BOOK 47 Page 19079 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 2000, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: Mayor Mollie C. Cardamone, Vice Mayor Gene M. Pillot, Commissioners Albert F. Hogle, Carolyn J. Mason and Mary J. Quillin, City Manager David R. Sollenberger, City Auditor and Clerk Billy E. Robinson, and City Attorney Richard J. Taylor ABSENT: None PRESIDING: Mayor Cardamone The meeting was called to order in accordance with Article III, Section 9(a) of the Charter of the City of Sarasota at 6:02 p.m. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson gave the Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENATION RE: EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR JANUARY 2000, MICHELLE VALENTICH, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ANALYST, FINANCE DEPARTMENT #1 (0030) through (0200) City Manager Sollenberger requested that Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, and Michelle Valentich, Financial Management Analyst, join him before the Commission. Mr. Mitchell stated that Ms. Valentich began her career with the City in 1976 as an Internal Auditor; that in 1982, Ms. Valentich was one of the first in Florida achieving the designation of a Certified Internal Auditor (CIA) i that in 1988, Ms. Valentich took a leave of absence and returned to the City in 1997 in the Finance Department; that Ms. Valentich's work on the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) contributed to the City's receiving the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting awarded by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Award; that Ms. Valentich also works on the City's budget, contributing to the City's receiving the GFOA's national Distinguished Budget Award for excellence in budget presentation; that Ms. Valentich is always willing to help solve any problem in the financial area and contributes to making the City a financially responsible government. Mayor Cardamone presented Ms. Valentich with a City-logo watch, a plaque, and a certificate as the January 2000 Employee of the Month in appreciation of her unique performance with the City of Sarasota; congratulated her for the achievement; and thanked her for the outstanding efforts. Ms. Valentich stated that working with the Staff of the Finance Department is wonderful and has made achieving the distinction of Employee of the Month easyi and introduced her family present in the audience: Michael, husband; Griffin, son; and Kelsey, daughter. 2. NEW BUSINESS: PRESENTATION RE: COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 - ACCEPTED AND RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM VII-1) #1 (0200) through (0280) Gibson Mitchell, Director of Finance, came before the Commission and stated that Staff has prepared the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) included in the Agenda materials for the fiscal year (FY) ending September 30, 1999; that the FY 1998/99 CAFR represents countless hours of preparation, could not have been accomplished without Staff's dedicated efforts, and continues the same tradition of excellence in financial reporting as in the past; that the unqualified opinion of CPA Associates, P.A., the independent public accounting firm which conducted the annual audit, is included in the CAFR; that the expectation is the FY 1998/99 CAFR will again receive the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting awarded by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) which has been received for the past 18 consecutive years; that the Award produces an economic benefit for the City as the Award provides an expert and independent analysis as to the CAFR's compliance with nationally established financial reporting and disclosure requirements; therefore, financial rating agencies are more confident the CAFR meets creditable standards, contributing to a higher financial rating and lower interest on borrowed funds; that the CAFR will be submitted to the GFOA for eligibility for another Award; that the Administration recommends the Commission accept and receive the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to accept and receive the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1999. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mr. Mitchell stated that the efforts of David Flatt, Accounting and Payroll Manager, and Christopher Lyons, Deputy Finance Director, present in the audience are appreciated. 3. PRESENTATION RE: DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING CELEBRATION AWARDS TO THE AFRICAN AMERICAN LEADERSHIP COALITION; PAULINE HODGES, COORDINATOR OF PROJECT CHALLENGE; JOSEPH WRIGHT, COORDINATOR OF YMCA, AND GENERAL ROLLAND HEISER, PRESIDENT OF THE NEW COLLEGE FOUNDATION BOOK 47 Page 19080 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19081 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. #1 (0280) through (0430) Mayor Cardamone stated that presentations were made at the January 17, 2000, William Fred Jackson Memorial Breakfast held as part of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Celebration to special people in the community and are being repeated for the benefit of the viewing audience; and requested that Cynthia Porter, Executive Director, and Jetson Grimes, President of the Greater Newtown Community Redevelopment Corporation (GNCRC) join her before the Commission. Ms. Porter stated that four people are honored as drum majors for freedom; that the City is also honored; that the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Celebration was intended as a time for thought, reflection and action with the theme: "A Day On, Not A Day Off"; requested that Lieutenant General Rolland Heiser, President of the New College Foundation, and Trever Harvey, African-American Leadership Coalition, join her before the Commission. Ms. Porter read in their entirety plaques presented on behalf of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Celebration Committee in appreciation of the considerable work done for the Newtown community; and stated that two other awards were presented; that Joseph Wright, Coordinator of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA), was presented the Torchbearer's Award recognizing an example of spirit to the younger generation; that Pauline Hodges, Coordinator of Project Challenge, was presented the Olive Branch Award recognizing businesses and organizations which have extended a helping hand to special, targeted populations. Ms. Porter stated that the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Celebration Committee salutes the City of Sarasota; read in its entirety a plaque expressing appreciation for the community support; and presented Mayor Cardamone with the plaque. 4. PRESENTATION RE: PLAQUE FOR CITIZEN RECOGNITION TO THOMAS "BOOMER' n HECHT, WESLEY THOMPSON, AND A.J. HARRISON #1 (0430) through (0730) John Lewis, Chief of Police, Sarasota Police Department, came before the CRA and stated that a State prisoner was released into the community at the beginning of January 2000; that between January 6 and January 20, 2000, eight women were attacked and brutally beaten in various locations throughout the City; that the vicious and unprovoked attacks involved multiple blows to the heads and faces of the victims; that on the evening of January 19, 2000, three shoppers were attacked at a local K-Mart store; that the act was witnessed by Allias (A. J.) Harrison, a 9-year- old boy, who through his mother, Mickey Harrison, contacted the police, volunteering as a witness which was extremely important to the case; that Mr. Harrison was able to identify the suspect from a photographic line-up, providing valuable evidence in the case as the perpetrator attacked victims from behind and identification was difficult. Chief Lewis continued that at approximately 12:30 p.m. on January 20, 2000, two employees of the multi-storied building at 1800 Second Street were alerted a suspicious person matching the description of the suspect in the eight cases was loitering in the parking garage; that the two employees, Thomas "Boomer" Hecht and Wesley Thompson, began a systematic search of the parking garage; that on the second floor of the building the suspect, Floyd Thomas Jr., was located crouched behind a vehicle watching a female employee entering the building; that upon being approached, the suspect was observed concealing a heavy metal pipe; that the suspect was ordered to drop the pipe, did SO, and attempted to flee the scene; that Mr. Thompson was able to catch the subject and with the help of Mr. Hecht was able to restrain the subject until the police arrived. Chief Lewis further stated that A.J. Harrison, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Hecht, by unselfish and heroic actions, assisted the Police Department in taking a dangerous criminal into custody; that in view of the vicious nature of the attacks, which were escalating in both violence and frequency, their actions truly contributed to making Sarasota a safer place for people; that the citizens of the community owe each a debt of gratitude for stepping forward; and requested that A.J. Harrison, Thomas - Boomer" Hecht and Wesley Thompson join him before the Commission. Mayor Cardamone presented a Good Citizen Award to A.J. Harrison in special recognition of the heroic assistance provided the Police Department during a criminal investigation; thanked A.J. on behalf of the citizens, especially the women of the community; and requested that Karen Runyon, representing the K-Mart store, join her before the Commission. Ms. Runyon stated that on behalf of the K-Mart stores and employees, the efforts of A.J. Harrison are appreciated and presented A.J. Harrison with a gift certificate. Mr. Harrison recognized his mother, Mickey Harrison, and his friend, Daren Rosier, present in the audience. Mayor Cardamone presented Good Citizen Awards to Thomas "Boomer" Hecht and Wesley Thompson for exceptional courage and heroics in the apprehension of a violent criminal. Mr. Hecht stated that receiving the award is an honor and will always be a high point in his life; that everyone should be vigilant; and recognized his mother, Colleen Hecht, and friend, George Crittendon, present in the audience. BOOK 47 Page 19082 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19083 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Mr. Thompson thanked the Commission for the award; stated that the efforts of A.J. Harrison are wonderful and appreciated by everyone; and recognized his wife, Marilyn, present in the audience. 5. PRESENTATION RE: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1250, RECOGNIZING THE PASSING OF GENE WHIPP, INNOVATOR AND COMMUNITY BENEFACTOR, WHOSE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY WERE NOTEWORTHY AND SIGNIFICANT #1 (0730) through (0925) Mayor Cardamone stated that Memorial Resolution No. O0R-1250 recognizes the January 18, 2000, passing of Gene Whipp, innovator and community benefactor. Mayor Cardamone read Memorial Resolution No. OOR-1250 in its entirety. On the motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to adopt Memorial Resolution No. O0R-1250. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes. Mayor Cardamone requested that Chris Whipp, wife of the deceased, come forward and presented a copy of the memorial resolution appropriately framed. The Commission recessed at 6:22 p.m. into a Special meeting as the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and reconvened at 6:25 p.m. 6. CHANGE TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED #1 (0925) through (0960) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson presented the following Change to the Orders of the Day: A. Remove Consent Agenda No. 1, Item No. III A-8, Approval Re: Implementation of the Sarasota Police Department ' S Career Service Award Program, per the request of Chief Lewis. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to approve the Change to the Orders of the Day. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 7. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SARASOTA CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2000 - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM I) #1 (0960) through (0970) Mayor Cardamone asked if the Commission had any changes to the minutes. Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing no changes, the minutes of the January 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting are approved by unanimous consent. 8. BOARD ACTIONS : REPORT RE: PLANNING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY'S REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 2000 - INSTRUCTED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING APPLICATION NO. 00-ZTA-12; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-1) #1 (0970) through (1045) Devin Rutkowski, Vice Chairman of the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), and John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department came before the Commission. Mr. Rutkowski presented the following item from the November 17, 1999, continued to January 5, 2000, Regular PBLP meeting: Application No. 00-ZTA-12 Re: Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH) Zone District Mr. Rutkowski stated that Application No. 00-ZTA-12 is to amend the Zoning Code (1998) to establish an SMH Zone District; that the proposed provisions would establish the SMH Zone District; however, the provisions will not rezone the SMH-owned properties; that if the proposed SMH Zone District is adopted, the SMH Board will pursue rezoning application (s) to apply the SMH Zore District to the official Zone District Maps; that at its November 17, 1999, continued to January 5, 2000, meeting, the PBLP conducted public hearings and voted unanimously on January 5, 2000, to find Application No. 00-ZTA-12 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the Standards for Review set forth in Section IV-1206, Zoning Code (1998), and to recommend Commission approval. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends the Commission instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance concerning Application No. 00-ZTA-12, schedule the public hearings as required, and receive the report of the November 17, 1999, continued to January 5, 2000, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) Regular meeting. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to instruct the City Attorney to prepare an BOOK 47 Page 19084 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19085 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. ordinance concerning Application No. 00-ZTA-12 and to schedule public hearings as required. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): : Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to receive the report of the November 17, 1999, continued to January 5, 2000, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) Regular meeting. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 9. BOARD ACTIONS: REPORT RE: HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD'S REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 11, 2000 APPROVED APPROPRIATION OF $875 FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF PLAQUES FOR THE GREAT FLORIDIANS 2000; RECEIVED REPORT (AGENDA ITEM II-2) #1 (1045) through (1125) Christopher Wenzel, Chairman of the Historic Preservation Board and John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department came before the Commission. Mr. Wenzel presented the following item from the January 11, 2000, Regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board: A. Great Floridans 2000 Mr. Wenzel stated that the Historic Preservation Board requests the Commission approve an appropriation of funding in the amount of $875 from the Historic Preservation Demolition Fund to purchase plaques for the recommended Great Floridian 2000 nominees who are: Nominee Property Address Property Name John Ringling 5401 Bay Shore Road Ca' d'Zan E.A. Smith 1631 Hawthorne Street E.A. Smith House 801 N. Tamiami Trail Municipal Auditorium John Hamilton Gillespie 1565 First Street Old City Hall Andrew McAnsh 77 Palm Avenue Mira Mar building Marie and William Selby 811 South Palm Avenue Selby Botanical Gardens 926 South Palm Avenue Selby House City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approving the Great Floridians 2000 nominees and an appropriation of $875 from the Historic Preservation Demolition Fund to purchase plaques for the designations. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to approve the nominees for the Great Floridians 2000 Program and to appropriate $875 from the Historic Preservation Demolition Fund to purchase plaques for the designations. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes;. Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to receive the report of the January 11, 2000, Regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Board. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 10. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 1: ITEM NOS. 1, 2,3,4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 AND 20; ITEM NO. 6 ADMINISTRATION WILL RETURN AT THE FEBRUARY 22, 2000, REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING; ITEM NO. 8 - REMOVED UNDER CHANGES TO THE ORDERS OF THE DAY - APPROVED (AGENDA ITEM III-A) #1 (1125) through (1800) Commissioner Quillin requested that Item No. 1 be removed for discussion. Mayor Cardamone requested that Item No. 6 be removed for discussion. 2. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4189, amending Chapter 11, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article II, Building Codes, Section 11-2, adoption of codes and local amendments Subsection (C) regarding the Standard Unsafe Building Abatement Code, 1985 Edition, and the City of Sarasota Local Amendments thereto 3. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4190, amending Chapter 16, Recycling and Solid Waste, Article III, accumulations of junk, trash, rubbish, weeds and vegetation, Section 16-53, procedure for City to remove accumulation of junk, rubbish, trash, or inoperable or unlicensed motor vehicles or to clear away overgrowth, vegetation; by providing that the abatement of nuisance liens shall constitute liens against any real or personal property owned by the violator and shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the date of its filing; amending Section 16-54, priority of liens by providing that abatement of nuisance liens shall be superior to all other liens, except a lien for taxes 4. Approval Re: Authorize the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE) to proceed with the Feasibility Study for Lido Key Shore Protection Project pursuant to the Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement 5. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Lease Agreement between the City BOOK 47 Page 19086 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19087 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. of Sarasota and Sarasota Garden Club, Inc., for a five year period, with four, five year renewal options 7. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the License Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority, for the Sarasota Police Department to use a portion of the Sarasota Bradenton International Airport property for training purposes 9. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Municipal Services and Pre- Annexation Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Harvey Kauffman and Margaret Kauffman, for water service for a site located at 1430 Pattison Street 10. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Loan Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Community Redevelopment Agency, to provide additional funds necessary to pay an appraisal fee ordered by Judge Rapkin in final settlement of the Palm Avenue Property purchased August 16, 1999, in the amount of $27,500.00 11. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Agreement between the City of Sarasota and MBIA MuniServices Company to perform a public service tax (excise tax/utility tax) Compliance Review 12. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Florida Sportservice, Inc., for Food/Beverage Concession at Ed Smith Stadium 13. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Agreement for Grant Funding between the City of Sarasota and The Florida House Foundation of Sarasota, Inc., to implement the EPA Urbaculture grant via work conducted by the Florida House Institute (FHI) 14. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Interagency Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Southwest Florida Water Management District for Technical Projects in the Sarasota Bay Watershed 15. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the First Amendment to Interagency Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Southwest Florida Water Management District for Technical Projects in the Sarasota Bay Watershed for Fiscal Year 1999 16. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute an Amendment to Agreement between the City of Sarasota and Scheda Ecological Associates, for Wetland Restoration Project Coordination 17. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Third Amendment to Agreement for Engineering Services between the City of Sarasota and Boyle Engineering Corporation, (RFP #96-3) for additional design services associated with the seawater pump station and filters, and construction phase services for the seawater handling facilities 18. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract between the City of Sarasota and Jon F. Swift, Inc., (Bid No. 00-2H) for the Streetscape on 6th Street and Cocoanut Avenue Renaissance) Project 19. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute a contract between the City of Sarasota and Omni Eye, Inc., (Bid No. 00-14H) for Lift Station #1 and #5 Private Building Sewer Rehabilitation Pilot Project, Phase 1 20. Approval Re: Request for Breast Health Sarasota, Inc., for use of funds estimated at $3,000 for Year 2000 Event On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 1. Approval Re: Set for public hearing proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163, regulating animals, including livestock, fowl, rabbits, etc. to prepare a prohibition against keeping animals within the City Commissioner Quillin stated that the issue concerning keeping animals within the City was brought to the Commission during Citizens' Input at the January 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting; and asked the problem with enforcement regarding the existing ordinances? City Attorney Taylor stated that the problem commenced in the summer of 1999; that a number of complaints were received; that investigations were conducted by the police; however, no witnesses were willing to come forward and testify; therefore, no offenses were found under the existing provision of the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended) (City Code) i that a concerted effort, including mediation, was made to resolve the problem amicably without resort to the court system; that at the end of 1999, a citation was written for a violation; that the property owner secured an attorney who is contesting the violation; that the necessity for new regulations became self evident at the end of BOOK 47 Page 19088 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19089 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. 1999; that proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 will replace the older language concerning animals in the City Code with a prohibition against keeping certain barnyard animals in the City in the future; that a prosecution is pending incorporating a challenge to the validity of the existing regulations. Mayor Cardamone stated that for the benefit of the public, proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 will regulate animals including livestock, fowl, rabbits, etc., in the City. Commissioner Quillin cited Section 8-45, Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended), as follows: Complaints to chief of police; notice to owner to remove. Upon written complaint to the chief of police that complainant is disturbed by noisy fowl or that fowl are not confined and kept in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, the chief of police shall notify the owner or keeper of such fowl to remove the same from the city. Failure to remove such fowl" from the city after such notice shall constitute a nuisance. Commissioner Quillin asked for clarification of enforcement. City Attorney Taylor stated that generally codes provide the fine and penalty if violations are found; that the provision provides for a finding of a nuisance, which is not a crime punishable under the City Code; that a nuisance is abated under civil causes of action; that the language concerning a nuisance has been part of the problem. Commissioner Hogle stated that existing regulations do not meet current standards. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item 1. Vice Mayor Pillot cited proposed new Section 8-2 as follows: Keeping of certain animals prohibited. No animal, except dogs, which are provided for in section 8-26, or as otherwise provided for in this chapter, shall be kept, harbored, raised or permitted to run at large on any property either public or private within the city limits of the city by any person. Vice Mayor Pillot cited proposed new Section 8-4 as follows: Exceptions to section 8-2. (5) Owners of dogs, . Vice Mayor Pillot asked the reason dogs are excluded in Section 8-2 but are an exception included in Section 8-4? City Attorney Taylor stated that the specific reference to dogs is to acknowledge the existence of Section 8-26 concerning control of dogs; that proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 is presented as the Commission at its January 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting directed return of an ordinance at the February 7, 2000, Regular Commission meeting; that drafting the proposed ordinance was not easyi that based on input received from Staff, the proposed ordinance requires additional revision which will be completed prior to the public hearing; that repetitive or contradictory, language will be revised; that the attempt is to meet an immediate requirement; that the ordinance which will be presented for public hearing will not be exactly the same. Commissioner Quillin cited new Section 8-4 as follows: Exceptions to section 8-2. (5) Birds shall be caged and kept indoors. Commissioner Quillin stated that aviaries are maintained in the City; that the proposed section may be a problem; that enforcement should be defined. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Commission directed the prohibition of certain animals at the January 18, 2000, Regular Commission meeting; that proposed Ordinance No. 99-4163 includes ten exceptions; that another approach may be preferable; that the proposed ordinance will be set for public hearing as soon as the required revisions are made. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to approve Consent Agenda No. 1, Item 1. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 6. Approval Re: Authorize the Mayor and City Auditor and Clerk to execute the Lease Agreement between the City of Sarasota and the Mayor's Drug Free Communities Committee, for the Rosemary District Police Substation Mayor Cardamone stated that the size and location of the leasehold could not be determined from the information provided. City Attorney Taylor stated that Exhibit A included in the Lease Agreement is a Legal Description of the real estate; and quoted from the Lease Agreement as follows: The Leasehold, however, shall only consist of that portion of the real property depicted on the sketch attached . . as Exhibit B. BOOK 47 Page 19090 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19091 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. City Attorney Taylor stated that the sketch included in the Agenda material is not marked as Exhibit B; that the leasehold could be clarified. Mayor Cardamone stated that leasing the property is not a concern; however, the specifics of the leasehold should be clearly identified. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the approval of the Lease Agreement will be returned with a new sketch to the February 22, 2000, Regular Commission meeting. 11. CONSENT AGENDA NO. 2: ITEM 1 (RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1241) - ADOPTED; ITEM 2 (RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1245) - ADOPTED; ITEM 3 (RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1246) - ADOPTED; ITEM 4 (RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1247) - ADOPTED; ITEM 5 (RESOLUTION NO. O0R-1248 ADOPTED; ITEM 6 (ORDINANCE NO. 00-4180) - ADOPTED (AGENDA ITEM III-B) #1 (1800) through (1960) 1. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. O0R-1241, amending Resolution 99R-1189 regarding a previously approved Major Conditional Use (99-CU-08) for a proposed motor vehicle sales agency in the Commercial General (CG) Zone District; said amendment consists of substituting Site Plan Application 00-SP-02 for previously approved Site Plan Application 99-SP-E; said Major Conditional Use is proposed to be located on a 1.69t acre parcel located at the southeast corner of Washington Boulevard and Oak Street; A/K/A Sarasota Ford; etc., (Title Only) (Application Nos. 00-CU-01 and 00-SP-02, Applicants Joel J. Freeman, AIÇP and Stephen D. Rees, Esq., as agents for the owners, Sarasota 500, Inc.) 2. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. O0R-1245, appropriating $2,500 from the Law Enforcement Trust Fund Forfeitures) to fund a donation to Do The Right Thing, Inc. to offset the cost of awards for youths recognized by the program; etc. 3. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. O0R-1246, appropriating $27,500 from the Unappropriated fund balance of the General Fund to provide additional funds necessary to pay an appraisal fee ordered by Judge Rapkin in settlement of the Palm Avenue property purchased August 16, 1999; etc. 4. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. OOR-1247, naming the Rosemary District Police Substation the Roy Curt Smith Resource Center in appreciation of his immeasurable contributions to the community to (Title Only) 5. Adoption Re: Proposed Resolution No. OOR-1248, renaming Sevilla Park to Mary Dean Park in recognition of the tireless efforts of Mary Dean on behalf of her community (Title Only) 6. Adoption Re: Second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 00-4180, amending the Zoning Code (1998) as adopted by reference by Ordinance No. 98-4076; amending Article II, Definitions and Rules of Construction; Division 2, Definitions; Section II-201, Definitions; creating a definition of "dBC" amending Article VII, Regulations of General Applicability, Division 10, Environmental Performance Standards, Section VII-1002, Noise, to establish additional maximum permissible sound levels in the CT, C-CBD and CBN Zoning Districts; providing exceptions to prohibitions relating to amplified sound not in a completely enclosed structure so as to permit reduced levels of sound between certain hours, subject to maximum decibel sound levels; etc. (Title Only) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Resolution Nos. O0R-1245 and O0R-1246 in their entirety and proposed Resolution Nos. O0R-1241, O0R-1247, O0R-1248 and proposed Ordinance No. 00-4180 by title only. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to adopt Consent Agenda No. 2, Items 1 through 6, inclusive. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson explain the public hearing sign-up process. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Affected Persons and other interested persons wishing to speak are requested to complete a Request to Speak form; that speakers at the non quasi-judicial public hearings will have 5 minutes to speak; that speakers will be timed and will be advised when 1 minute remains. All individuals wishing to speak during the public hearings were requested to stand and were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. 12. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: 1999/2000 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT - APPROVED ALLOCATION OF GRANT FUNDS (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-1) #1 (2035) through (2397) John Lewis, Chief of Police, Sarasota Police Department, and Gerard Lacertosa, Lieutenant, came before the Commission. BOOK 47 Page 19092 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19093 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Lieutenant Lacertosa stated that the City has received a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) in the amount of $267,951 with required matching funds of $29,772; that a requirement of receiving the funds is to hold a public hearing regarding the proposed use (s) of the grant funds. that the Police Department recommends the following uses of the funds: 12th Judicial Circuit Drug Program $100,000 Surveillance Equipment (N.E.T. Unit) 23,584 Sound-Level Meters 11,800 Electronic Turbo Flares 4,500 Stop Stick Tire Deflating Devices 29,154 Criminal Investigation Division 49,000 Color Printer Printer w/duplexing capabilities Fuji Pictrostat Digital 400 System Computer Card Access System 25,000 Property Unit 14,200 Video Enhancement Server for Digital Imaging Special Operation Equipment Upgrades 11,070 Training Division Field Force Gear 8,200 Court Watch* 20,000 *Requested subsequent to advertising Vice Mayor Pillot requested clarification of the source of the funds. Lieutenant Lacertosa stated that the Federal government is contributing $267,951; that the City's matching requirement is $29,772 which has been previously approved by the Commission; that the total sum is $297,723. Mayor Cardamone stated that the grant is wonderful; that obtaining additional grants with small matching amounts would be pleasing. Commissioner Quillin stated that funding the Court Watch program is important; that more grant funds should be used in the community for similar programs, such as the suggested volunteer program. Lieutenant Lacertosa stated that a grant is available annually; that any requests will be entertained. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone Closed the public hearing. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends approval of the allocation of grant funds. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to approve the recommended allocation of grant funds. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes. Commissioner Quillin stated that a new Director of Information Systems and Technology (IST) has been hired and should review the recommended new equipment to assure a good interface with existing equipment. 13. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4192, AMENDING CHAPTER 10, SARASOTA CITY CODE, BEACHES AND WATERWAYS, ARTICLE II, BOATING, TO PROHIBIT THE OPERATION OF AIRBOATS WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; EXEMPTING THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY FROM SAID PROHIBITION; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-2) #1 (2400) through (2643) City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4192 makes operating an airboat unlawful within the City limits except in the intracoastal waterway; that the issue of airboat regulation arose after Manatee County encountered significant problems involving the operation of airboats; that Manatee County has passed a regulation based on the following findings: airboats create an inordinately high level of noise, noise of airboats is not limited through speed and distance restrictions, the noise nuisance must be abated, and the tranquility of life and the wildlife in Manatee County should be protected. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Town of Longboat Key has inquired if the City is interested in as Countywide ordinance due to concern regarding the possibility of airboats entering the environment of open bays, canals, residential areas or high-rise buildings which produce a canyon effect from the noise of the revolving propellers; that airboats can operate on virtually no water due to the propulsion methodology; that the police marine patrol supports the passage of proposed Ordinance No. 00-4192; and referred to a February 7, 2000, memorandum from Robbin Hinesley, Sergeant, to John Lewis, Chief of Police, Sarasota Police Department, indicating the police marine unit believes the operation of airboats along in-shore and near-shore waterways constitutes a hazard to swimmers, boaters, and users of personal watercraft and is detrimental to the preservation of grass and mud flats. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. BOOK 47 Page 19094 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19095 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4192 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4192 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4192 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes. Commissioner Quillin asked if private airboats brought in to assist in evacuation such as during the floods of 1992 and 1995 would be in violation of the proposed ordinance? City Attorney Taylor stated that an exemption exists in the proposed ordinance for operation by government regulatory agencies. Commissioner Quillin stated that private airboats may be utilized for emergency operations. City Attorney Taylor stated that operating in accordance with an emergency plan would be exempted from the regulations. 14. NON QUASI-i JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4193, PROVIDING FOR REVISIONS TO ZONING CODE TO ADDRESS SCRIVENER 'S CORRECTIONS AND REVISE SPECIFIC ZONING CODE SECTIONS WHICH ARE UNCLEAR OR INACCURATE ETC. (TITLE ONLY) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-3) #2 (2647) through (3085) Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that Zoning Text Amendment Application No. 00-ZTA-01 is to amend the Zoning Code (1998) to address scrivener's corrections and specific sections which are unclear or inaccurate; that at its November 17, 1999, Special meeting, the PBLP voted unanimously to find Application No. 00-ZTA-01 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the Standards for Review set forth in Section IV-1206, Zoning Code (1998), and to recommend Commission approval; that the revisions are as follows. Section I-105, Scriveners' correction and clarification re: Transitional Rules approved conditional rezonings. Section II-201, Scrivener's corrections to definitions: Definitions nightclub, public art, public works of art New definition for: Director of Building, Zoning and Code Entorcement and animated sign. Section IV-202, Clarifies the Commission may either affirm Major Conditional the PBLP's recommendation for major Uses and G Zone conditional uses and G Zone waivers without a Waivers Public hearing or hold a public hearing and grant, Hearings grant with conditions, or deny the application. Section IV-505, Clarifies a separate appeal to the Commission Site Plans if not required upon PBLP denial of site plan approval if the site plan is part of a rezoning, major or minor conditional use or for a proposed development in the G Zone District. Section IV-805, Clarifies that a separate Historic Historic Designations Preservation Board report is not necessary for proposed historic designations since these applications will automatically be set for public hearing before the Commission. Section IV-905, Clarifies the Commission, upon receiving the Major Conditional recommendation of the PBLP for major Uses conditional uses, may either affirm the PBLP's recommendation without a public hearing or may hold a public hearing and either grant, grant with conditions, or deny the application. Section IV-1306, Adds a criterion to the standards for review Street Vacations of street vacations, i.e., if the proposed vacation is in the public interest consistent with applicable case law; Deletes Sec: IV-1307 regarding the legal effect of street vacations as applicable case law will govern and makes technical scrivener's corrections. BOOK 47 Page 19096 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19097 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Section IV-1705, Clarifies the Commission, upon receiving the G Zone Waivers PBLP's recommendation, may affirm the PBLP action without a hearing or may hold a public hearing to consider the application for a G Zone waiver, and grant, grant with conditions, or deny the application. Section V-102, Scrivener's correction to section reference. Noncontorming Uses Section VI-102, Clarifies terminology of the height Height Limitations limitations. Section VI-102 and Adds artist, sculptor, potter, weaver, etc. Exhibit "A" studio as a permitted use in the C-CBD Zone District; Adds department store as a permitted use in the C-CBD Zone District; Deletes nursing home as a permitted use in the I Zone District; Adds nursing home as a permitted use in the MCI Zone District; and Adds school, kindergarten, elementary or secondary as a permitted use in the G Zone District. Section VI-2103, Corrects scrivener's error as to citation Off-Street Parking Section VII-206, Clarifies parking requirements in the C-CBD Off-Street Parking - Zone District. C-CBD Zone District Section VII-210, Clarifies the content of off-site parking Off-Site Parking agreements. Agreements Section VII-602, Corrects scrivener's error as to use standard Car Washes for car washes. Section VII-1301, Clarifies the height of structures in Waterfront Property watertront setbacks. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated the following documents are made part of the public record: Minutes of the November 17, 1999, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) Document entitled "Errata Revisions III 1998 Zoning Code" prepared by the Planning and Development Department with a draft date of November 4, 1999 Memorandum from Mark Hess, AICA, Planning and Development Department to Chairman Kantor and Members, Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP), dated November 8, 1999, regarding Comprehensive Plan Consistency Analysis of Proposed Errata Revisions III File No. 99-ZTA-01 City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4196 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4193 on first reading. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4193 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes. Mayor Cardamone stated that for the benefit of the public, reading the titles of ordinances is a legally mandated procedure. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that unfortunately, two Requests to Speak forms were misplaced; that the public hearing should be reopened to hear the public input. Mayor Cardamone asked if another vote on the proposed ordinance will be necessary? City Attorney Taylor stated that taking another vote will depend on the public input. Mayor Cardamone reopened the public hearing. Cheryl Zimmer, 1744 Seminole Drive (34239), came before the Commission and was sworn in. Ms. Zimmer stated that a careful review of Article V, Vested Rights and Nonconformities, Division 1, Nonconformities, Section V-102, Nonconforming Uses, is requested; that a property at 1700 Seminole Drive which is personally represented has vested rights for use as a school since 1933; that the property has been in review as the grandfathered rights were châllenged by Staff in January 1999 at the time the new owners to occupy the property for the use as a school; that a fair review is requested; that assuring any decisions regarding amendments will not adversely BOOK 47 Page 19098 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19099 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. affect the property owner's position is requested; that the City looks favorably on education; that the continued use of the property as a school should be allowed. City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4193 amends the Zoning Code (1998) only by correcting scrivener's errors; that an individual with a particular status with the City will not be affected. 15. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4196, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (1998) REGARDING THE REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF CONCURRENCY AND THE METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING PROJECTED DEMAND FOR CERTIFICATES OF CONCURRENCY; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-4) #1 (3089) through (3520) Dennis Daughters, Director of Engineering/City, Engineer, and Osaka "Sam" Frieda, Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering Department, came before the Commission. Mr. Daughters stated that Application No. 99-ZTA-15 as contained in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4196 updates the regulations regarding the issuance of Certificates of Concurrency and the methodology for performing transportation studies; that three significant are recommended: 1. Change the following language of Section IV-203.B.2. Transportation Facilities, to define the tool used to determine traffic volumes and to delete a reference to single-family dwellings which are exempt as follows: Add - utilizing the most recent table of the generalized two-way peak hour volumes in the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Level of Service Handbook. Delete Provided, however, an impact of a single-family home on an existing lot will constitute a de minimus impact on all roadways regardless of the level of deficiency of the roadway. (with the exception of the impact of a single-family home on an existing zoning lot) 2. Delete Section IV-203.E.3.b referring to the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) as follows: A development approval is issued subject to the conditions that the necessary facilities and services required to serve the new development are scheduled to be in place or under actual construction no more than three (3) years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy, as provided in the adopted City of Sarasota five (5) year schedule on capital improvements. The schedule of capital improvements may recognize and include transportation projects in the first three (3) years of the applicable, adopted Florida Department of Transportation five (5) year work program; or Renumber remaining sections 3. Update of Exhibit No. 1 of Ordinance No. 00-4196 Consisting of the Methodology for Calculating Projected Demand for Certificates of Concurrency, to be Codified as Appendix "A" of the Zoning Code (1998) including five items of importance as follows: a. Correcting Service Demand Rates b. Reflecting the change in State law regarding the definition of de minimis C. Adding requirements of a traffic circulation plan d. Clarifying content and format of a transportation study for standardization e. Correcting grammar and name changes Mr. Daughters stated that at its November 17, 1999, Special meeting, the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) voted unanimously to find Application No. 99-ZTA-15 consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and the Standards for Review set forth in Section IV-1206, Zoning Code (1998), and to recommend Commission approval. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated the following documents are made part of the public record: Minutes of the November 17, 1999, PBLP meeting Document entitled "Proposed Revisions to the Zoning Code (1998) 99-ZTA-15, Transportation Concurrency Regulations, Planning Board, November 17, 1999" Memorandum from Paul Costanzo, Chief Planner, to Chairperson Kantor and Planning Board members dated October 20, 1999, regarding LDR Revisions Consistency with the Sarasota City Plan 1998, Transportation Concurrency Regulations Memorandum from Dennis Daughters to the PBLP dated October 21, 1999, regarding Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Code (1998) with attached draft Appendix "A" Memorandum from Dennis Daughters to the City Commission dated January 25, 2000, regarding Proposed Amendment to the Zoning Code (1998) with attached Appendix "A" BOOK 47 Page 19100 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19101 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4196 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4196 on first reading. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4196 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yesi Hogle, yesi Mason, yes; Pillot, yes. 16. NON QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4201, AMENDING CHAPTER 24, PERSONNEL, ARTICLE II, PENSIONS, DIVISION 3, POLICE, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; AMENDING SECTION 24-68, MEMBERSHIP, TO ALLOW THE POLICE CHIEF THE OPTION TO PARTICIPATE OR NOT, IN THE PENSION PLAN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) - PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-A-5) #1 (3325) through (3690) City Manager Sollenberger stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4201 amends the City of Sarasota Police Officers' Pension Fund to allow an option for the Police Chief to opt out of the pension plan; that Gordon Jolly has agreed to return from retirement to resume his previous post as Police Chief; that as Chief Jolly is drawing a retirement benefit based on 28 years of service, re-entering the plan is not beneficial; that the Police Officers' Pension Board of Trustees has endorsed proposed Ordinance No. 00-4201. Commissioner Mason left the Chambers at 7:30 p.m. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if adding for the public benefit proposed Ordinance No. 00-4201 is consistent with State law. City Manager Sollenberger stated yes; that a State law was enacted approximately one year ago to allow the option of participating or not in a pension plan. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak and Mayor Cardamone closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4201 by title only. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends passing proposed Ordinance No. 00-4201 on first reading. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4201 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (4 to 0): Cardamone, yesi Hogle, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Attorney Taylor explain the quasi-judicial public hearing process. City Attorney Taylor stated that during the quasi-judicial public hearings, the Commission will be required to base any decision on competent, substantial evidence; that prior to opening the public hearing, Commissioners will be requested to disclose any ex parte communications concerning the subject property; that recommendations for time limits for the quasi-judicial public hearings will be made at the appropriate time; that speakers may request additional time which, if granted, will be determined at the discretion of the Commission; that Applicants, the City, and Affected Persons will be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and expert witnesses and the opportunity for cross examination. Commissioner Mason returned to the Chambers at 7:40 p.m. 17. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4191, PROVIDING FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 324 JULIA PLACE, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE DR. JAMES A. AND DELMA S. OLIVER HOUSE, AS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 99-HD-17, APPLICANTS DEVIN RUTKOWSKI AND MARIAN RUTKOWSKI AS OWNERS) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-1) # 2 (0097) through (0342) City Attorney Taylor stated that proposed Ordinance No. 00-4191 provides for the designation of the structure located at 324 Julia Place, historically known as the James A. and Delma S. Oliver House; that the Applicant is the owner, Devin RutkQwski. City Attorney Taylor stated that no one has filed for certification as an Affected Person; that the recommendation is to allow the Applicant and the City 5 minutes for presentation and 3 minutes for rebuttal. Mayor Cardamone stated that the consensus of the Commission is to approve the recommended speaker timelimits. BOOK 47 Page 19102 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19103 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Mayor Cardamone requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Mayor Cardamoné, Vice Mayor Pillot, Commissioners Hogle, Mason and Quillin stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that individuals have asked the reason some public hearings are quasi judicial and others are not; and requested clarification for the public of quasi-Judicial and non- quasi-judicial public hearings. City Attorney Taylor stated that a Florida Supreme Court decision provides for the determination of quasi or non - quasi judicial hearings; that prior to the Court decision, the Commission would have sat in a legislative capacity to hear matters involving land use, rezonings, historic designation, etc.; that the Florida Supreme Court determined certain public hearings are quasi judicial in nature and require additional effort to assure appropriate sateguards. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. Devin Rutkowski came before the Commission and stated that the home was purchased three years ago; that an historic designation is being sought to take advantage of the County's abatement of the increase in taxes which will come from future improvements to the home; that property values and taxes in Laurel Park have increased dramatically; that an abatement by the City also would be enjoyed; that Laurel Park is not located in the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District, which will be, therefore, unaffected by the abatement; that the City's offering a similar abatement to the County would be a wonderful incentive; that the previous owner of the home was former Chief of Police, Francis Scott. Mayor Cardamone requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. John Burg, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated a review by Staff from the Sarasota County Department of Historical Resources determined the structure located at 324 Julia Drive exemplifies the classic single-story frame, craftsman-style bungalow constructed in 1925; that the one-story bungalow is representative of the boom years which took place in downtown Sarasota during the 1920s during which time Laurel Park experienced its greatest growth; that the wood frame structure is built on a brick foundation; that the overhangs are generous and consist of exposed 2- by 4-inch roof framing members; that the front porch is an integral design feature with a front facing gable roof bisecting a large main gable roof running the length of the house and a half-height wall with square wood columns; that the exterior siding consists of wood shingles with circular saw cuts; that the windows are large double-hung wood; that at its September 14, 1999, meeting, the Historic Preservation Board unanimously recommended historic designation of the structure known as the Dr. James A. and Delma S. Oliver House, which meets the following criteria listed under Section IV-806 (A), Zoning Code (1998) : 4. Embodies the distinctive visible characteristics of an architectural style or period, or a method of construction City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that no one has signed up to speak; that neither the Applicant nor the City has any rebuttal. Mayor Cardamone requested Commissioner supplemental remarks, if any, and hearing none, closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4191 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4191 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that for the benefit of the public, clarification as to the reason the Commission does not request Administration's recommendation on certain public hearings. City Attorney Taylor stated that making a recommendation places the Administration in the position of being an advocate for or against an application; that the Administration prefers to maintain a neutral role. 18. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4197, REZONING REAL PROPERTY HAVING A STREET ADDRESS OF 727 HUDSON AVENUE AND COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ALDERMAN OAKS RETIREMENT CENTER FROM THE RESIDENTIAL MULTI - FAMILY REVITALIZATION (RMF-R) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-5 (RMF-5) ZONE DISTRICT AND ALSO REZONING ADJACENT PROPERTY HAVING A STREET ADDRESS OF 742 ROWE PLACE, FROM THE MULTI-F FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-3 (RMF-3) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE MULTI-I FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-5 (RMF-5) ZONE DISTRICT; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICATION NO. 00-RE-04, APPLICANT WILLIAM W. MERRILL, III, ESQ.. AS AGENT FOR THE BOOK 47 Page 19104 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19105 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. OWNER ALDERMAN OAKS RETIREMENT CENTER, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION) = PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-2) #2 (0347) through (0869) Mayor Cardamone stated that Application No. 00-RE-04 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4197 is to rezone real property having a street address of 727 Hudson Avenue and commonly known as the Alderman Oaks Retirement Center from the Residential Multi-Family Revitalization (RMF-R) to the Multi- Family Residential (RMF) -5 Zone District and also rezoning adjacent property having a street address of 742 Rowe Place, from the RMF-3 to the RMF-5 Zone District. City Attorney Taylor stated that no one has filed for certification as an Atfected Person; that the recommendation is to allow the Applicant and the City 5 minutes for presentation and 3 minutes for rebuttal. Mayor Cardamone stated that the consensus of the Commission is to approve the recommended speaker timelimits. Mayor Cardamone requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Mayor Cardamone, Vice Mayor Pillot, Commissioners Hogle, Mason and Quillin stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. William Merrill, III, land-use attorney, law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, and Rusty Blix, President, Alderman Oaks Retirement Center, Inc., an Assisted Living Facility (ALF), came before the Commission. Attorney Merrill and Rusty Blix were sworn in by City Auditor and Clerk Robinson. Attorney Merrill stated that rezoning 13 lots is requested; that the property is bounded by four streets: Rowe Place, Hudson Avenue, Alderman Street, and Pine Tree Lane; that the rezoning is unusual as the zoning of the property owned by one party is split; that the rezoning for lots 1 through 12 is from the RMF-R Zone District which allows a density of 35 dwelling units per acre on the majority of the property to the RMF-5 Zone District which allows a density 25 dwelling units per acre and which is a down-zoning; that the ALF is located on the property containing lots 1 through 12; that an old, dilapidated, boarded-up house. is located on lot 13 will be demolished to allow for an addition to the ALF; that lot 13 is in the RMF-3 Zone District which allows 13 dwelling units per acre; that rezoning lot 13 to RMF-5 will be an up-zone of 25 dwelling units per acre; that rezoning the property will provide consistent zoning of the RMF-5 Zone District on the entire property; that Site PIan Application No. 00-SP-07 requests approval to increase from 48 ALF units to 65 ALF units remaining well below current allowable units; that the net increase will be 17 new ALF units; that 9 new units will be constructed and two existing units will be converted into a recreation room/office area; that the rezoning request is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition; that the property is a zoning enclave which is property not currently compatible with the future uses envisioned by the Land Use Classification within which the property is located; that the RMF-R Zone District is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; that the City's Comprehensive Plan encourages rezoning of the property; that the property is located in the Multi-Family Medium Density Land Use Classification; that the rezoning is an overall reduction in density; that no neighborhood opposition or objections exist; that a few neighbors expressed concerns which were resolved; that the RMF-3 and Office, Professional and Business (OPB) Zone Districts surround the property; that an RMF- R Zone District is east of the property; that limiting the use of the property to an ALF has been proffered; that no changes will be made to vehicular access, traffic circulation, or the height of the ALF; that Staff identified no negative issues regarding the rezoning request; that traffic impact is de minimus for concurrency and compatibility; that the addition will make the building more symmetrical; that negotiations with Staff resulted in architectural modifications to improve the ALF neighborhood compatibility by retrofitting the existing portion of the building to further the symmetry and create a human scale rather than an institutional façade; that Staff recommended rezoning the property as the mixed zoning created difficulties regarding set- back and lot coverage; that Variance No. 00-01 was approved subject to rezoning approval; that the Planning Board/Local Planning Agency (PBLP) held a public hearing at its January 5, 2000, meeting and determined Rezoning Application No. 00-RE-04 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4197 is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Standards for Review set forth in the Zoning Code (1998), and recommended Commission approval, subject to the conditions incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4197 as follows: 1. The real property shall only be developed and used for the following type of land use which is designated as a permitted use in the Multi-Family Residential-5 (RMF-5) Zone District: "assisted living facility. II 2. The real property . shall not be developed or used for any land uses other than the use indicated Any uses which may be added to the list of permitted uses in the RMF-5 Zone District after the effective date of this ordinance shall not be permitted uses on BOOK 47 Page 19106 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19107 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. the property * unless this ordinance is amended to specifically provide that such uses will be allowed. Mayor Cardamone requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Karin Murphy, Senior Planner II, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that the Applicant has provided a detailed and accurate description of the rezoning; that the proffered ALF use and the Rezoning and Site Plan Applications were reviewed; that early in the application and review process, Staff had concerns regarding the elongated façade of the building; that Staff suggested installing residential architectural features on the building to assure compatibility with residential development to the west; that the Applicant added a porch and balcony and retrotitted the existing portion of the building to achieve a non-institutional façade. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that no one has signed up to speak; that neither the Applicant nor the City has any rebuttal. Mayor Cardamone requested Commissioner supplemental remarks, if any, and hearing none, Closed the public hearing. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4197 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Quillin and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4197 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes. 19. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 00-4198, TO REZONE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BAHIA VISTA STREET AND ALLENDALE AVENUE AND HAVING STREET ADDRESSES OF 1120 AND 1128 ALLENDALE AVENUE, FROM THE SINGLE- - FAMILY-RESIDENTIAL-4 (RSF-4) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS (OPB) ZONE DISTRICT, AS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH HEREIN; ETC. (TITLE ONLY) (APPLICANT NO. 00-RE-03, APPLICANT LAND RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC. AS AGENT FOR THE CONTRACT VENDEES DR. LUIS F. GUTIERREZ AND MARYBEL GUTIERREZ) PASSED ON FIRST READING (AGENDA ITEM IV-B-3 #2 (0873) through (1111) City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that Application No. 00-RE-03 as incorporated in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4198 is to rezone real property located on the northwest corner of Bahia Vista Street and Allendale Avenue and having street addresses of 1120 and 1128 Allendale Avenue, from the Single-Family- Residential-4 (RSF-4) to the Office, Professional and Business (OPB) Zone District. City Attorney Taylor stated that no one has filed for certification as an Affected Person; that the recommendation is to allow the Applicant and the City 5 minutes for presentation and 3 minutes for rebuttal. Mayor Cardamone stated that the consensus of the Commission is to approve the recommended speaker timelimits. Mayor Cardamone requested that Commissioner ex parte communications, if any, be disclosed. Mayor Cardamone, Vice Mayor Pillot, Commissioners Hogle, Mason and Quillin stated that no ex parte communications have occurred. Mayor Cardamone opened the public hearing and requested that the Applicant come forward. Bruce Franklin, President, The ADP Group, came before the Commission and stated that the property is designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, as Neighborhood Office Land Use Classification; that the property currently zoned Single-Family Residential (RSF) -4 Zone District is a zoning enclave; that rezoning to Office, Professional and Business (OPB) Zone District is requested; that the proposed zoning is consistent with the Land Use Classification; that the property is approximately one-half acre; that an approximately 4,000 square-foot building will be constructed. Mr. Franklin referred to a map displayed on the overhead projector and stated that access is limited to Allendale Avenue; that the proposed use is as a dental office; that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Cardamone requested that Staff come forward for the City's presentation. Mark Hess, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that at its January 5, 2000, meeting, a public hearing was conducted regarding Rezone Application No. 00-RE-03 to rezone property near the northwest corner of Allendale Avenue and Bahia Vista Street from the RSF-4 to the OPB Zone District; that the Site Plan presented to the PBLP is slightly different from the drawing displayed on the overhead projector as changes were made to save some large trees and to provide a pedestrian connection between the building and the Bahia Vista Street sidewalk; that the property is a zoning BOOK 47 Page 19108 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19109 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. enclave; therefore, the zoning change is encouraged; that the OPB Zone District is an implementing zone districts of the Neighborhood Office Land Use Classification; that the PBLP recommended on a 4-to-0 vote to approve Rezone Application No. 00-RE-03 subject to conditions set forth in proposed Ordinance No. 00-4198 as follows: 1. The real property described shall only be developed and used for the following types of land uses which are designated as permitted uses in the Office, Professional and Business (OPB) Zone District: alarm systems, security operation office; data and computer services; medical or dental laboratory; office, business or professional; office or clinic, medical or dental. 2. The real property described shall not be developed or used for any land uses other than those uses listed in Section 3.A. above, specifically including the following uses which are currently listed as permitted uses in the OPB Zone District: adult day care; child care centers; essential governmental services; family day care centers; financial institutions; park; radio and television stations. Any uses which may be added to the list of permitted uses in the OPB Zone District after the effective date of this ordinance shall not be permitted uses on the property unless this Ordinance is amended to specifically provide that such uses will be allowed. Commissioner Quillin asked if a sidewalk will be installed along Allendale Avenue? Mr. Hess stated yes. Commissioner Quillin asked if curb gutters will be installed? Mr. Hess stated yes. Commissioner Quillin stated that lot 1131 on Tuttle Avenue to the west of the property will be land-locked. Mr. Hess stated that lots 1131 and 1117 are also designated for in the Neighborhood Office Land Use Classification; that an assemblage would be required between the two properties for any redevelopment to occur. Commissioner Quillin stated that the adjoining properties are owned by different individuals. Mr. Hess stated that is correct. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson stated that no one has signed up to speak; that neither the Applicant nor the City has any rebuttal. City Auditor and Clerk Robinson read proposed Ordinance No. 00-4198 by title only. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to pass proposed Ordinance No. 00-4198 on first reading. Mayor Cardamone requested that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson proceed with the roll-call vote. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes; Hogle, yes; Mason, yes. The Commission recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:25 p.m. 20. CITIZENS' INPUT CONCERNING CITY TOPICS: #2 (1320) through (1500) Paul Thorpe, Executive Director, Pat Richmond, President, Pam Truitt, Member, The Downtown Association of Sarasota, Inc. (Downtown Association) 1818 Main Street (34236). Mr. Thorpe stated that the City and County Commissioners are conducting a joint meeting February 8, 2000; that the Downtown Association wishes to present a letter concerning an issue for the Commission to consider at the joint meeting. Ms. Richmond read a February 7, 2000, letter from the Board of Directors of the Downtown Association to the Commission as follows: We, the Board of Directors of The Downtown Association of Sarasota, request the City Commission to make a firm and final decision as to the location of the Bus Transfer Station. We urge you to do this before the state funding is lost. Furthermore, we would prefer to go on record with our recommendation to situate the Bus Transfer Station at a location south of Fruitville Road in the core downtown area. Joan Baker, 2711 Bruce Lane (34237), stated that a suggestion has been made to convert Eighth Street to a park; that homeowners on Bruce Lane were advised years ago Eighth Street would be extended which would help alleviate the traffic on Tenth Street. Mayor Cardamone asked if a private discussion with Staff would be acceptable? Ms. Baker stated yes. 21. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: : FINAL ORDER IN THE MATTER OF THE CITY OF SARASOTA VS. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DOAH CASE NO. 98-2364 (RINGLING CAUSEWAY BRIDGE) (AGENDA ITEM VI-1) #2 (1500) through (2100) City Attorney Taylor stated that the Final Order in the matter of the City of Sarasota versus the Florida Department of BOOK 47 Page 19110 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19111 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Transportation, DOAH Case No. 98-2364 (Ringling Causeway Bridge) has been received; that if the City wishes to appeal the Final Order, the appeal must be filed by February 23, 2000; that David Levin, Attorney with the law firm of Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen, and Ginsburg, represents the City and will brief the Commission and answer questions. Mayor Cardamone stated that hearing the Commission's agreement, the Commission will receive the information and hear public speakers, Eollowed by Commission discussion. Attorney Levin stated that the case concerning the Ringling Causeway Bridge was initiated approximately three years ago by a Commission which believed the desires of individuals most directly impacted by the decision of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to construct a high-level, fixed-span bridge had not been adequately considered; that a year-long investigation of the facts concerning FDOT's decision was conducted; that the investigation's conclusion was FDOT failed to follow the requirements of State and Federal law intended to provide the public an opportunity for effective participation prior to the design public hearing and FDOT's selection of and commitment to a specific design proposal; that detailed testimony and documentary evidence were presented supporting the City's contentions during the two-week trial in May 1999 before an Administrative Law Judge; that for example, FDOT selected the high-level, fixed-span alternative, selected a design consultant to prepare construction drawings, entered into a contract with the selected design consultant, and issued a notice to proceed with preparation of the construction plans months before the required design public hearing and the required Federal Highway Administration (FHA) approval; that unfortunately, the Administrative Law Judge assigned the case was confused by the facts as reflected in the error-filled Recommended Order, neglected to consider key City witnesses, and, worse, found acceptable FDOT's failure to perform detailed studies of the impacts of the various alternatives notwithstanding the mandate to conduct such studies by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and FDOT's own policies; that the Administrative Law Judge's Recommended Order supported the contention FDOT is not required to follow the law as asserted by FDOT's attorneys; that the Final Order of FDOT's Secretary accepting the findings of the Recommended Order is not surprising; that after condoning FDOT's failure to follow the requirements of State and Federal law, FDOT currently claims the decision regarding the Ringling Causeway Bridge is beyond the reach of the Florida Administrative Procedures Act (APA) which is also not surprising; that the Final Order issued is an additional example of FDOT's belief of being above the law and beyond reproach; that an appeal of the Final Order is warranted and winnable; that a Notice of Appeal must be filed by February 23, 2000, if the Commission approves. Mayor Cardamone stated that as a reminder to the public, speakers concerning the Ringling Causeway Bridge are limited to three minutes as Agenda Item VI-1 is not a public hearing. The following people came before the Commission: Dr. L. R. Ludwig, 122 Seaqull Lane (34236), stated that the proposed high-level, fixed-span Ringling Causeway Bridge is opposed; that the Commission is urged to appeal the Administrative Law Judge's ruling and FDOT's arrogant stance; that the same issues have been addressed to the Commissioners of the previous Commission; that addressing the issues again for the benefit of the new Commissioners is desired; that the proponents of the high-level, fixed-span bridge cite reliability, safety, and cost-effectiveness as the reasons for supporting the project; that the factors have significance; however, the degree of the impact on the debate is arguable; that the major concern should be the impact on traiiic; that no improvement in traffic patterns will result; that only two traffic lanes in each direction which is the same as currently exist will be constructed; that traffic will not be halted by bridge openings; however, traffic will be slowed or stopped by the increased congestion at St. Armands Circle and US 41 and Gulf Stream Avenue; that traffic will be horrendous with the completion of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel project, the Renaissance of Sarasota, the Sarasota Bay Club senior citizens complex, the Marina Towers project, the Phoenix, etc.; that the opponents of the high- level, fixed-span bridge have argued the necessity is for a new bridge connecting Longboat Key to the mainland numerous times; that Longboat Key is the only barrier island in the Tampa Bay area without a bridge providing a direct connection to the mainland; that 70 percent of the traffic on the Ringling Causeway Bridge is going to or coming from Longboat Keyi that the recent accident involving a tractor trailer on the Bird Key approach to the Ringling Causeway Bridge in which a spillage of diesel fuel occurred is a perfect example of the necessity for a bridge to Longboat Keyi that according to the Police Chief, a high-level, fixed-span bridge would not have prevented the subsequent three- to four-hour delay; however, traffic could have been diverted if a bridge to Longboat Key from the mainland existed; that for some reason, proponents of a new high-level, BOOK 47 Page 19112 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19113 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. fixed-span bridge will not address the traffic issue and the necessity for a Longboat Key bridge; that the argument is dismissed as such a structure would be too expensive or not environmentally feasible; that if a man can walk on the moon, a simple bridge problem can be solved. Wolfgang Brockmeyer, 2642 Nancy Street (34237), stated that during the afternoon of February 7, 2000, he was stuck in traffic for 25 minutes on the Ringling Causeway Bridge; that an ambulance was also stuck but fortunately was not on an emergency run; that the arguments should end; that no further funds should be expended; that the State should be allowed to build a bridge and also encouraged to build a bridge to Longboat Key. Richard Storm, 707 South Gulf Stream Avenue (34236), stated that arguments concerning the bridge have been heard for many years; that the Commission is urged to appeal the FDOT's Final Order; that the arrogance of the ruling is astounding; that the question is the standing of the City concerning an issue and a controversy regarding transportation within the City limits; that the relevance is far wider than just Sarasota; that the Final Order indicating transportation policy is not subject to review does not refer only to Sarasota but refers to any community in the State; that filing an appeal is encouraged; that the Bridge Too High Committee (Bridge Too High) plans to file an appeal and will raise the necessary funds for the Bridge Too High's portion of the appeal; that the hope is to join the City in an appeal; that many people in the audience are wearing the Bridge Too High's yellow stickers; and requested the individuals wearing yellow stickers to stand sO the Commission can understand the community support of a very necessary appeal. Ronald Kauffman, 4084 Fruitville Road (34232) representing Nilson Glass Company, the Gulf Coast Builders Exchange, and the Manasota Subcontractors Association, stated that the high-level, fixed-span bridge is supported; that the Ringling Causeway Bridge is traveled daily in the course of performing business; that the traffic stoppages are objectionable; that a bridge to Longboat Key is also necessary. Michael Garey, representing the St. Armands Circle Association consisting of approximately 90 businesses on St. Armands Circle, 5899 Whistlewood Circle (34236), stated that on February 1, 2000, the Board of Directors of the St. Armands Circle Association placed on its agenda the Ringling Causeway Bridge issue and voted unanimously in favor of the high-level, fixed- span bridge; that the City is urged to consider the Association's position; that expensive legal hassles should end; that the Commission is urged to accept the FDOT's recommendation. Gilbert Waters, 1580 Hillview Street (34239), stated that the Commission is requested to allow due process occur as recommended by the Board of Directors of The Argus Foundation; that the Ringling Causeway Bridge issue will not be resolved until the plans are completed; that the determination will occur subsequent to advertising and public hearings; that FDOT is governed by Federal and State law; that the Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is also governed by Federal and State law; that the process is complicated and time- consuming but necessary to obtain the funds for transportation improvements; that the Good Bridge 2000 which is comprised of 900 members is personally represented and has expended over $40,000 to obtain accurate renderings and conduct eight public opinion polls indicating 70 percent of the general public favor the high-level, fixed-span bridge; that public opinion polls conducted by WWSB-TV Channel 40 and the Sarasota County Republican Executive Committee demonstrate a commanding preference of the general public for a bridge not requiring numerous raisings and lowerings daily; that discussions with residents in Fort Lauderdale regarding a 45-foot drawbridge raised on demand with four bascule spans rising to 118 feet ten times daily revealed the same traffic back-up problem as with the present Ringling Causeway Bridge causing dangerous conditions; that the process should go forward; that additional taxpayer funds which are required by other districts should not be wasted; that the Commission is urged on behalf of the citizens to allow the process go forward and allow FDOT to advertise, conduct hearings, and discuss the environmental impacts; that private contributors will beautify the approaches to the Ringling Causeway Bridge; that allowing completion of the process is urged. Ned Parsekian, Member, St. Armands Residents Association, 460 North Washington Drive (34236), and Natalie Levinsky, 1173 Morningside Place (34235). Mr. Parsekian stated that gifts will be presented to the Commission with the request the gifts subsequently be presented to others; and related a parody of the EDOT fashioned after the fable entitled "The Emperor and His New Clothes." Ms. Levinsky presented the Commission a No. 2 pencil for FDOT to begin construction plans of the bridge to Longboat Key and a BOOK 47 Page 19114 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19115 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. No. 2 pencil with a red ribbon for Attorney Levin to begin the legal brief and appeal to the court. Ken Shelin, President, St. Armands Residents Association, 117 North Washington Drive (34236), stated that the St. Armands Residents Association represents 257 residential property owners on St. Armands Key; that the Commission should not give up the fight against the FDOT's tyranny and arrogance in thinking FDOT has the right, obligation, privilege, or responsibility for deciding the fate of local communities; that a golden opportunity exists to turn the tide concerning the Ringling Causeway Bridge replacement issue due to FDOT's decision the City has no standing to appeal; that FDOT has potentially alarmed every community in the State by usurping communities' rights to play a role in deciding transportation issues in the community; that the issue is larger than the Ringling Causeway Bridge replacement; that the issue is the opportunity of each community to have a say and role in the community's transportation future; that the City should seize the opportunity to appeal the decision; that moving forward aggressively to protect the rights of every community to play a significant role in determining the future is encouraged. Richard Ferrell, 125 Seagull Lane (34236), stated that the character of the Bird Key area is being compromised; that the personal decision to move to the area was due to the City's Vision of Small Town Living and Feeling which will be destroyed by the high-level, fixed-span bridge; that the hope is the City will topple FDOT just as David, the Biblical character, toppled Goliath. Albert Moore, representing the Civic Affairs Committee, Plymouth Harbor, 700 John Ringling Boulevard (34236), stated that the City has the right to manifest opposition to a high-level, fixed- span bridge which begins and ends within the City limits; that after seven years, the questions are the continued length of time the issue will be debated and the additional cost; that the State is forced to expend funds to defend lawsuits; that 65-foot, high- level, fixed-span bridges are favored all along the State's intracoastal waterways; that constructing high-level, fixed-span bridges is a State policy with a few exceptions primarily for geographic reasons such as Fort Lauderdale which has narrowly separated shores; that drawbridges are expensive dinosaurs; that the City should not even think of appealing as the City does not have a case; that the Ringling Causeway Bridge not only serves the City but is crossed by vehicles from Longboat Key, Sarasota and Manatee Counties, tourists from Ohio, Michigan, New York, Canada, etc.; that the issue is a metropolitan one; that approval for a replacement bridge was received twice from the MPO and is financed almost entirely by Federal funds, which are strictly for a replacement bridge and not a bridge to Longboat Keyi that a replacement bridge will be financed almost entirely by Federal funds, spans a Federal waterway, and is designed, engineered, and built under a contract by FDOT according to State policies; that EDOT was Cleared of any failures to properly publicize the replacement bridge proposal after administrative hearings; that he served for five years on the task force studying the Ringling Causeway Bridge, representing Longboat Key at one time and Sarasota at another; that FDOT attended every task force meeting, answering questions and being very helpful; that the City's case is based upon flimsy arguments bordering on frivolous; that further legal action against FDOT should be suspended; that the City requires FDOT's funds and expertise in resolving the obvious traffic problems; that the time has come for a truce. Laurel Kaiser, 2317 Sunnyside Place (34239), stated that FDOT's findings make an arrogant statement; that having been born and raised in Sarasota, Lido Beach has been visited for his entire life; that the Ringling Causeway Bridge is crossed approximately six times daily; that stopping for openings of the Ringling Causeway Bridge is not inconvenient, is a part of the City's ambiance in causing an individual to slow down and enjoy Sarasota, and affords the best view of the