charles Fowler, Superintendent of the Sarasota County School System, stated that Mr. Fowler had a previous engagement and was unable to attend tonight's meeting; that the Superintendent who is responsible for the 30,000 school-aged children attending Sarasota County public schools strongly supports the passage of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792; that the State of Florida has a compulsory law which requires children to attend school; that parents assume their children will be in a safe environment at the school and on their way to school; that the Superintendent is concerned with how those children arrive at school; that the passage of this ordinance will guarantee that businèsses intended as adult use establishments will not be in close proximity to Sarasota County's public schools. Lyn Lloyd-Davies, 4628 Pine Green Trail, stated that he attended one of the earlier hearings in support of regulating adult use establishments; that he continues to support the work being accomplished by the City in this regard; that he represents individuals aged 70 and over who are not able to attend these public hearings; that he is a British-born Canadian and has resided in the United States since 1958, and specifically in Sarasota since 1975; that he has come to know, and has a strong desire to preserve, the merits of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, etc.; that pressures to eliminate prayer in the schools, establish things such as zero-value criteria, amplify sex education programs, and generally dismantle the former concept of education, morals, and ethics has been observed with its disastrous results. Mr. Davies continued that on behalf of his generation, he strongly endorses the proposed ordinance and all its aspects; that the City Commission, Planning Board, legal personnel, and City Staff should be commended. Esther Rachwal, 4975 Southern Wood Drive, stated that the Commission and the City Attorney's office, specifically Sarah Schenk, should be thanked for the commendable work done and the effort taken to achieve this ordinance; that as a member of the American Family Association (AFA) she consulted the Florida Director, and the AFA thoroughly supports this ordinance. Sister Jennifer "X", President, Dr. Martin Luther King Neighborhood Improvement Association, stated that the Dr. Martin Luther King Neighborhood Improvement Association thanks the Commission for the diligent work done to prepare this ordinance; that she is before the Commission to tell them, "Not in our neighborhood, not another one of your blessed blessings for Newtown"; that Newtown always gets dumped upon; that once again Newtown has been singled out to take that which no one else wants; that adult use establishments are not wanted in the Newtown community where children also would have to pass by them to go to school; that these adult use establishments have been delicately streamlined to be aesthetically acceptable, but "not to us, not this time." Kaffy Benz, representing Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores, stated that the drafting of this ordinance is appreciated and adoption of it is urged; however, this is only one-half of what is necessaryi that the law being put into place is very important, but Sarasota citizens must realize the role of identifying and reporting violations to the police; that the City needs to educate the Book 37 Page 10924 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10925 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. citizens sO this can be done; that combined with other laws which have recently been passed, the City streets should become more pleasing. C. Bart Cotten, President, Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Neighborhood Association, stated that he objects to the name of the ordinance, Adult Entertainment, which infers to children that the activities contained are how adults spend their time; that the name should focus on businesses that profit from sexually-oriented activities; that the higher education and colleges should not be exempted from the "School" definition; that he agrees adult entertainment facilities should not be allowed in the Newtown district, but he did not recognize that opportunity being provided in the proposed ordinance. Mr. Cotten continued that his organization as well as Gateway 2000 and the North Trail Business Association have worked to upgrade the North Trail area to attract businesses which would upgrade the neighborhood; that it is lifficult to attract worthwhile businesses with the proliferation of adult use establishments present; that the Indian Beach/Sapphire Shores Neighborhood Association will continue to work with the City and be supportive if legal challenges are experienced. Mr. Cotten further stated that he and his neighbors are tired of living under the real or perceived stigma that the North Trail is a crime-ridden area; that no one, even under the First Amendment, has the right to open a business in his neighborhood that attracts crime, prostitution, and unsavory characters who are a danger to children. Jon Susce, 524 Erie Court, representing the East Sarasota Neighborhood Association (ESNA), stated that he is against this ordinance which moves the adult use establishments from one neighborhood of the City to another; that the adult use establishments are not wanted in east Sarasota; that this ordinance is viewed as word politics which will establish a Combat Zone in his neighborhood; that Gateway 2000 speaks for the people in the North Trail neighborhood, and his neighborhood has not been included in any of the Gateway 2000 meetings; that an organization amed Common Ground has been formed by the working-class citizens of the City of Sarasota who no longer want to be dumped upon; that the adult use establishments are being moved from the neighborhoods of Sapphire Shores, Indian Beach, and the Ringling School of Art and Design into his neighborhood. Mr. Susce cited the following from a memorandum written by Mike Taylor, Deputy Director of Planning and Development to the Planning Board: This proposed ordinance is also supported by the conclusion of the North Trail sector study where many of the potential adult use establishments are currently located These special zoning considerations included the implementation of measures to deter prostitution, which is frequently caused by adult use establishments. Mr. Susce stated that at one of the meetings he attended on this subject, he spoke with one of the gentlemen who operates an adult use business in the North Trail area who had stated that the City was attempting to relocate adult use establishments from the North Trail to Washington Boulevard; that Washington Boulevard is part of his neighborhood; that east Sarasota does not want these adult use establishments in their neighborhood. Mr. Susce continued that the adult use establishments should be eliminated, not moved from one neighborhood to another. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that adult use establishments will be allowed in more than one area of the City; that this ordinance makes it difficult for lingerie modeling shops to operate; that currently, adult video stores, for example, are allowed in many commercial areas of the City; that this ordinance will vastly restrict the locations of these adult use establishments; that the Supreme Court has ruled that cities must allow a reasonable amount of adult use establishments to locate within a city; that the portion of the City Mr. Susce feels all the adult use establishments will be allowed to locate is substantially smaller than the other areas in the City where adult use establishments will be also allowed; that this ordinance will provide assistance for the North Trail neighborhood; however, he does not agree that this ordinance will be distributing the adult use establishments solely into Mr. Susce's neighborhood. Lymus Dixon, representing Pastor Jerome Dupree, Kiononia Baptist Church, children and citizens, read a statement by Pastor Jerome Dupree which opposed any adult bookstores, adult pornographic and adult modeling studios, strip joints, and other such establishments being moved into or built in or near the predominant black section of the City of Sarasota. Mr. Dixon stated that adult use establishments should not be allowed in areas where such establishments do not currently exist. Barbara Cherry, 3907 Bay Shore Road, representing the North Trail district, stated that assistance was requested from the Commission regarding the adult use establishments in the North Trail area; that this ordinance is in response to that request and it is appreciated; that a State law will be implemented beginning October 1, 1994, regarding nuisance properties which cater to illegal activities. Ms. Cherry distributed and cited the following from an article entitled, New Laws - Effective October 1994: Local governments may declare certain buildings and lands public nuisances. Now, the following additional events may trigger the property to be declared a nuisance: a) any two violations of prostitution law within 6 months (Section 796.07); Book 37 Page 10926 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10927 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. b) the manufacture or cultivation of any controlled substance two times within 6 months; c) any time it is the site of the unlawful possession of a controlled substance, where the possession constitutes a felony and the property has been previously used on more than one occasion as a site of the unlawful sale, delivery, manufacture, or cultivation of any controlled substance. The local governmental board may now enter an order "requiring the owner of fthe) premises to adopt . procedures as may be appropriate under the circumstances to abate" the nuisance or to close the place or premises or any part thereof. (Section 893.128(1),(3), F.S.) Ms. Cherry stated that the City is locked in by the First Amendment to allow these adult use establishments to exist; that the majority of the businesses on the North Trail are run by honest, hard working people; that this proposed ordinance and new State law provide a real chance to help the North Trail and other neighborhoods in the City; however, the laws must be enforced; that enforcement requires not only the police, Commission, and City Administration to do their jobs, but also requires the residents to all and report knowledge of these types of activities. Julia Lomneck, 1025 Stoeber Avenue, representing AFA, stated that she thanks the Commission for having this ordinance drafted and she hopes it will be adopted; that adult use establishments should not be allowed into neighborhoods. Michelle Bolick, representing Friendship Village, stated that her two companions are Courtney and Josh, who with her represent the children of the neighborhood; that these stores should not be allowed in their neighborhood; that children don't like to walk past these (adult use establishments) and witness the associated "nasty" actions; that the children would like the neighborhood to remain as it is. Christine Weber, 2131 Harvard Street, representing ESNA, Friendship Village, Common Ground Alliance, stated that pornographers are lesperate men - and women who pervert the beauty of sex and exploit ale lusts in order to prosper from the sale and distribution of pornography; that in June 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Miller Decision stating, "This much has been categorically settled by the court, that obscene material is unprotected by the First Amendment"; that this statement disagrees with the Commission's statements that adult use establishments are allowed by the Constitution; that the Miller Decision empowered the citizens in any community to make the decision that pornography would remain only if the citizens want it. Ms. Weber continued that the city's obscenity codes are weak, vague and outdated; that the Planning Board requested that an option be presented; that the City Commission should develop a model obscenity ordinance based on the Miller Decision definitions which, where implemented, have helped to clean up several communities. Ms. Weber further stated that the proposed ordinance is not an alternative to the situation; that moving the problem will not solve it; that the problem needs to be addressed and solved; that the East Sarasota Neighborhood Association, Common Ground Alliance, and residents of the Friendship Village mobile home community are willing to sit down with city representatives: to discuss a solution for this problem; that together a viable alternative can be developed. Ms. Weber distributed a copy of her prepared speech, a Model Ordinance - Obscenity, and a St. Petersburg newspaper article dated April 24, 1984, referencing a nine-year-old boy who was found guilty of first degree murder in connection with the torture death of an eight-month-old baby girl. Mayor Patterson asked City Attorney Taylor for a response. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City is not attempting to regulate obscenity; that the obscenity laws are already on the books; that obscenity is illegal today no matter where it is found within the City of Sarasota; that this ordinance does not say that obscenity is allowed in one of the permitted zone districts; that no matter where an obscenity is found within the City of Sarasota it will be handled under State laws; that this ordinance is regulating businesses which are of an adult nature and something less than outright illegal conduct that is deemed illegal through other regulations; that the activities regulated by this ordinance are assumed to be legal, but are deemed to be of a type that the City needs to be cautious regarding location; that the proposed ordinance was not designed to condone illegal conduct in particular zone districts; that the decision was made as an adjunct to other City régulations to deal with adult use establishments as a matter of land use rather than allowing adult use establishments to exist in any commercial zone districts within the City; that when particular zone districts are focused upon it gives the appearance that the adult use establishments are being relocated from current locations into another neighborhood. Commissioner Pillot stated that an adult use establishment could currently locate in any of the zone districts permitted by this ordinance. City Attorney Taylor stated that is correct. Commissioner Pillot stated that this ordinance reduces the amount of space available for adult use establishments to legally exist within the City of Sarasota; therefore, new locations have not been created; that adult use establishments could currently locate in the same areas which will be designated for location by this ordinance. Commissioner Pillot continued that the Commission Book 37 Page 10928 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10929 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. directed the legal and administrative staff to bring back the strongest possible ordinance that has any reasonable chance to pass a court challenge; therefore, this ordinance is the best judgement of competent, legal staff with regard to regulating adult use astablishments; that the Commission would vote to ban adult use establishments from the City entirely if that decision could withstand a court challenge; however, tens of thousand of dollars would be spent on a court case that the City would lose if that decision were made; that the Courts of the United States which bind this Commission have made decisions regarding the rights of adult use establishments to have reasonable space to locate within a jurisdiction. Arland Christ-Janer, 4372 Camino Madera, Chairman of Gateway 2000, stated that he is the President of the Ringling School of Art and Design located at the intersection of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Way and North Tamiami Trail; that he reaffirms the support of Gateway 2000 in the endeavor which has been undertaken by the City Commission and legal counsel; that a study on the North Trail sector began four to five years ago; that 27 or 28 public hearings were held during which concerns for the quality of life along the entire North Tamiami Trail were expressed; that those concerns not only focused on the street but also on the adjacent neighborhoods; hat he understood a similar sector study would be performed on Washington Boulevard once the North Trail sector study was completed; that the intention was to develop a master plan incorporating the two sectors. Mr. Christ-Janer continued that the perception of drugs and crime at the gateway to the City of Sarasota was of further concern; that many people enter into the City from University Parkway and the Sarasota/Bradenton Airport; that Gateway 2000 proceeded to work with City Staff from whom immense cooperation was received; that this ordinance has emanated from a lengthy undertaking; that the intention was not to move adult use establishments from one place to another; that this ordinance may limit adult use establishments on North Tamiami Trail, but it will also limit adult use establishments in other areas of the City as well; that adult use establishments are allowed in those areas now, but choose for whatever reason not to locate there; that the adult use establishments currently located on the North Trail may not choose to relocate to the permitted areas. Mr. Christ-Janer further stated that the Commission is encouraged by Gateway 2000 and the students and faculty of Ringling ichool of Art and Design to adopt this ordinance. David Wasserman, Casselberry, FL, representing Blue Video, stated that he is an attorney engaged in First Amendment law; that his client, Blue Video, carries nonsexually explicit movies as well as sexually explicit movies. Mr. Wasserman continued that the definition of Adult Bookstore/Video Store contained in the proposed ordinance is confusing and may make many of the "mom and pop" video stores, currently operating within the City, Adult Video Stores under. the definition included; that City Attorney Taylor is correct that the Miller Decision previously mentioned is the State law on obscenity in the State of Florida; that he is disappointed that people feel "locked in by the First Amendment" rather than celebrating the freedom that allows them to speak out an engage in religious practices unimpeded. Mr. Wasserman stated that this is more confusing than any definition of adult bookstore or video store he has ever read; that he has difficulty understanding how it will be interpreted or applied. Mr. Wasserman referred to the following segment of the Adult Bookstore/Video Store definition: the sale and/or rental of Adult Material is greater than 10% of the gross income from the sale and/or rental of goods and/or services at the Establishment Mr. Wasserman stated that his client wants to be able to comply with the law; and asked if this definition refers to daily or weekly basis and if the City plans to audit his client's books on a weekly basis? city Attorney Taylor stated that the emphasis in that particular definition which has to do with display, gross income, or gross floor area is designed from the City's perspective to determine how much of the adult material within the store should trigger the definition; that the percentages refer to the amount of floor area devoted to the adult material or the quantity of items that are in inventory as defined in the ordinance; that whether 10% of the income of the store or organization related to the sale of all of their adult materials is what is being focused upon. Mr. Wasserman stated that he voices his objection over his client being made responsible for the individual tastes of the people who come into the store to purchase videos under the percentages of inventory or the percentage of sales; that the City will encompass businesses which were not considered if this ordinance is adopted. Johnny Nugent, 400 North Tamiami Trail, representing Common Ground Alliance, stated that he is the Precinct Captain of voting precinct 119 of the Democratic Executive Committee who serves on the Common Ground Alliance which is based on one man and one woman from each voting precinct; that Common Ground is a northside alllance which was formed to ensure adequate representation on issues such as the location of the County's Central Library; that the Common Ground Alliance realizes that citizens must ban together to retain the that library within the City limits. Mr. Nugent continued that he also represents the Normandy Motel, and referred to the letter contained in the Agenda packet written to Sarah Schenk by Attorney Michael Furen on behalf of the Normandy Book 37 Page 10930 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10931 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Motel regarding applicability to adult materials which are offered to guests at hotels or motels. Mr. Nugent stated that he attended the Planning Board public hearing regarding this land use ordinance and discovered that the establishment located on 17th Street off of Washington Boulevard would be the only establishment within the City that would qualify inder this ordinance; that speculation among people is that this ordinance is too restrictive and will be stricken by a higher court; that the City will then have more of a problem; that 1000 feet is very restrictive for a City the size of Sarasota; that an 800-foot or 500-foot distance should be considered; that the land use portion of this ordinance moves usage from one neighborhood to another which is morally wrong; that Common Ground opposes this ordinance. Sonia Vander Ploeg, representing Friendship Village, stated that her companion was her granddaughter Courtney; that adult use establishments which are ungodly and immoral to all age groups are not wanted in her neighborhood; that these activities will not be regulated without supervision; that she doesn't agree with the Superintendent of Schools; that adult use establishments should not be allowed anywhere in the City; that her children have been raised morally; that she realizes adult use operations are covered by the Zonstitution, but it amazes her that it is; that a step too far was :aken when god was removed. There was no one else signed up to speak and Mayor Patterson Closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 on first reading: Commissioner Atkins stated that in effect this ordinance has done exactly what he discussed at the table several months ago; that it targets a neighborhood and a community which is not currently affected by adult use establishments; that the commercial zone districts designated in this ordinance for adult use location will legatively affect one community for the benefit of the present sommunity which is negatively impacted; that the Commission will be oing a injustice to the District 1 community, specifically to the 12th and 17th streets/Mashington Boulevard area if this ordinance is adopted, which should not be done; that the cheers for this ordinance are coming from the people who are presently impacted by the adult use establishments; that the people not currently impacted should be just as pleased with it; that this ordinance is not fair; that the zoning districts in the City are not fair; that the most intensive commercial and dirtiest industries are placed near the poor and impoverished people of the community; that he is amazed that the American Family Association supported this ordinance after approaching the Commission in opposition of the zoning districts; that it is a shame that they support something which will be dumped into someone else's neighborhood instead of their own; that if the American Family Association is of such high moral character, they should not support adult use establishments anywhere in the City, especially in the lower income neighborhoods. Commissioner Atkins continued that this ordinance continues to do exactly what the citizens of the Washington Boulevard corridor opposed and the North Tamiami Trail corridor citizens supported move the adult use establishments from North Tamiami Trail to Washington Boulevard; that the Commission should have the heart to consider reversing this ordinance. Commissioner Pillot referred to Map area no. 8 contained in the Agenda packet and asked if the high probability area depicted on that map was the southeast corner of Bahia Vista Street and U.S. 41? Captain Carter came