waterfront to passersby; that keeping the Ringling Causeway Bridge as a low, bascule bridge is consistent with the City's vision; that the City has every right and provocation to challenge FDOT's ruling on behalf of the community and citizens of the State whose communities may not be enhanced by FDOT's vision of a community's requirements or financially acceptable maintenance over a period of years; that exceptions exist; that taking control of the City is necessary; that community support should exist to maintain the Ringling Causeway Bridge and enjoy the small town look; that the City has expended large amounts of funds; that much time, funds, and dedication is required and warranted; that few communities have a vision of small town living and feeling; that better travel planning may be required to reach a destination. Larry Wolov, 499 Partridge Circle (34229), stated that previous employment was as a US Justice Department attorney prosecuting deportation cases; that the possible action of a Federal agency is well known; that the possible action of a State agency is presumed; that private practice defending civil rights cases was pursued; that being. personally upset regarding a bridge is BOOK 47 Page 19116 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19117 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. surprising; that the concern regarding the Recommended Order is deciding the case on the basis of standing rather than the merits of the case; that a record is created, individuals can present testimony, and a record is established at an administrative hearing; that the issue of standing never arose at the administrative hearing; therefore, denial of standing is a denial of due process as no rebuttal is possible; that the decision should have been made on the merits and should have been remanded to the lower court if the decision went to the issue of standing; that the right to argue standing has not been provided. Lorraine Garland, 1252 Center Place (34236), stated that the Department of Transportation (DOT) is not personally liked anywhere; that a summer home is owned on an island with a large bridge on each side; that a new bridge has been constructed leaving two bridges standing side-by-side as the DOT ran out of funds to demolish the old bridge; that DOT fears the new bridge may be too close to demolish the old bridge; that the new bridge's falling and the old bridge's standing long after construction would not be surprising; that FDOT cannot be trusted; that the City is encouraged to stand up and fight; that two bridges are required; that the road situation must be addressed prior to building a new bridge; that FDOT advised plans for roads are not considered until a bridge is built; that no bridge will be constructed to Longboat Key unless written plans are obtained from FDOT; that FDOT should be combated and should not control communities regarding a high bridge, a low bridge, or a tunnel. Richard Angelotti, 228 Seagull Lane (34236), stated that as an 18-year resident of Bird Key, the Ringling Causeway Bridge issue has been a personal concern since 1993; that in 1993, a public hearing at the Bird Key Yacht Club was attended at which time FDOT made misrepresentations which continue; that FDOT indicated a bridge would be built règardless of the circumstances; that FDOT rejected the recommendation of the Architectural Design Committee; that the Commission rejected the proposed high-level, fixed-span replacement bridge twice; however, FDOT ignored the Commission; that appealing FDOT's Final Order is encouraged; that the Commission is requested not to sacrifice Golden Gate Point and Bird Key. Heather Schoonheim, 539 Bird Key Drive (34236), stated that only recently knowledge was gained the Commission does not care for the proposed fixed-span replacement bridge; that a large force such as FDOT often uses the technique of wearing down a small community to force submission; that hearing the City has no standing is frightening; that after FDOT completes a replacement bridge, FDOT will walk away and go on to the next project; that the citizens will live with the replacement bridge; that FDOT is not affected in the same manner; that the past and present Commissioners are frustrated; that the possibility of the Commission's not continuing to fight after sO many years is a concern; that giving up based on a bad ruling is undesirable; that the Commission is encouraged to appeal; that city and county councils and commissions should be able to make decisions for the citizens; that FDOT's ruling is arrogant; that allowing FDOT to prevail is not desired. Ernest Kretzmer, 118 North Polk Drive (34236), stated that the eight-year debate concerning the Ringling Causeway Bridge represents a personal involvement; that wonderful people are on both sides of the issue; that an agreement to build a bridge on which people can come together is desired; that a modern, high- level, fixed-span bridge will provide a full-time bridge improving traffic capacity rather than a part-time bridge; that traffic in season backs up from St. Armands Circle to the beach causing gridlock; that all the stopped vehicles being released at the same time ties up the intersection at US 41 and the Ringling Causeway; that the proposed bridge replacement is a beautiful design and allows a view under the bridge as the support structure is much less cluttered; that more people in the City support a high-level, fixed-span bridge; that citizens should have been allowed to vote on the Ringling Causeway Bridge issue; that the process should be allowed to proceed; that over $500,000 of tax funds has been expended; that appealing FDOT's ruling is futile; that proceeding with building a beautiful bridge is desired. Rusty Blix, 420 Golden Gate Point Drive (34236), stated that the high-level, fixed-span bridge will provide a false sense of security for easier hurricane evacuation; that the danger is people will wait longer to evacuate; that each end of the Ringling Causeway Bridge floods; that a high-level, fixed-span bridge will not improve traffic; that the concern is access to Golden Gate Point and the Ritz-Carlton Hotel project; that the proposed high- level, fixed-span bridge may not be 65 feet in height; that the question is who will represent the citizens concerning such issues and guarantee a mess is not created; that a bridge on Tenth Street to Longboat Key is required. Raymond Shmalo, 7825 Estancia Way (34238), stated that a bridge in Clearwater, Florida, was observed; that a manager of a local restaurant indicated gridlocks occurred due to a drawbridge; that traiiic problems no longer existed after replacing the bridge; BOOK 47 Page 19118 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19119 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. that Daytona Beach, Florida, has two or three 65-foot-high bridges; that one bridge at US Highway 92 was personally crossed with no traffic problems being encountered during the Daytona 500 races; that the future of transportation on the barrier islands requires a 65-foot bridge to avoid gridlock and for safety and transportation reasons; that a 65-foot, fixed-span bridge will not harm the City. Martin Rappaport, Executive Director, Commercial Landowners Association (CLA), St. Armands Circle, 241 Tree Bay Lane stated (34242), that the CLA Board of Directors unanimously favors the high-level, fixed-span bridge; that the Commission should step back from the trees to see the forest; that liking or disliking FDOT should not be an issue; that the Commission has been elected to represent the citizens of the City; that two-thirds of polled citizens favor a high-level, fixed-span bridge; that citizens also requested a bridge from the mainland to Longboat Key; that expending additional funds to fight a situation which will not be resolved to the satisfaction of all citizens should not be encouraged; that the funds and energies of the Good Bridge 2000 and the Bridge Too High Committee should be utilized; that the proposed high-level, fixed-span bridge should be built; that all energies should be combined toward investigating the possibility of obtaining a much-needed bridge from Longboat Key to the mainland; that two bridges are the answer to the City's requirements. Jay Brady, Executive Director, Gulf Coast Builders Exchange, representing 300 member companies, 1487 Second Street (34236), stated that member companies were surveyed; that 27 letters were received representing 558 employees such as electricians, plumbers, roofers, etc.; that the employees indicated spending time getting to and from jobs is preferred rather than waiting at a bridge wasting time and money; that one member company indicated one week of work annually is lost due to waiting at the Ringling Causeway Bridge; and cited two City goals as follows: -Safe Place For People and -Economic Vitality Mr. Brady stated that the City is not as safe or as economically viable as possible as long as the Ringling Causeway Bridge is a drawbridge. Kerry Kirschner, Executive Director, The Argus Foundation, 1590 Gulf View Drive (34236), stated that a two-day session with FDOT, Mayor Cardamone, Gilbert Waters, and Richard Storm was personally attended; that the two-day session was an attempt by FDOT at both the Federal and State level to explain FDOT's process; that FDOT's treatment of the City can be likened to being slapped in the face by an opponent after having lost a tennis match; that due process is through the MPO; that the Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorialized the City should be able to control the City's destiny with the proposed bridge; that interstate highway systems require Federal control; that the only avenue for the City to determine unilaterally the type of replacement bridge is to appeal to take the bridge off the State system of roadways and not accept Federal funds; that only the City's standing is being discussed; that the height of the bridge will be unknown until the replacement bridge process is completed; that opportunities for public input will be available during the public input process; that the public will not make the determination of the configuration of the bridge as final approval of the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is required; that the USCG will unilaterally make a determination only after receipt of final construction drawings; that the focus should be on reviewing plans and expending funds on beautification and buffering residential neighborhoods with berms, etc. to improve the community; that replacement of the Ringling Causeway Bridge is based on the health, welfare and safety of the citizens rather than aesthetics. Commissioner Hogle stated that FDOT's ruling has been reviewed; that a number of neighborhood association meetings, including one on St. Armands Key, were attended; that a large amount of correspondence for and against the fixed-span bridge has been received; that achieving consensus and eliminating divisiveness on the issue is desired; that during studies in college, opportunities were presented to study under juris doctors; that the City has rights based on the State and Federal Constitutions and the common law; that the FDOT Secretary, Thomas Berry, is incorrect in the conclusion the City has no standing; that the City Attorney should be instructed to investigate if funds expended on the lawsuit with FDOT can be recovered; that Attorney Levin is personally respected and performed a wonderful job although 100 percent differently than would be personally recommended; that the approach taken was to take a shotgun and shoot pellets at the target on many issues; that approximately six issues were clear and possibly had merit which could or could not have been won; that the debate should cease; that not expending additional funds for legal representation is preferred; that separating the issues is necessary; that a concern is the issue of home rule; that the City Attorney should investigate and report BOOK 47 Page 19120 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19121 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. back concerning recommendations and funds expended to date; that an appeal of the ruling is not supported; that the process is running and should continue; that many citizens have indicated the necessity for a bridge to Longboat Key; that an immediate dialogue should be initiated with the MPO, the St. Armands Key neighborhood associations, Longboat Key, Sarasota County, Manatee County, Bradenton, the Good Bridge 2000 and Bridge Too High Committees, etc.; that an extensive effort should be devoted to assisting Longboat Key acquire a bridge to the mainland; that the clippings of publications and correspondence personally received concerning the bridge is extensive; that achieving consensus on the Commission is desired. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that a concerted combined effort toward obtaining a second bridge to Longboat Key should be undertaken; that a major concern of the previous Commission was a second bridge; that the fight against EDOT was entered with the second bridge a major goal; that the Commission and affected citizens should start the process as strongly and quickly as possible; that two additional issues are: the process leading to the administrative hearing as to the type of bridge and home rule as local rights have been severely damaged by FDOT's ruling; that the Commission should take every action possible to restore the home rule rights by having the ruling overturned in the proper venue; that several individuals indicated not just the City, but the entire State could be hampered; that the words overbearing, arrogant, and tyranny, were used; that a question may be if FDOT's Secretary and the Final Order deserve any of the adjectives or not; however, such question is less important than home rule rights; that the Commission should fight to restore home rule rights; that the two fights to continue are: 1) a joint effort involving all sides to begin the process to have a second bridge built to Longboat Key at an appropriate location determined by engineers and others and 2) a challenge to the ruling the City has no standing in the proper venue which will be determined by the City Attorney's Office; that prior to FDOT's ruling, the personal inclination was not to support any further appeals; that productive meetings with representatives of the Good Bridge 2000 and the Bridge Too High Committees have been held; that at a meeting with the Good Bridge 2000 Committee, a card-playing cliché was quoted: "There's a time to hold them and a time to fold them"; that the inclination prior to FDOT's ruling was to move forward; that the issues are sO strong the Commission should do everything possible to challenge FDOT to determine if the result of the administrative hearing is correct and proper; that if SO, the fight for a second bridge should still continue; that if the ruling is successfully challenged and the determination is the Administrative Law Judge erred, the type of bridge would be a contention; that a challenge of FDOT's ruling and fighting for a second bridge are strongly supported. Commissioner Quillin distributed a copy of the transportation section of the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 Edition, and quoted as follows: 5.8 John Ringling Causeway. The City will seek the repair the John Ringling Bridge to maintain compatibility with the surrounding areas. The City will support construction of a new bridge at a different location to serve barrier island traffic, particularly Longboat Key, and to relive traific congestion from the John Ringling Bridge. Commissioner Quillin stated that the City's Comprehensive Plan has been approved by the State; that forefathers were challenged on standing resulting in the Boston Tea Party and overthrowing the King; that outrage occurred upon reading the Final Order, not due to the rejection of claims but rather the ruling the City had no standing; that determining standing was part of the hearing process; that the Administrative Law Judge declared the Good Bridge 2000 had standing with the City to challenge, which is in the record; that ruling the City does not have standing after the fact causes frustration; that the then-existing Commission challenged the process, not a 65-foot bridge, not a fixed-span bridge, and not repairing the Ringling Causeway Bridge; that the administrative hearing was to determine the appropriateness of the process; that the Commission desired the process be fair and equitable for the citizens of the City; that the Commission did not believe the process was fair and equitable and therefore filed for an administrative hearing; that many citizens asked about the replacement bridge issue during the recent personal election campaign; that building a bridge to Longboat Key to eliminate the impact on two counties has long been advocated; that the reason the State cannot comprehend the need for a Longboat Key bridge is unknown; that Longboat Key is the only barrier island on the west coast of the State without a bridge; that FDOT's responsibility supposedly is for the health, safety, and welfare of the State; that FDOT's allowing a community to impact two counties both of which flood is incomprehensible; that proceeding with the replacement