before the Commission and stated that was correct. Commissioner Pillot asked how this area could meet the 1000 feet distance requirement when the Sailor Circus and Sarasota High School are directly across the street? Captain Carter stated that the referenced area is the Midtown Plaza shopping center; that if an adult use establishment is located in an interior portion of the second floor of the shopping center, the measurement would be taken from the front door of the office in the interior portion of the premises, down the stairs, to the nearest exit out of that property, and down the roadway to the nearest prohibited zone district or use; that the areas of that shopping center which would qualify are highly restrictive. Commissioner Pillot stated that the three largest areas depicted as high probability on the area maps are not in the Newtown community or the area to which Commissioner Atkins referred; that the areas are: 1) at the intersection of Bee Ridge Road and U.S. 41 which is the Southgate shopping area, 2) at the intersection of Beneva and Fruitville Roads which is the Town and Country shopping area, and 3) near the Sarasota Kennel Club Dog Racing track. Commissioner Atkins stated that the highest concentration of adult use activities are found in city cores where hotels and motels are located; that it is unlikely that this type of activity will locate in the three areas mentioned by Commissioner Pillot; that this ordinance creates a nucleus for a congested area already experiencing problems to be enhanced by this potential blight; that the maps can depict one thing, but the Commission must realize the real effect of this ordinance; that Combat Zones are created in areas of city cores with high traffic and high intensive use of commercial and residential areas; that this ordinance relocates the Book 37 Page 10932 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10933 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. adult use establishments to the true gateway to the City of Sarasota; that far more traffic travels on U.S. 301/Washington Boulevard than travels on U.S. 41; that the Commission should delay action on an adult use ordinance until after the U.S. 301 sector study is complete; that at that time, a zoning district could be created which would not be applicable and another location could be liminated. Commissioner Atkins continuéd that the relocation of one church or one school would change the probability scenarios depicted on the area maps; that a high concentration of applicable zoning exists along the U.S. 301 corridor. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the issue of adult entertainment which will be allowed by this ordinance refers to bookstores and video stores and does not include topless bars or lingerie shops; that a lingerie shop located in the Fruitville/Beneva Roads area was part of the policé "sting" operation which are used to prove that lingerie shops are not operating in a legal manner; that this ordinance, with the open viewing area clause, will make it difficult for lingerie shops to pretend that the law is not being violated; therefore, he expects lingerie shops to close; that he does not believe allowing adult use establishments in the Fruitville/Beneva Road area will negatively affect the Carolina Estates or the Glen Oaks subdivisions. Vice Mayor Merrill sontinued that businesses have had difficulty securing approval for alcohol in the Midtown Plaza shopping center due to the 500-foot listance requirement; that a very restrictive portion of that shopping area would meet the 1000-foot distance requirement. Vice Mayor Merrill further stated that Mayor Patterson's district has the highest probability of location with his district being the second district with a large amount of square footage available to adult use establishments; that he agrees that lower-priced stores are located in the area referred to by Commissioner Atkins; however, an adult use establishment currently exists in that area and there is a 1000-foot distance requirement between adult use establishments; that this ordinance addresses adult bookstores and video stores; that the notion of a Combat Zone with which people from Boston, Massachusetts, are familiar is not bookstore or video store driven; that a Combat Zone is nudity driven. Vice Mayor Merrill added that he wishes that adult use establishments could be totally banned or that this type of material could be declared obscene; however, legal counsel had advised that this cannot be accomplished; that this ordinance does not simply move the adult ise establishments from one area to another; that it severely estricts the operation of adult use establishments in the City of parasota; therefore, he strongly supports this ordinance. Commissioner Cardamone stated that currently adult use establishments can locate and operate in any part of the City of Sarasota which is zoned commercial; that this ordinance severely restricts the opportunity to open what are perceived to be legal, adult entertainment uses; that no adult use establishments can locate in the area as long as neighborhoods of single family homes exist on either side or the back side of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Wayi that Midtown Plaza is across the street and in front of a single-family neighborhood, across from a school, and near the Lutheran Church; that this ordinance will restrict the location of adult use establishments to small areas where there are no schools or churches; that the Commission is trying to eliminate adult use establishments within the City as best as the law will allow. Mayor Patterson stated that this is at least the fourth public hearing that the majority of the Commission has held on these issues; that there is no easy solution; that the City has two ordinances in place currently that prohibit nudity Citywide; that a zoning ordinance to further restrict these activities was previously drafted and addressed; that the applicable zoning would have been concentrated particularly in the northeast quadrant of the City and was, therefore, rejected; that the Commission directed the Administration to be as comprehensive as legally possible in drafting this ordinance because of the rapid proliferation of adult bookstores and video stores along North Tamiami Trail. Mayor Patterson continued that residential use areas exist within the high probability sections depicted on the area maps; that the adult use establishment must be 1000-feet from any residential home, not just a residential zone district; therefore, there will be only a few locations permitted in the City; that the Commission is not creating a Combat Zone; that the Commission has done their best to develop a legally defensible solution that zones adult use establishments to areas which will have the least impact on City neighborhoods and can be enforced. City Attorney Taylor stated that the assignment given to the City Attorney's office was to revise the Sarasota County adult use ordinance for applicability within the City of Sarasota; that many of the adult use establishments located in the County relocated into the City limits when the Sarasota County ordinance went into effect; that this ordinance modeled the Sarasota County ordinance with modifications requested by the City Commission to make the City's ordinance more restrictive than the County's ordinance. City Attorney Taylor continued that 4% of the total land area of the City would be available for adult use location under this ordinance. Commissioner Pillot referred to the School definition in the proposed ordinance; and asked why vocational or higher institution schools were excluded? Ms. Schenk came before the Commission and stated that the School definition was modeled from the Sarasota County ordinance; that Sarasota County's ordinance may have been drafted in that manner with the presumption that secondary effects are greater to school- Book 37 Page 10934 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10935 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. aged children, and adults would be attending vocational or professional schools and colleges. Commissioner Pillot stated that K-12 aged or high school students attend the Sarasota County Technical Institute which is a vocational school located in the County; that a similar school built within the City would be excluded by this ordinance; that Ms. Schenk did not state that court decisions prohibited the inclusion of these schools; therefore, the proposed ordinance should be amended to include all educational institutions. Mayor Patterson asked city Attorney Taylor for comment. City Attorney Taylor stated that was acceptable. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to amend the motion to eliminate the exclusion of "vocational or professional education or training or an institution of higher education, including but not limited to, a community college, junior college, four-year college or university" from the School definition contained in proposed Ordinance No. 94-3792 prior to second reading. Commissioner Cardamone referred to the letter received by Attorney Furen regarding the request from Mr. Nugent to have this ordinance written as not to include hotels or motels that offer their guests materials; and stated that the request to exclude hotels and motels should be denied. Mayor Patterson asked whether the proposed ordinance excludes hotels and motels? City Attorney Taylor stated that this ordinance does not regulate that type of a business activity; that he is not familiar with the specific business activity occurring at the Normandy Motel; that the business activity would have to be further nvestigated to determine the emphasis of the regulation; that he S aware that the Normandy Motel advertisements are oriented to the adult aspects of this ordinance; that such establishments may not located in Sarasota County, and, therefore were not regulated in their ordinance; that as this ordinance has been written and advertised, the referenced hotel/motel activity was not included; that a separate regulation as a subsequent amendment will be necessary if regulation of the activity is desired by the Commission. Mayor Patterson stated that City Attorney Taylor is not recommending that a change to the proposed ordinance be made at this time. City Attorney Taylor stated that is correct. Mayor Patterson called for a vote on the amendment to the motion to eliminate the School definition exclusions. Amendment carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, no; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the City Attorney should be directed to review the request made by Attorney Furen to determine if an amendment to this ordinance should be discussed by the Commission. Mayor Patterson stated that there was a consensus of the Commission to direct City Attorney Taylor to review regulating adult business activities at hotels and motels. The Commission recessed at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened at 9:42 p.m. 9. CITIZENS INPUT (AGENDA ITEM VI) #3 (1344) through (2595) The following people came before the Commission: Jeffrey Harris, 973 Virginia Drive, stated that the City has been grossly negligent in providing public safety for the citizens and visitors in Sarasota with regard to aspects of the road construction occurring on North Tamiami Trail and in front of Sarasota High School as required for the City's Sewer Rehabilitation Project; that his complaints are not in regard to the inconvenience associated with the road being torn up, nor to lament on its effect on local business owners; that he assumes this work had to be done, the timing for the project was appropriate, and the inconvenience must be accepted; however, the public safety aspects of the project are of concern. Mr. Harris referred to and cited the following from an August 1994 Sarasota City News article "Taking it to the Streets Making Sarasota Safer" written by James Frazier, Fire-Rescue Bureau, Public Safety Department: A traffic death is no less tragic than a senseless murder and there are steps people can take to protect themselves. The City employees and Engineering Department of trained professionals plan, coordinate, and oversee road projects in the City. Mr. Harris stated that this project occurring on a major arterial road in the City of Sarasota is not being handled by the Engineering Department; that it is being handled by a department that doesn't build roads, and the results in terms of safety have been disastrous; that the safety aspect of this project has been unprofessional and irresponsible from the start, inadequate and misguided during construction, and consistently sloppy even after the traffic was rerouted back to normal. Mr. Harris continued that no advance warning of lane discontinuance was provided to vehicles Book 37 Page 10936 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10937 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. travelling north at the posted speed of 45 mph, possibly at night or in the rain; that the contractor was notified directly, and the speed limit signs were covered the following day; that a warning sign was posted on the wrong side of the road several weeks later; that a speed limit of 35 mph was posted weeks later; that "weeks" is a long period of time when citizens are travelling on this road every day and every night; that the Utilities Division of Public Works was contacted regarding the situation and he was told, "We can't tell the contractor how to do his job... - and it meets State standards"; that adequate signage should be used to reduce accidents which can cause much pain, loss, and death; that it is irresponsible for the City to become complacent about the safety of others. Mr. Harris further stated that thé top coat of asphalt was ground off, leaving a three to four inch lip which resulted in a violent shock to any car or light truck travelling over it at much over 20 mph; that frequent travellers of the road become aware of Chose locations and tend to spontaneously brake prior to contact which invites a rear-end collision; that he has witnessed many close calls and several head on collisions; that a transition lip of raised asphalt was constructed on North Tamiami Trail the day after he contacted the Mayor and another Commissioner; however, the similar situation present in front of Sarasota High School was not addressed. Mr. Harris added that this project does not appear to be receiving adequate attention by the assigned department; that the Engineering Department should be overseeing this hazardous project; that these dangerous conditions should not be permitted to continue. Mayor Patterson stated that a similar instance has been observed with regard to the raised manhole covers on North Tamiami; that vehicles on North Tamiami Trail attempt to dodge the manhole covers around which the asphalt should be raised. 3il Leacock, Director of Public Works, came before the Commission ind stated that the project was approved by all of the regulatory agencies at all levels of government in the State and the City; that the detour plans were submitted to and approved by the City's Engineering Department and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) prior to obtaining a construction permit for the project; that responses from employees in the Public Works Department and the Utilities Engineer were supplied to Mr. Harris regarding his concerns; that the signage placed at the subject locations was in accordance with the requirements of the regulatory agencies; that the signage was not deficit; that the Public Works Department has acted responsibly and pursued this project in a proper manner. Deputy City Manager Schneider asked Mr. Leacock what could be done to remedy the manhole cover situation? Mr. Leacock stated that the manhole covers are still raised because the final paving surface has not been applied to the road; that the milling surface was done in accordance with FDOT specifications; that he does not have the asphalt resurfacing schedule available at this time. Mayor Patterson stated that she understood that the asphalt surface would not be applied for many months; that she is concerned with the situation remaining as it is for any length of time. Mr. Léacock stated that he has voiced similar concernsi that he will not permit the situation to remain as it is; that the resurfacing will take place in the near future. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she is concerned with the safety of the driving public; and asked when the project will be complete and why there has been such a long delay? Mr. Leacock stated that the contractor may have subcontracted the resurfacing portion of this project to a paving contractor who then experienced difficulties; that the situation will be reviewed and resolved. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the business owners on Tamiami Trail near the Sarasota High School were told that this project would start at the beginning of July and be completed by the end of August; that it is now the latter part of September, and the project is not close to being complete. Mr. Leacock stated that portion of the project was intentionally postponed when the contractor could not meet the submitted schedule; that the project has continued on School Avenue and a portion of Bahia Vista Street; that the project will come west on Bahia Vista Street to tie into U.S. 41. Commissioner Cardamone stated that she is concerned with the situation; that the barricades and the proximity of their location are difficult to handle; that the children and young adults that drive in that area are not careful, experienced drivers. Commissioner Pillot stated that he finds it difficult to believe that Mr. Harris witnessed head-on collisions due to this construction; that Mr. Leacock has provided a thorough, responsible answer which is satisfactory to him. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that vehicle drivers are cutting through Shade Avenue to avoid the approaching construction on Bahia Vista Street and School Avenue; that residents have complained about the increased traffic on Shade Avenue; that a solution for this type of cut through activity should be addressed prior to construction beginning on the Tuttle Avenue Road Widening project. Book 37 Page 10938 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10939 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Mr. Leacock stated that the increased traffic on Shade Avenue will be relieved shortly when the School Avenue resurfacing is completed. Mayor Patterson stated that the FDOT standards may have been met, but the project areas are high traffic areas with potential for accidents; that signage to pre-warn the travellers of the road construction should be posted. Mr. Leacock stated that this could be included in the City's requirements for these type of projects. Dorothy Clark, 1521 23rd Street, representing the Leon Avenue Neighborhood Watch Association (LNA), presented the Commission with a copy of a letter received by Wallace Rentals and stated that it was a positive response to a letter written by the LNA regarding the illegal activities by tenants residing at Wallace Rental properties. Ms. Clark stated that City assistance is requested to lean up the Leon Avenue neighborhood; that the area is one of high prime, and the residents who need to rise for work in the morning get little sleep; that she requests that the Commission visit the neighborhood at night to witness the activities with which the residents are subject to on a daily basis; that she requests a legal City ordinance, which will stand up in court, be developed to address the variety of crime activities which occur in the neighborhood 24 hours per day; that young children are subject to this activity and view it through their home windows; that the City has used taxpayers' money to purchase the former Augustine Quarters property to build new homes; that the LNA and the City Commission will be embarrassed if the area is not cleaned up prior to the October 1, 1994, kick-off scheduled for that project. Ms. Clark continued that discussions have been held with John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, and Gordon Jolly, Chief of Police Services Bureau, Public Safety Department, regarding using Law Enforcement Trust Funds (L.E.T.F.) to rent the property located on the corner of Leon Avenue and 24th Street to provide assistance; that the LNA las done everything that has been requested of them; that the residents are tired and need help. Mayor Patterson asked for clarification of the request associated with renting the property at Leon Avenue and 24th Street. Ms. Clark stated that the police department is being requested to use this property as a resource center; that the resource center previously located on Orange Avenue is no longer in operation; that Police Chief Jolly had stated that the manpower was reduced due to budget constraints; that L.E.T.F. money should be used to supply manpower to the area. Commissioner Pillot stated that he supports Ms. Clark's request. Vice Mayor Merrill asked Ms. Clark if she thought the crime activity occurring in her neighborhood was drug related? Ms. Clark responded yes; and that Police Chief Jolly has been supplied with individual names, house numbers, etc., of the individuals participating in drug-related activities. Vice Mayor Merrill asked Ms. Clark if she agrees with the newspaper that these individuals should not be sent to jail because drug crimes are victimless crimes and if she thinks drugs should be legalized? Ms. Clark stated that the City should get tough with drug offenders; that she could not really say if drugs should be legalized; however, many health problems are associated with drug abuse. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that Ms. Clark deals with drug-related activity each day; that many of the people who pontificate on drug-related issues live no where near this type of activity. Ms. Clark stated that the LNA requested that an ordinance similar to those in effect for malls and businesses be developed which would make it illegal for individuals to stand around the neighborhood for unlawful purposes; that individuals can stand in front of her house all day long playing a boom box and the police can do nothing. Mayor Patterson stated that the City has a noise ordinance which could be enforced; that there are ordinances pertaining to drug dealings; that the burden of proof is the difficult element associated with cleaning up this and many other City neighborhoods; that the Commission can refer this matter to the Administration and the Police Chief; that the issue has been reviewed previously; that the Commission is concerned and can relay to the Administration that the concern continues especially where people are trying very hard to work with the police to clean up their neighborhood; that the Commission wants that neighborhood to experience positive effects and have police resources made available as much as possible. Commissioner Cardamone stated she recentiy took a two-hour police tour through the Leon Avenue neighborhood late at night; that she witnessed large numbers of people standing all over the streets, talking, fooling around, and dealing drugs; that she realizes that one of the difficulties is that the police make arrests and, before the paperwork is completed, that individual is back on the street; however, the situation is deplorable; that she shares the same worries as Ms. Clark in regard to the project scheduled for construction on the former Augustine Quarters property; that the Book 37 Page 10940 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10941 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Administration should pursue Ms. Clark's request and consider using the property mentioned to provide police presence in the area. Deputy City Manager Schneider stated that he will meet with the Police Chief and report back to the Commission. Ms. Clark extended an open invitation for the Commission to attend an LNA monthly meeting. Mayor Patterson stated that Edward T. Harding was signed up to speak, but has since left the Commission Chambers; that the request to speak form referred to an issue which was mentioned in a recent letter written to her by Mr. Harding; and asked if the City is currently installing gray water lines on U.S. 41 as that road is being repaved? Mr. Leacock came before the Commission and stated that the City is not currently installing gray water lines along U.S. 41 at this time since that installation would have been more expensive that the method the Administration chose to pursue; that the City will install reuse lines on Central Avenue to feed from Central Avenue zest of U.S. 41 at specific intersections to convert the potable systems in the medians to reuse; that U.S. 41 will not be excavated for line installation. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the purple lines being installed on Bahia Vista Street are reuse lines? Mr. Leacock stated that reuse lines will be installed on Bahia Vista Street and will be placed on the medians on North Tamiami Trail; however, the lines will be serviced with the potable system until the conversion takes place; that ultimately the lines will be reuse which is why purple lines are being installed. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the reuse lines will be placed on South Tamiami Trail? Mr. Leacock stated that those lines would be installed on South Tamiami Trail for future tie in capability. Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission requested that the Administration install gray lines each time a street was excavated; hat she assumed that practice was being followed; that the ommission's intent was not only to provide gray water to medians, but ultimately to providing reuse water for residential use. Mr. Leacock stated that the line which will be installed on Central Avenue will go north to the Sarasota/Bradenton Airport and feed east and west of Central Avenue; that this will make it possible, at some point, to feed the Ringling Museum, the Asolo, and those neighborhoods where inground irrigation systems are installed; that a similar project is scheduled for Tuttle Avenue; that a total loop system is being implemented to provide a basis for feed off to three main spines into the residential districts. Betsy Kelley, stated that citizens have worked hard to obtain a resource center for police services on Central Avenue; that Joe Penix has volunteered a portion of his plumbing store to provide the police substation on Central Avenue which will be staffed by volunteers of the neighborhood; that she hopes a similar arrangement can be made for the residents of the Leon Avenue neighborhood. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: COMPUTERIZED TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM - STATUS REPORT GIVEN (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #3 (2597) through (3432) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, and Glen Ivey, District Construction Engineer, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), came before the Commission. Mr. Ivey stated that the project has been functioning since June 1994; that the public has been experience some level of benefit by the improvement of traffic flow; that communication problems between the 59 signal sites and the central computer were experienced shortly after the system became functional due to defective communication modules and battery board controllers; that these items have since been replaced; that the manufacturer provided upgraded operating software which was installed; that the following elements of the system have recently been damaged: 1) the traffic signal system at Ringling Boulevard and Shade Avenue which was damaged by lightening has been repaired and a line amplifier to remedy some of the communication problems was installed, 2) the interconnect cable on 10th Street which was cut by a contractor performing excavation work has not been repaired, and 3) the spliced box at U.S. 301 and Fruitville Road which was damaged by an automobile accident has not been repaired. Mr. Ivey continued that in addition to the damaged items mentioned and completion of punchlist items which must be performed, the following aspects of this part of the project remain: 1) functional testing for acceptance of the system, 2) operational training to the City's Engineering Department Staff and members of the County's staff, and 3) a 60-day "burn-in" period to evaluate the system; that the contractor is scheduled to begin the functional testing within two weeks which means the above mentioned repairs and remaining items must be performed; that the operational training sessions are tentatively scheduled for the week of October 3, 1994; that this part of the project, including the 60-day burn- in period in which related difficulties and minor adjustments to the signal timings are made, could be completed by early December. Mr. Levy further stated that the field work has been completed for the following phase of the project which will involve integrating an additional 83 intersections within the City and County into the system; that tying the connections into the existing project will be performed once the existing project is back on line; that the difficulties experienced with the initially mentioned phase of the Book 37 Page 10942 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10943 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. project is delaying the subsequent phase, but hopefully, that phase can proceed by the end of December. Mayor Patterson asked how far behind the originally contracted schedule is the project? Mr. Levy stated that the current contractor has been charged approximately 1200 days on an original 350-day contract; however, the contractor has been granted time extensions whereby the current allowable contract time is approximately 950 days; therefore, the allowable contract time has been exceeded by 250 days. Commissioner Cardamone stated the City of Sarasota has been penalized by this delay time; and asked how the contractor is being penalized? Mr. Ivey stated that recently, the contractor was noticed of an intent to default; that prior to that notice, the FDOT had declared the contractor delinquent; that the contractor has filed a request for an administrative hearing in accordance with the FDOT's administrative process; that the hearing should take place within 30 days; that the intent to default was noticed with the goal and intent of getting the contractor to complete the project quickly. Mayor Patterson stated that at some point, the project should be taken from the current contractor if he doesn't perform and given to a contractor who can perform the work necessary to complete the project; that the Commission receives constant complaints regarding this issue. Mayor Patterson stated that the penalty for default must be ninimal. Mr. Ivey stated that the penalty in the contract is for 1,000 per day; however, a conscious decision was made that the pest approach to get the project completed was to encourage the contractor to complete it; that withholding the penalties from the contractor at that time would have meant rebidding the project; that in retrospect the FDOT would have been better off defaulting the contractor. Vice Mayor Merrill asked for clarification of the date on which the project is anticipated to be operational. Mr. Ivey stated that the system has been operating since June 1994; that the contractor should complete the remaining work by early December 1994. Mayor Patterson asked if the additional 83 intersection will be completed by December 1994? Mr. Ivey stated that the additional 83 intersection are included in package "C"; that packages "C" and "D" will not be performed by the same contractor and will not be completed by December; that he anticipates a completion date three months subsequent to completion f the first packages; that a more accurate completion date can be forwarded once the contract for packages "C" and "D" has been reviewed. Mayor Patterson stated that many complaints have been received regarding the signal timing length at various side-street intersections; that the various decisions made by the FDOT regarding the timing length anticipated for the busier intersections should be forwarded to the Commission. Mr. Ivey stated that improving the flow on the thoroughfares makes it more difficult to get into the system; however, that time lost getting into the system is regained as a vehicle travels within the system; that the timing length on the side streets can be reviewed for possible improvement. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the Commission was informed that " smart lights" would be incorporated into this system whereby the traffic signals at intersections respond to the movement of traffic, especially late at night; that she has to wait for what seems to be an eternity at the Main Street and Orange Avenue intersection and, subsequently, at the Ringling Boulevard intersection when she leaves City Hall at midnight after a Commission meeting, although there are no other vehicles on the road; that the traffic signal should be able to detect that only one car is at an intersection. Mr. Ivey stated that there are sensors in the roadway which sense a vehicle's presence or absence; that the traffic signals should also be regulated on the thoroughtares dependent upon counted traffic volumes. Mayor Patterson asked if vehicle drivers currently have to wait at an intersection when there is no other traffic because the system is not complete, or if it is a permanent condition? Mr. Ivey stated that a permanent condition will be that it takes a longer period of time to get into the system; however, it is not a permanency of the system to wait an eternity to enter into the system; that there may be a problem at the particular site mentioned. Mr. Ivey continued that the certain key intersections that drive the system will determine what happens at the rest of the intersections on the system. Commissioner Atkins stated that turn arrows should not be activated when there are no vehicles in the turn lane; and asked if this will be implemented by April 1, 1995? Mr. Ivey stated yes. Mayor Patterson requested that Mr. Ivey report back to the Commission at the meeting scheduled closest to April 1, 1994. Mr. Ivey stated that he hopes to bring good news to the Commission at that time. Book 37 Page 10944 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10945 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. 11. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2, AND 3 APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM IIIA) #3 (3432) through (3475) 1. Approval Re: Award of Purchase Order Contract to Home Carpet Company, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, in the amount of $12,458.43, for the installation and replacement of worn carpet, ceramic tile and floor vinyl at Fire Stations 1, 2, 3, and 5 2. Approval Re: Ratification of three-year contract Agreement effective October 1, 1994 through September 30, 1997, between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. for Permanent Full-Time and Part-Time Police Officers 1st and 2nd Class and Sergeants. Also, Permanent Full-Time Dispatchers, Sr. Dispatchers, Communications Supervisors, Community Service Aide Supervisors and Community Service Aides, also, Permanent Full-Time Criminalist I, Criminalist II and Criminalist III 3. Approval Re: Ratification of three-year contract Agreement effective October 1, 1994 through September 30, 1997, between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Police Benevolent Association, Inc. Supervisory Unit of Permanent Full-Time Lieutenants On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item Nos. 1, 2, and 3. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 12. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-734) - ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-754) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-766) = ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-767) = ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (RESOLUTION NO. 94R-768) = ADOPTED: ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3817) - ADOPTED; ITEM 7 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3825) ADOPTED; ITEM 8 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3826) - ADOPTED; ITEM 9 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3827) = ADOPTED; AND ITEM NO. 10 (ORDINANCE NO. 94-3828) = ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #3 (3475) through #4 (0065) 'ice Mayor Merrill requested that Item No. 2 be removed for iscussion. Mayor Patterson requested that Item No. 4 be removed for discussion. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 94R-766 in its entirety, and proposed Resolution Nos. 94R-734 and 94R-768, and proposed Ordinance Nos. 94-3817, 94-3825, 94-3826, 94-3827, and 94-3828 by title only. 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 94R-734, of the city Commission of the City of Sarasota, Florida, accepting abatement of nuisance and cost reports pertaining to the removal of accumulations of junk, rubbish, trash or other offending matter; directing the assessment of a lien against the property described in each abatement report for the amount stated therein; etc. (Title Only) 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 94R-766, appropriating $10,000 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to fund operating costs of a citizen volunteer sub-station on Central Avenue 5. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 94R-768, requesting that the Lido Key Beach Restoration Project, as included in the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Legislative Fixed Capital Budget, be included in the Governor's budget to be presented to the State Legislature; etc. (Title Only) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3817, amending Chapter 33, Traffic and Motor Vehicles, by adding thereto Article V, Combat Automobile Theft Program, which shall provide definitions, create the Automobile Theft Program, create the enrollment procedures for enrollment into said program, establish procedures for termination of enrollment into said program, and determine the lack of civil liability for implementation of said program; making findings as to the propriety for said program; repealing ordinances in conflict; providing for the severability of the parts hereof; etc. (Title Only) 7. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3825, providing for the designation of the structure located at 1716 Oak Street, historically known as the Ella Dula Westermann Tenant House, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-HD-12, Lybrand) 8. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3826, providing for the designation of the structure located at 2846 South Riverside Drive, historically known as the C. E. Hitchings/Judge Fosler Residence, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-HD-17, Abbott) Book 37 Page 10946 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10947 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. 9. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3827, providing for the designation of the structure located at 451 Woodland Drive, historically known as the Dr. George Day House, as a structure of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-HD-18, Cotten) 10. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 94-3828, providing for the designation of the structures located at 76 South Washington Drive, as structures of historic significance pursuant to the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Sarasota; etc. (Title Only) (Petition No. 94-HD-19, Hartig) On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 2, Item Nos. 1, 3, and 5 through 10 inclusive. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 94R-754, appropriating $1,800 from the Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (Forfeitures) to assist in funding the Project Black Çinema International Film Festival/Youth Educational Program On motion of Vice Mayor Merrill and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to appropriate $1,800 from the General Fund to assist in funding the Project Black Cinema International Film restival/Kouth Educational Program. Vice Mayor Merrill stated the appropriation of Special Law Enforcement Trust Fund (L.E.T.F.) money must be above reproach and used for legitimate law enforcement purposes only; that the location of a Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) officer at a function where the officer is neither a speaker, nor the function itself is specifically related to law enforcement, constitutes improper use of the L.E.T.F. money, i.e., funding the French Film Festival because police officers are present; that it is not Clear that the Project Black Cinema program is a law entorcement program. Commissioner Atkins stated that the Project Black Cinema nternational Film Festival Community Outreach/Youth Educational 'rogram is an appropriate expenditure under the Forfeiture Fund State Ordinance; that L.E.T.F. money can be spent for purposes other than the direct purchase of instruments for police enforcement. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the L.E.T.F. consists of money recaptured from drug arrests and other law enforcement-related areas; that the money in the L.E.T.F. cannot be budgeted; that the State's intention by including the word "Trust" in naming the fund is to ensure that this money is spent solely on items directly related to law enforcement; that Gordon Jolly, Chief of Police Services Bureau, Public Safety Department, indicated that a D.A.R.E. officer would attend the Project Black Cinema program; that D.A.R.E. officers may attend many upcoming events, however, this would not justify funding those events from the L.E.T.F.; that the money to support the Project Black Cinema program should be appropriated from the General Fund rather than the L.E.T.F. Commissioner Cardamone stated that requesting the Commission to appropriate money for an event which already occurred is unusual; that $1,800 is an enormous amount of money to expend for one officer to distribute literature; that the Commission should be. informed of the funding budgeted, the actual expenditures, and why this appropriation request is coming before the Commission after the event has already transpired. John Lewis, Director of Public Safety, came before the Commission and stated that the information regarding Project Black Cinema International Film Festival Community Outreach/Youth Educational Program was received by Police Chief Jolly on September 9, 1994; that time did not permit bringing this request before the Commission prior to the event which hundreds of school-aged children attended; that drug use prevention and the importance of education were the main themes woven into the entertainment and cultural performances; that the requested appropriation is for the cost associated with renting the Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall (VWPAH) for the event. Commissioner Pillot stated that the City Commission should approve the appropriation of $1,800 to show support for the valuable purpose the Project Black Cinema International Film Festival Community Outreach/Youth Educational Program served; that it is immaterial whether the funds are taken from the General Fund or the L.E.T.F. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the Project Black Cinema event was a "city only" program or involved the entire community? Mayor Patterson stated that whether the funding comes from the General Fund or the L.E.T.F. is relevant; that the optimum use for the L.E.T.F. money would be to hire additional policemen to combat illegal drugs, but the restrictions placed on the usage of the L.E.T.F. money does not allow such an expenditure; that the General Fund should not be used in lieu of the L.E.T.F. for a program that is coherent in its aim of removing illegal drugs; that Book 37 Page 10948 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10949 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. appropriating $1,800 from the General Fund will leave less dollars in the General Fund to pay police officers' salaries. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that appropriating this $1,800 from the L.E.T.F. will: reduce the amount of funding available to purchase other law entorcement related items which are not approved out of the General Fund; however, appropriating this $1,800 from the General Fund will not take funding away from the Police Services Bureau. Mayor Patterson stated that one-half of the General Fund is used to fund the Police Department of the City of Sarasota; that there is a direct relationship between the General Fund and the Police Department. Commissioner Cardamone asked if the Project Black Cinema program was directed entirely to drug prevention? irector Lewis stated that a portion of the second session of the èvent included the education and drug-prevention themes. Commissioner Pillot stated that there is much greater flexibility in the use of General Funds as opposed to the L.E.T.F. dollars; therefore, the General Fund dollars should be preserved. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 94R-754 in its entirety. On motion of Mayor Patterson (who passed the gavel to Commissioner Cardamone) and second of Commissioner Pillot, it was moved to amend the motion to approve the appropriation of $1,800 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund. Commissioner Cardamone called for a vote to amend the motion to approve the appropriation of $1,800 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund. Amendment carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; ferrill, no; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. Commissioner Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote on the motion as amended. Motion carried (4 to 1): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, no; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. 94R-767, adopting the revised position Classification/Compensation Plan; authorizing employees, including the City Manager and the City Auditor and Clerk, for whom collective bargaining is not required, except as provided herein, an increase in the. base rate of pay as provided herein, effective October 5, 1994, authorizing the City Manager to continue to administer the Classification/Compensation Plan re- quirements; providing additional compensation for longevity; determining which officers shall give bond and the amounts thereof; etc. (Title Only) Mayor Patterson stated that salary increases for Department Heads and Charter Officials should be dependent upon satisfactory performance reviews; that the Commission's annual evaluations should be done in August to allow time for a vote after completion of the reviews as to whether or not the raises are justified. Commissioner Pillot stated that scheduling of annual evaluations by the City Commission should be closer to the end of the fiscal year; that recent evaluations showed satisfactory ratings of the Charter Officials; that the Charter Officials are entitled to a cost of living adjustment (COLA); that consideration of the proportional percentage aspect of a higher salary versus a low entry-level salary would merit discussion if the proposed increase went beyond the COLA. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 2, Item 4. Mayor Patterson asked when the evaluations of the two Charter Officials were done by the Commission? City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that the evaluations were submitted late in December 1993, and the results were received in January 1994. Commissioner Cardamone stated that City employees did not request salary increases; that City Manager Sollenberger consistently states that staff has been reduced to a minimum; that previously eliminated : department positions should be restored in lieu of authorizing an increase in pay for employees. Mayor Patterson stated that employees should receive a COLA to combat increases in the cost of living; however, the Department Heads directly under the supervision of the City Manager should not receive a COLA unless it is in conjunction with a satisfactory performance. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution No. 94R-767 by title only. Mayor Patterson requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried (3-2): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, no; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, no. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION = FLASHING MODE OPERATION - ADMINISTRATION TO CONDUCT IN-HOUSE TRAFFIC SIGNAL STUDIES (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) Book 37 Page 10950 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10951 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. #4 (0680) through (0944) Mayor Patterson stated that $19,500 in consulting fees is estimated to determine the feasibility of operating signals at 39 intersections in a flashing mode (flashing red-yellow) as opposed to their normal mode of operation red-yellow-green) during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. daily; that Rick Chalker of the Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) estimated a savings between S $5,000 to $12,000 per year if the mode of operation is changed. Asim Mohammed, Assistant City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that the Administration has the expertise in-house to conduct studies to determine if the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) requirement guidelines can be met to change any or all of the 39 traffic signals to a flashing mode of operation; however, manual traffic-turning movement counts must be done at each of the locations; that this requires two people standing at each location counting every car that turns left and right; that the Administration does not have sufficient staff to perform the required traffic counts as quickly as an outside consultant could have the task performed; that the benefit of hiring an outside consultant is that the necessary study would be completed in approximately one month. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Vice Mayor Merrill, it was moved to authorize the Administration to conduct the study in-house and deliver the results in the quickest, reasonable time, staffing will permit. ommissioner Cardamone asked if people actually would be sent out in the middle of the night to count cars? Mr. Mohammed stated that in accordance with FDOT guidelines, the study must be conducted between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Commissioner Cardamone stated that it is incongruous to count cars at an intersection between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. to determine if the light mode should be changed to flashing after 10:00 p.m. Mr. Mohammed stated that the amount of traffic present during the remaining hours of the day and night can be determined by applying certain standard factors to the turning movement counts performed between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. which are the peak hours; that a standard measure of traffic for the remaining part of the day can pe determined from machine counts, i.e., traffic at 9 a.m. may be only 20% of the peak-hour traffic. ommissioner Cardamone stated that the Administration should take the liability risk and change the mode of operation to flashing at 10:00 p.m. in the areas with no traffic. Mayor Patterson stated that the FDOT procedures must be followed; that the possible cost of liability is too great, i.e., one law suit alone could cost the City $500,000. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, stated that the Administration will provide the City Commission with a schedule to complete the traffic signal study at the 39 intersections in-house. Mayor Patterson asked for clarification on the liability associated with changing the mode of operation of the traffic lights at the 39 intersections? city Attorney Taylor stated that the City must proceed according to the instruction manuals of the FDOT in order to avoid possible negligence suits; that the exposure to suit is great since the program entails 39 intersections; that attempting to bypass the manuals is not recommended. City Attorney Taylor continued that even though the City complies with the standards, there is always the possibility a person will challenge the standards; however, the City is in a better legal position if the FDOT procedures are followed. Mayor Patterson restated the motion as to authorize the Administration to conduct studies in-house and determine the number and location of traffic signals in the City which can be operated in a flashing mode of operation during selected hours. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 14. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: STATUS OF MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - REPORT GIVEN (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #4 (0947) through (1024) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/CiEy Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that progress was hampered on the Main Street Improvement Project due to continuous rain over the past two weeks; that the project is at the brick-laying stage; that the brick in place has to dry before the masons can continue; that a second delivery of precast material will arrive shortly and be installed; that this portion of the project is still scheduled for completion by October 15, 1994, since allowances were made for rain days. Mr. Daughters continued that approval on the portion of work completed on Main Street from Gulf Stream Avenue to Orange Street was given on September 9, 1994; therefore, that portion of the project is now the City's responsibility. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS TO THE BAYFRONT PARK ENTRANCE = APPROVED THE USE OF $100,000 OF GAS TAX FUNDS TO MODIFY THE RINGLING BOULEVARD AND MAIN STREET ENTRANCES APPROVED THE CONSTRUCTION BE ADDED TO THE MAIN STREET PROJECT; TABLED Book 37 Page 10952 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10953 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. ADMINISTRATION'S. RECOMMENDATION TO RESCIND THE AUTHORIZATION TO REMOVE ACCESS FROM GULF STREAM AVENUE UNTIL NEXT CITY COMMISSION MEETING (AGENDA ITEM VII-4) #4 (1026) through (1345) Mayor Patterson stated that the Administration's recommendation is as follows: A. Rescind a previous Commission authorization to remove access from Gulf Stream Avenue to the Marina Jack area; B. Approve $100,000 from Gas Tax Funds to modify the Ringling Boulevard and Main Street entrance; and C. Authorize construction to be added to the Main Street Project. Mayor Patterson continued that her husband's law firm represented Marina Jack, Inc. in a law suit against the City; therefore, she declares a conflict of interest and will abstain from voting. layor Patterson passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Merrill. Commissioner Pillot asked for clarification on how the modifications to Ringling Boulevard and the Main Street entrance and adding this construction to the Main Street Project relate to the discussions and agreements between the City and Marina Jack, Inc. Mr. Daughters stated that he was not privy to the discussions held between the City and Marina Jack, Inc.; however, his understanding is that all three access points to Marina Jack, Inc., i.e., the Ringling Boulevard intersection access, the Main Street access and the Gulf Stream access will be affected by the modifications. Commissioner Pillot stated that the Commission must be certain that the requests of the Administration are consistent with previous understandings between the City and Marina Jack, Inc. fr. Daughters stated that he previously met with Lee Sullivan, the 'ice President and Chief Operating Officer of Marina Jack, Inc., to discuss the modifications to the Ringling Boulevard and Main Street intersections; that Mr. Sullivan agreed to the modification plans presented; that adding this construction to the Main Street Project was not specifically discussed with Mr. Sullivan since it will not directly affect Marina Jack, Inc.; however, authorizing the additional construction as part of the Main Street Project will expedite work on the intersections to assure completion prior to the beginning of the tourist season. Commissioner Pillot stated that the effect on Marina Jack, Inc. is the issue of concern; that the Commission must be certain of Marina Jack, Inc.'s position on removing or retaining the access from Gulf Stream Avenue which was previously part of an agreement between the City of Sarasota and Marina Jack, Inc. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Atkins, it was moved to 1) approve Items B and C of the Administration's recommendation, and 2) table Item A until the next Commission Meeting to allow for confirmation of Marina Jack, Inc.'s position to be presented by the Administration. Commissioner Cardamone asked for clarification of the following sentence from the memorandum dated September 12, 1994, addressed to the Mayor and City Commission from Mr. Daughters which was included in the Agenda packet: Frontier is willing to assume the additional work, however, they want their potential Construction Claims and the Liquidated Damages resolved as part of the arrangement. Mr. Daughters stated that Frontier Insurance Company of New York, the bonding company, has agreed to perform the additional work on the Main Street Project; that the City has liquidated damages against Frontier which are estimated at approximately $70,000; that Frontier have construction claims against the City for approximately $70,000; that the Administration feels the city has à strong position with regard to the liquidated damages and Frontier feels they have a strong position with regard to the construction claims; that arrangement has been made wherelby the City has agreed to forgive the liquidated damage penalties, and Frontier will not attempt to collect any construction claims from the City. Commissioner Cardamone asked how this arrangement relates to the payment forwarded to Brian Bishop Builders, Inc. by the City? Mr. Daughters stated that $6,000 will be reimbursed to the City from Frontier; that the sum includes $5,421 for the payment forwarded to Brian Bishop Builders, Inc., and payment for work done on one of the store fronts by the City Public Works Department. Vice Mayor Merrill asked if this was the best arrangement the City could obtain with Frontier? Mr. Daughters responded, yes. Vice Mayor Merrill called for a vote on the motion to approve the Administration's recommendation to use $100,000 from Gas Tax Funds to modify the Ringling Boulevard and the Main Street entrance, to authorize this construction be added to the Main Street Project, and to table the Administration's recommendation to rescind the Book 37 Page 10954 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10955 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. authorization to remove access from Gulf Stream Avenue until the next Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Patterson, abstained; Pillot, yes; Merrill, yes. 16. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: ENFORCEMENT OF THE PLACEMENT, SIZE AND REMOVAL OF POLITICAL SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONE DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF SARASOTA - CITY ATTORNEY DRAFTING ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW SIGNS TO BE REMOVED FROM RIGHTS-OF-WAY (AGENDA ITEM VIII-1) #4 (1346) through (1538) layor Patterson stated that a series of violations of Ordinance No. 38-3224 occurred during the recent election; that City Auditor and lerk Robinson notified all political candidates of the provisions of the City's sign ordinance well in advance of their placement; that Sarasota County's sign ordinance provides for removal of signs from the right-of-way by County officials; that a $10.00 recovery fee is also imposed; that the City Commission should adopt an amendment to the Zoning Code with provisions similar to those contained in the Sarasota County ordinance. V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, stated that in the past, most candidates have voluntarily complied with requests for sign removal from the right-of-ways; however, political candidates displayed poor cooperation this year; that the Zoning Code should be amended to authorize the Administration to remove signs from the right-of-way;, that this authorization would alleviate similar problems in the future; that the Administration has established a notice procedure to confront the present situation; that City Attorney Taylor is preparing a code amendment authorizing seizure py City officials of signs found in the right-of-way; that in the 'uture, the City will implement a mechanism making it clear to all parties involved that signs are not allowed in the public right-of- way. City Attorney Taylor stated that the assignment was received from the City Manager last week; and that an ordinance has been drafted. Mayor Patterson stated that the Administration should be more pro- active about ensuring that City ordinances are entorceable. Mr. Schneider stated that Sarasota County officials include a letter in the political candidates' packet which is vague and implies signs may be put anywhere; that the letter does not distinguish between public and private property. Commissioner Cardamone stated that the City's letter to candidates should be done in a clear and bold announcement form. Mr. Schneider stated that the Administration will describe explicitly in the letter the city policy regarding signs. 17. NEW BUSINESS: PRESENTATION RE: CAUSE OF CRIME AT THE RINGLING SHOPPING CENTER (AGENDA ITEM VIII-2) #4 (1539) through (1759) Vice Mayor Merrill stated that recently bystanders aided in the capture of a suspect who stole a wallet from a 73-year-old man at 11:00 a.m. at the Ringling Shopping Center; that the suspect was arrested, but that suspect should have already been in jail; that the perpetrator was well known to the police; that the youth was a graduate of the community's juvenile justice system and had turned 18 years old two weeks earlier; that the "downstream side" of law enforcement does not serve to deter crime; that the philosophy which is based on smothering the offender with love to make him a better person is a concept that does not. work, as is evident in this theft case; that the suspect, Eric Michael Childs, is currently in jail since bail could not be posted, but will probably be released with just a slap on the wrist because this is the first time he will be tried as an adult; that previous crimes committed by a juvenile cannot be brought into adult criminal court. Vice Mayor Merrill continued that the solution to crime is not hiring additional police officers; that sentences should be imposed which will not allow offenders to be released immediately; that the area mentioned was also the subject of a bank robbery recentlyi that constant problems in this area are reported with the homeless residing on the railroad tracks and burglaries occurring. Vice Mayor Merrill further stated that the Commission's standard response when questioned by the public regarding crime in an area is that the matter will be referred to the Police Chief and placement of a substation in the area will be reviewed; that the Sheriff's office and Police Department are already located near the Ringling Shopping Center. Commissioner Atkins asked what causes crime at the Ringling Shopping Center? Vice Mayor Merrill stated that the cause of crime in the theft case mentioned was the lack of swift and sure punishment; that there is a statistical correlation between the crime rate and poverty, but the social engineers have been working on poverty for over 30 years and still have not solved the crime problem; that sitting around and waiting on root causes is not going to work; that offenders have to be put and kept in jail. Commissioner Atkins stated that this is not feasible since there are not enough jails. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that criminals are eing sent the message that they will not be punished by implying more jails are not Book 37 Page 10956 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10957 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. necessary; that more jails should be built to change that perception and to convince offenders that jail is where they will go; that once criminals are convinced they will be sent to jail, there will be a decrease in the rate of crime. 18. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZATION FOR A 2.5 PERCENT INCREASE BASED ON THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARASOTA AND THE CITRUS, CANNERY, FOOD PROCESSING & ALLIED WORKERS, DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS AFFILIATED WITH INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, LOCAL UNION NO. 173 REPRESENTING GENERAL EMPLOYEES AS AUTHORIZED BY THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION, CERTIFICATION (CASE NO. RC- 94-012), DATED JULY 17, 1994 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM VIII-3) #4 (1755) through (1790) Commissioner Pillot stated that the Commission has received the pertinent information on this issue; that the 2.5 percent increase is consistent with what was approved for all other City employees. On motion of Commissioner Pillot and second of Commissioner Cardamone, it was moved to approve the authorization of a 2.5 percent increase in the base rate of pay for represented employees. layor Patterson called for a vote on the motion to approve the uthorize a 2.5 percent salary increase for all staff members cepresented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union No. 173. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Atkins, yes; Cardamone, yes; Merrill, yes; Pillot, yes; Patterson, yes. 19. REMARKS OF COMMISBIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - COMMISSIONER PILLOT GAVE NOTICE OF HIS INTENT TO RESCIND THE ACTION REGARDING SIDEWALKS ON SHORELAND AND SPRING CREEK DRIVES AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING; ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE A REPORT ON THE HUDSON BAYOU STUDY AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING; ADMINISTRATION AND CITY ATTORNEY TO REPORT ON POSSIBILITY OF INCLUDING BRIDGE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT IN THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AGENDA ITEM X) #4 (1793) through (2078) COMMISSIONER PILLOT: A. stated that he was absent from the September 6, 1994, Commission meeting at which a vote was taken with respect to removing Shoreland and Creek Drives 1 Spring from the sidewalk improvement project; that the sidewalk program was established to provide sidewalks wherever children walked to schools; that the plan was based on safety standards and input received from the Sarasota School Board Administration; that while residents may consider the sidewalks unnecessary and undesirable, the basis for establishing the program was safety which overrides the residents' objections; that he will move to rescind this action at the next meeting. COMMISSIONER CARDAMONE: A. requested that a status report be presented on the Hudson Bayou Master Plan. Mayor Patterson stated that there was consensus of the Commission for the Administration to provide a status report on the Hudson Bayou Master Plan at the October 3, 1994, Commission meeting. B. stated that she will be absent from the Special Meeting of the City Commission on September 26, 1994, regarding the Comprehensive Plan. C. stated that further discussion should occur and other avenues of recourse explored with regard to the Ringling Causeway Bridge; that the majority of the residents of Sarasota are not aware of the ramifications of having a 65-foot-high, 70-foot-long road across the Bayi that the bridge could be closed to traffic if there are sustained winds of 40 miles per hour which will present major traffic problems, especially to ambulances and other high-profile vehicles. Mayor Patterson stated that a height requirement for bridges could be established in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Vice Mayor Merrill stated that he agrees with attempting the Comprehensive Plan approach if it is not too late. Commissioner Pillot stated that the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) told the Commission that the bridge is a "fait accompli", but he is more than willing to pursue every possible avenue. Mayor Patterson stated there was consensus of the Commission for the Administration and the City Attorney to investigate the possibility of including a bridge height requirement in the City's Comprehensive Plan or any other avenues which may be available to the Commission. MAYOR PATTERSON: A. stated that a vote is normally taken on Consent Items before commencement of the Public Hearings; that the Agenda should be scheduled logically; that listing the issue of salary increases under the Consent Agenda and the approval of the budget under Public Hearings is inconsistent, i.e., holding a public hearing to approve Book 37 Page 10958 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. Book 37 Page 10959 09/19/94 6:00 P.M. an item for which an obligation was created earlier in the meeting. B. stated that she was misinformed as to the sharing of sand when the Army Corps of Engineers dredged New Pass between Longboat Key and Sarasota; that she was under the impression that the three-party agreement was not in effect because it had not been signed by the County; however, the agreement contains a clause whereby it is not necessary for the County to ratify the agreement on sharing the sand for it to be binding. 20. OTHER MATTERS/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN REPORT ON CABLE TELEVISION CONSULTING PROGRESS (AGENDA ITEM XI) #4 (2079) through (2120) JEPUTY CITY MANAGER SCHNEIDER: A. stated that the City has obtained the consulting services authorized in association with the Cable TV contract; and asked how the Commission would prefer to be apprised of the progress being made with that contract? Mayor Patterson stated that the Commission should be provided with a written informational report. CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK ROBINSON: A. stated that a Special Meeting of the City Commission will be held on Monday, September 26, 1994, at 4:00 p.m. 21. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #4 (2121) 'here being no further business, Mayor Patterson adjourned the meeting at 11:31 p.m. Hora eA a1 NORA PATTERSON, MAYOR ATTEST: 131l E Rabenion BILLY EROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME' NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE Patterson, Nora Sarasota City Commission MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: 707 Freeling Drive X CTIY in COUNTY I OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY COUNTY NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: Sarasota Sarasota City of Sarasota DATE ON W'HICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS: September 19, 1994 X: ELECTIVE 11 APPOINTIVE 6 - E G WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B 26 80 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an as RT eg board; council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory! bodiés wholare bresented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particular form is not required by law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES ELECTED OFFICERS: A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or al. his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: You- should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form should be provided immediately tO the other members of the agency. The form.s should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest. Ct HORMI KB 1.46 IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. Yous should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, Nora Patterson hereby disclose that on September 19 19. 94 (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) X inured to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of by whom I am retained. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: A motion was made and adopted to approve the use of $100,000 from Gas Tax Funds to modify the Ringling Boulevard and Main Street entrance to Bayfront Park and authorize construction be added to the Main Street Project. A motion was also made and adopted to table the rescission of authorization to remove the access from Gulf Stream Avenue to the north esplanade parking area at Bayfront Park made at the September 20, 1993 City Commission meeting. My husband is a partner in the law firm that represents Marina Jacks, a marina and restaurant located at Bayfront Park. September 22, 1994 Houa Aitanon Date Filed Signature NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES $112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND. MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000. CF FORMAR. : 1A.46 DAGE *