bridge process was supported; that remaining issues should be addressed during the process; however, the Final Order is a slap in the citizens' faces by indicating the City has no standing; that FDOT is attempting to be larger than the City and should be told "no"; that challenging the Final Order is necessary; that every individual in Chambers and every organization which has come before the Commission BOOK 47 Page 19122 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19123 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. regardless of position advocated should join forces and pressure the State to assure Longboat Key obtains a bridge, alleviating the impact on two counties; that 60 percent of the traffic will be eliminated, making neighborhoods safer; that everyone should join hands and fight for a Longboat Key bridge, which is fair and equitable; that FDOT should participate and cooperate. Mayor Cardamone stated that FDOT's Final Order should be challenged; that the challenge should deal with the home rule or standing issue; that being provided the transportation section of the City's Comprehensive Plan is appreciated; that three Commissioners support the decision to challenge the Final Order; that information concerning the procedure would be appreciated; that hearing the Commission's agreement, the City Attorney is requested to explain the procedure for challenging FDOT's Final Order. City Attorney Taylor stated that the City Attorney's Office has not been actively involved in the lawsuit; that the manner in which the Commission wishes an appeal to proceed is unclear; that an analysis has not been prepared concerning a possible appeal; that a preliminary view is substance exists for an appeal; that clarification would be appreciated as to if the Commission is requesting the City Attorney's Office proceed singularly or discuss the matter with outside counsel and report back with a recommendation of action and associated costs. Mayor Cardamone stated that if the City Attorney's Office reports back, another large hearing would result which would be counter- productive to the vigilant public; that four solid votes exist to continue; that inviting Attorney Levin to come before the Commission is supported; that hearing the Commission's agreement, Attorney Levin is requested to come before the Commission and clarify the information concerning the fee to file an appeal. Attorney Levin stated that the offer being made is to take the appeal on behalf of the City; that the concern regarding costs is known; that estimating costs of the initial litigation was difficult; that a number of appeals have been personally conducted; that appeals similar to the City's have averaged $25,000; that costs for filing and conducting the FDOT appeal will not exceed $25,000; that FDOT's strategy is intended to draw attention away from the Recommended Order which is weak; that a shotgun approach was involved; however, a focus will be on specific issues on appeal; that a vulnerability of the Recommended and Final Orders is the contract with the design consultant; that the statement of FDOT's Secretary in the Final Order regarding the design consultant indicates the judge was confused about the issue; that FDOT's Secretary indicated the record clearly demonstrates the reference to Greiner, Inc., the planning consultant, at the beginning of the process, instead of Kunde Sprecher and Associates, Inc., the contractor who entered into the contract to build a fixed-span bridge, was an inadvertent error and the Administrative Law Judge correctly understood and considered the issue; that reading the mind of the Administrative Law Judge is necessary to contend an inadvertent error; that the City requested the matter be remanded to correct obvious errors, i.e., 37 exhibits not identified, expert witnesses not mentioned in the order, etc.; that FDOT decided the correct procedure was to remand the matter to the Administrative Law Judge to correct the errors but only requested correction of errors relating to the 37 exhibits; that an objection was filed requesting all errors be corrected; that FDOT purposefully, did not request the Administrative Law Judge review the error concerning the consultant; that if the Administrative Law Judge had reviewed the orderly-presented evidence, the necessary conclusion would have been the establishment of the contract and the issuance of the Notice to Proceed prior to the required public hearing which violates the requirements of the statutes and Federal law; that the one issue alone is sufficient to reverse the case; that initially an estimate of costs of an appeal was prepared based on the merits; that a new set of precedential and more important issues exist; that the entire appeal can be accomplished within the $25,000 estimate. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the venue in which the appeal would be filed? Attorney Levin stated a choice exists of either the Second District Court of Appeals (2nd DCA) in Lakeland, Florida, or the First District Court of Appeals (1st DCA) in Tallahassee, Florida; that the recommendation is to file with the 1st DCA due the experience of the 1st DCA with agencies; that the conclusion a decision such as FDOT's Final Ruling is not reviewable under the APA would be scoffed at by the judges in the 1st DCA. Vice Mayor Pillot asked if the appeal will be simply on the home rule issue or the merits? Attorney Levin stated that a synergy exists between the two issues as FDOT's credibility regarding the merits and jurisdiction has been raised; that the ridiculous notion the City does not have standing nor the right to appeal under the APA will present a lack of credibility which will carry over to a review of the merits; that the case is strengthened by going forward with a pinpoint accuracy on key issues on the merits and also addressing the jurisdiction and the standing issues. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the issue of standing was addressed in the administrative hearing and quoted a portion of the Final Ruling as follows: BOOK 47 Page 19124 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19125 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. the alleged injuries suffered by the City and the intervenor do not meet the substantial interest test standing under the APA. Attorney Levin stated that the question of sufficient injury to the City for standing involves fact issues; that the Administrative Law Judge, who has primary responsibility for ascertaining the facts, made a determination the City demonstrated standing based on facts of the hearing; that for FDOT's Secretary to reject the Administrative Law Judge's determination without evidence to suggest or support error is a direct violation of administrative law. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that FDOT's Secretary was aware the administrative hearing was to be conducted in the City but is now contending the City does not have standing for the administrative hearing; that a question is the reason FDOT's Secretary did not indicate such prior to the hearing, thus eliminating the time and money expended. Attorney Levin stated that the issue of standing involves facts; that the case should not have been referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) and the administrative hearing should not have taken place if FDOT's Secretary believes the bridge decision is not challengeable; that FDOT received the petition first and had the opportunity for review; that FDOT has a responsibility to review a petition to determine if the petition involves a legally challengeable decision; that sending the decision to DOHA was a determination such decisions are legally challengeable based not only on the City's case but also, for example, the bridge case involving the City of Anna Maria Island. Vice Mayor Pillot asked the defense of the inconsistency of the thinking of FDOT's Secretary? Attorney Levin stated that a personal belief is defense in good faith with a straight face is not possible. Commissioner Quillin stated that FDOT's Secretary must have read the full brief in which DOAH determined the City had standing; that the record of the administrative hearing establishes the City's standing; that an appeal must be filed to assure the courts recognize the City's standing as the rest of the case means nothing without the City's having standing. Attorney Levin stated that no question exists the court will make a ruling. in the appeal on the issue of standing and the applicability of the APA. Commissioner Quillin stated that the appeals court could decide to review or send back the case. Attorney Levin stated that the court automatically has jurisdiction on the legal questions of the reviewability under the APA and the City's standing based on the merits of the case as found by the Administrative Law Judge and adopted by FDOT's Secretary; that the court will have the entire record and may be able to make a determination of any factual issues remaining such as the contract issue or the process or may remand the decision back to DOAH; that the court likely will make a finding an error was made and remand the decision back to DOAH. Commissioner Quillin stated that an appeal is filed to obtain standing sO the court will review the case and remand certain inconsistent issues back to DOAH. Attorney Levin stated that is correct; that a new judge to review the evidence will be sought as the Administrative Law Judge who produced the erroneous Recommended Order would not be able to give the City a fair chance in reviewing the evidence a second time; that the costs in Circuit Court would involve filing fees. Attorney Levin stated that attorney fees will be on an hourly basis not to exceed the proposed $25,000 cap. Commissioner Quillin stated that a problem exists from a personal and a constituency perspective; that filing an appeal and expending some funds in doing so is not a concern; that the appeal should be conducted on the basis of a flat fee. Attorney Levin stated that estimating the costs of a two-year preparation and trial is difficult; that costs of an appeal can be controlled; that the written offer to the City is costs for filing an appeal will not exceed $25,000; that the City will not be billed if additional hours are required. Commissioner Quillin stated that for clarification, the written offer was $25,000 plus expenses; that the proposed offer is for a $25,000 flat fee. City Attorney Taylor stated that clarification is necessary for the record; that the out-of-pocket expenses aspect is important; that the previous bill was shocking; that having some concept of expenses in addition to the fee is necessary. Attorney Levin stated that the Clerk of Court will be contacted to determine the costs for preparation of the record; that the costs for the appeal will not be to the same extent as for the trial; that a fixed amount of costs will be provided. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the assumption is costs are finite, defensible, and identifiable; that responses to two questions would be appreciated: 1. If the proper venue for filing the appeal is the 1st DCA? BOOK 47 Page 19126 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19127 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. 2. If engaging Attorney Levin to take the appeal at legal fees not-to-exceed $25,000 is recommended? City Attorney Taylor stated that the choice of the 1st DCA is supported; that filing an appeal for a fee not-to-exceed $25,000 is recommended. Attorney Levin stated that expenses will include travel to Tallahassee; that not many expenses will be involved; that to simplify the matter the fee will be $25,000 including expenses. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to engage Attorney David Levin to represent the City in an appeal to the First District Court of Appeals in Tallahassee, Florida, to appeal the ruling of the Secretary of the Florida Department of Transportation at costs not-to-exceed $25,000. Motion carried (4 to 1): : Hogle, no; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that individuals with whom conversations occurred recently, especially representatives of the Good Bridge 2000, were advised of personal support of proceeding and cooperating with FDOT; however, the ruling by FDOT's Secretary precluded the decision. Mayor Cardamone stated that filing an appeal is a wise decision on behalf of the City; that other cities throughout the State may join the City at the 1st DCA; that officials in Gainesville, Florida, expressed surprise regarding the decision concerning the City's lack of standing; that copies of a portion of the Final Order, a Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial, and other information concerning the Ringling Causeway Bridge were faxed to the Mayor of St. Petersburg, Florida, who has a similar bridge issue coming forward and who requested comment and support; that an attorney in West Palm Beach, Florida, cited a similar issue being faced by the City of Gainesville regarding a stormwater utility in which FDOT has taken the same attitude as is being demonstrated to the City; that the City will network throughout the State to make the Ringling Causeway Bridge issue known to gain support; that the Final Order was sent to the Director of the Florida League of Cities (FLC) with a request for legal staff to review and comment; that the anticipation is the FLC will take the issue to the highest level to obtain support for the City's case; that the Commission's actions are a source of personal pride; that the City has been dealing with a very divided community; that the issue of the Ringling Causeway Bridge replacement represents one of the most difficult decisions made during her tenure on the Commission; that the correct action has been taken; that the Commission's support is appreciated; and thanked the audience for coming forward again. Commissioner Quillin stated that all the organizations to which the Commissioners belong should be contacted; that FDOT's ruling affects every community in the State; that Orlando, Florida, is experiencing problems with FDOT; that FDOT should be made aware of the need for sensitivity to the communities served. Mayor Cardamone stated that the report from the bridge symposium conducted in Orlando, Florida, a couple of months ago was placed on the Commissioners' clipboard; that knowing every FDOT district in the State was represented at the symposium except the City's district is important as the City was the impetus for the symposium; that challenging the Final Order will be of benefit to all of the citizens of the State. 22. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: GUIDELINES TO FACILITATE COMMUNICATION. BETWEEN CITY COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF - APPROVED TO SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP TO REVIEW THE ADMINISTRATIONIS PROPOSED RESOLUTION AND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TIME FOR LEGAL REVIEW BY THE COMMISSION AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (AGENDA ITEM VI-2) #3 (2108) through (2933) City Manager Sollenberger stated that at its January 18, 2000, Regular meeting, the Commission requested guidelines be prepared for facilitation of communication between Commissioners and Staff pursuant to Section 8, Article IV, City of Sarasota Charter (1996) (City Charter); that a draft proposed resolution concerning guidelines has been prepared for Commission discussion; that the Commission may wish to schedule a retreat or workshop to consider the proposed guidelines. Commissioner Quillin stated that the proposed resolution is well- prepared; that a public hearing should be scheduled to receive public input. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that setting the proposed resolution for public hearing is supported; that the resolution is well- prepared. City Attorney Taylor stated that a public hearing is not required to adopt the proposed resolution. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that scheduling either a workshop or a public hearing is supported. Mayor Cardamone stated that no strong opinion exists either way. Commissioner Hogle stated that a workshop is supported; that the proposed resolution reads very clearly and logically. Mayor Cardamone stated that some Commissioners have suggested obtaining the services of a team builder or facilitator, which is BOOK 47 Page 19128 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19129 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. supported; that if desired, the possibility of obtaining the services of a team builder or facilitator could be discussed at a Commission workshop. Commissioner Quillin stated that taxpayers' funds should not be wasted on a facilitator; that the proposed resolution is well- written but contains some legally challengeable provisions; that the right of access to public records is being tread upon; that the public should have the right to inform the Commission of opinions regarding conduct of Commissioners under the City Charter, for which the public voted; that the public will decide which provisions are appropriate; that the proposed resolution violates public records law; that a public hearing will determine if the citizens desire the adoption of a resolution which violates the public records law; that the citizens should review the proposed resolution to determine the quality of the resolution and if the resolution provides for fair and equitable representation by the Commissioners. City Manager Sollenberger stated that a workshop or retreat was suggested as a misunderstanding may exist; that prohibiting Commissioners from obtaining public records was not intended; that the State law provision allowing any individual to obtain a public record is clearly understood; that a Commissioner can go to any City office and obtain a copy of a public record; that the proposed resolution indicates the preferable manner is to request public records through the City Manager's Office which is merely a guideline; that the Commissioners can go directly to the custodian of the record to request access; that setting up a conflict between the proposed resolution and State law is not intended; that discussion of the proposed resolution is suggested. On motion of Commissioner Quillin, it was moved to scheduled the proposed resolution for public hearing. Motion died for lack of a second. On motion of Commissioner Hogle and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved to schedule a workshop to review the Administration's proposed resolution regarding guidelines for facilitation of communication between Commissioners and Staff and to provide additional time for review by the Commission and the City Attorney's Office to assure no legal problems exist. Commissioner Mason stated that further review of the proposed resolution by the Commission is required prior to setting a public hearing. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that Commissioner Quillin's opinion concerning a violation of State law is respected; however, personal disagreement exists; that the wording of the proposed resolution specifically indicates: Section 1. Requests for records or documents may be made by individual Commissioners as provided by Florida law Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the proposed resolution indicates a preference to direct requests for records through the City Manager's Office; that requesting records through the City Manager's Office does not preclude any Commissioner or any individual from obtaining records in a reasonable and timely manner; that during his tenure as Superintendent of Schools for Sarasota County, requests for documents were directed through him as the custodian of the records; and requested clarification of the City's custodian of the records. Commissioner Quillin stated that City Auditor and Clerk Robinson is the City's custodian of the records. Mayor Cardamone agreed. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the individual Commissioners have the responsibility to conduct business through the City Manager; that Commissioner Quillin's opinion is respected; however, personal opinion differs. Commissioner Hogle stated that obtaining the services of a facilitator should be considered. Commissioner Quillin stated that the proposed resolution should be submitted to the State's Attorney General for a ruling; that the State law is quite specific; that disclosing an individual's name is not necessary to obtain public records; that a Commissioner should not have to sacrifice a right by being required to acquire records through the City Manager. Mayor Cardamone requested clarification of the relationship of the City's Oath of Office requiring the upholding of the City Charter and the rights of an ordinary citizen who has become an elected official with a contract concerning the City Charter. City Attorney Taylor stated that the proposed resolution provides definitively public records may be requested as allowed by law; however, State law has never attempted to regulate the City Manager's being advised if a Commissioner requests and receives a public record; that a reason for keeping a secret of records provided cannot be imagined; that the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk has always advised as to public records provided if requested. Mayor Cardamone stated that providing all Commissioners with special information requested has always been a comfortable policy from a personal perspective; however, the proposed resolution appears to have slightly different provisions. BOOK 47 Page 19130 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19131 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. City Attorney Taylor stated that requesting a record through the City Manager's Office cannot be a condition to obtaining the record; that such a restriction is not possible. City Manager Sollenberger stated that records may be obtained either through the City Manager's Office or the custodian of the records; that clarification of language in the proposed resolution is necessary to alleviate confusion. Mayor Cardamone stated that the language is not personally confusing. City Manager Sollenberger stated that an institute for City Managers sponsored by the Florida City and County Management Association was recently attended; that similar topics were discussed; that the recently-retired City Manager of Fort Lauderdale and the City Manager of Tallahassee were asked the manner in which matters regarding access to public records is addressed; that the response was staff should be asked if a question can be answered by staff; that reporting a pothole, etc., should be reported to the appropriate department; however, requests for action or time - consuming research should be through the City Manager; that the City Charter provides the Commission will deal with employees through the Administration; that adoption of a resolution such as proposed will clarify appropriate procedures; that the resolution is a facilitation to avoid questions as to possible violations of the City Charter; that several facilitators are available if the Commission wishes to obtain such services. Mayor Cardamone stated that a motion has been made to conduct a workshop; that the motion does not include working with a facilitator regarding group dynamics; that the language of the proposed resolution should not be revised until the workshop is conducted. City Attorney Taylor concurred. Commissioner Quillin asked if review by the State's Attorney General is desired? Vice Mayor Pillot asked if an opinion of the State's Attorney General is binding on the Commission? City Attorney Taylor stated that the opinion of the State's Attorney General is persuasive but not binding. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that opinion is advisory. City Attorney Taylor stated that the Attorney General provides advisory opinions with the caveat "unless legislatively or judicially determined otherwise"; that lawyers are fond of saying the opinion of the State's Attorney General is the opinion of another lawyer; that the Commission can respond the resolution was legislatively adopted if the Attorney General determines the Commission erred in adopting the proposed resolution. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that a Commissioner would have the right to take the resolution to a court of competent jurisdiction over the Commission. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to schedule a workshop to review the Admimistration's proposed resolution regarding guidelines for facilitation of communication between Commissioners and Staff and to provide additional time for review by the Commission and the City Attorney's Office to assure no legal problems exist. Motion carried (4 to 1): Hogle, yesi Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, no; Cardamone, yes. 23. NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL RE: PARK EAST NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION STRATEGY - APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED STAFF TO IMPLEMENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION STRATEGY PLAN (AGENDA ITEM VII-3) #3 (2997) through (3441) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration's recommendation is to approve the recommendations incorporated in the Park East Neighborhood Action Strategy (NAS) Plan and authorize Staff to implement the Plan; that research will be required into possible available funds for items not funded; that not all required funds are readily available; however, many resources are currently at the City's disposal to implement the Plan. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that five representatives of the Park East neighborhood are in the audience and have signed up to speak; that undoubtedly, the neighborhood representatives will request implementation of the Plan; that the Commission considers the Plan a high priority; that seeing the neighborhood representatives' agreement, Staff's recommendation will be received and a motion to approve the Plan will be made prior to receiving public input. Gregory Horwedel, Director of Neighborhood Development, came before the Commission and stated that in July 1999, the Commission directed Staff to identify specific neighborhoods north of Downtown, designated as walk-to-town neighborhoods, for particular emphasis; that beginning in August 1999, Staff worked with neighborhood residents and received considerable input into developing the Plan, which is a business plan for neighborhood revitalization specifically in the Park East neighborhood; that other neighborhoods will be reviewed during the next several months; that the Plan should be considered a major accomplishment by Staff and the residents assisting with the Plan. BOOK 47 Page 19132 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19133 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Mason, it was moved to approve and authorize Staff to implement the Park East Neighborhood Action Strategy with the maximum funds the Administration can determine are available and recommend to the Commission. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that in eleven years on the Commission, no plan has been observed as being as well-prepared as the Park East NAS Plan; that utilizing community input under the leadership of Staff creates a good feeling. Commissioner Quillin stated that during Citizen's Input, a question was raised concerning the Eighth Street extension; and asked if an answer was received. Alexandrea Hay, Deputy Director of Engineering/Deputy City Engineer, came before the Commission and stated that two primary issues were raised at a January 25, 2000, neighborhood forum: 1. The failure to convert the Eighth Street stretch between Jefferson and Tuttle Avenues into a road 2. Traffic on Bruce Lane off Tuttle Avenue Ms. Hay stated that Staff has been contacted to attempt to install a sign indicating local circulation only on Bruce Lane; that many drivers make a U-turn on Bruce Lane from Tuttle Avenue continuing south on Tuttle Avenue; that an effort is being made to rectify the problem. Ms. Hay continued that a plan has been presented to convert the Eight Street stretch into a useable linear park; that no residents indicated the stretch should be converted into a road; therefore, Staff deemed the consensus of the neighborhood was to convert the stretch into a useable linear park. 24. NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION RE: NORTH COUNTY LIBRARY LOCATION PROPOSAL AT COHEN PARK - APPROVED NOT TO ENDORSE LOCATING THE NORTH COUNTY LIBRARY AT THE COHEN PARK SITE AND TO REQUEST THE SARASOTA BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER THE SITE ON DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. (MLK) WAY, EAST OF US 301, AND NEWTOWN BOULEVARD (AGENDA ITEM VII-2) #3 (3440) through #4 (0305) City Manager Sollenberger stated that the County is evaluating sites for construction of a new library in the northern area of the County; that opening a new library in north County will enable the County to meet the level of service (LOS) established for library services in Sarasota County's Comprehensive Plan, entitled Apoxsee; that the proposed library's 25,000-square-foot building, parking and stormwater management facilities will cover approximately three acres; that one potential site recommended by the Friends of the North County Library is a site at the City- owned Cohen Park at the intersection of Osprey Avenue and Myrtle Street, west of US 301; that locating the new library at Cohen Park would be utilizing park space and would be inconsistent with the City's Future Land Use Plan. David Smith, Senior Planner II, Planning and Development Department, came before the Commission and stated that the City's Future Land Use Plan identifies the site as in the Open Space- Recreation-Conservation (OSRC) land use classification which is intended to protect defined areas from development; that the City's Comprehensive Plan, also called the Sarasota City Plan, 1998 edition, indicates a library is not the most appropriate use for the site but also provides uses allowed by existing zoning would be deemed consistent; that the site is in the Governmental Use (G) Zone District, which provides for libraries as a permitted use; however, the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan is not to allow a library at the Cohen Park site. City Attorney Taylor stated that the word "intent" should be inserted in the Administration's Recommendation on the Agenda Request form to read as follows: Recommend motion to adopt Staff recommendation that the City not endorse locating the North County Library at the Cohen Park site because a library at this site is inconsistent with the intent of the City's Future Land Use Plan. Mayor Cardamone stated that word "intent" is important. Commissioner Mason stated that an alternate site in the area of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., (MLK) Way and Newtown Boulevard meets all the County's criteria for locating the new library; that a strongly held personal view is park land should not be taken for other uses; that the hope is to send a strong message to the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners (BCC) indicating park land will not be used for purposes other than recreational. Commissioner Hogle stated that the alternate site makes sense. Commissioner Quillin agreed; and stated that a considerable amount of development is occurring in the area, including a new church; that the City Commission could recommend the BCC consider the alternate site. Mayor Cardamone asked if the alternate site is publicly owned and available? BOOK 47 Page 19134 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19135 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Commissioner Mason stated that the alternate site is privately owned by one owner and meets all the County's criteria for locating the new library. On motion of Commissioner Mason and second of Vice Mayor Pillot, it was moved not to support locating the new County library at the Cohen Park site. Mayor Cardamone asked if the motion includes a recommendation to consider the alternate site? Commissioner Mason, as the maker of the motion, and Vice Mayor Pillot, as the seconder, stated yes. Mayor Cardamone stated that the City is working diligently to revitalize MLK Way between US 301 and 41; and asked the reason a site along MLK Way is not being considered for the new library? Commissioner Mason stated that one of the County's criteria is a minimum parcel size of three usable acres, which is not available on MLK Way between US 301 and 41. Mayor Cardamone stated that three acres may be required for a one-story library; that a two-story library which would not require as much land and would be more urban in character could be constructed; that constructing the new library in the core of the community should be considered. Commissioner Mason stated that the alternate site is between two schools. Mayor Cardamone stated that both schools have libraries. Commissioner Mason stated that the alternate site is close to the Urbaculture site and the Newtown Recreation Center; that adequate space is not available on MLK Way between US 301 and 41 with the other nearby amenities; that two other City-owned properties were on the County's list of possible sites. Mayor Cardamone stated that considering alternatives to building a public library across from two school libraries may be wise. Commissioner Quillin stated that combining resources was discussed at the November 17, 1999, joint meeting with the School Board of Sarasota County (School Board) i that the two schools near the alternate site are beautiful with excellent resources; that the County and the School Board should discuss the north County library together; that combining the resources of the school libraries and the proposed new County library may be possible. Mayor Cardamone stated that partnering facilities is of interest; that the School Board, which operates four libraries in north County, may not have an interest in becoming involved in the new County library. Commissioner Quillin stated that the Commission has discussed facilitating partnering arrangements. Commissioner Hogle stated that during personal visits to the Selby Public Library, people are seen who should not be around the public schools; therefore, partnering school and County libraries causes some nervousness from a public safety perspective. Mayor Cardamone restated the motion as not to endorse the Cohen Park site and to request the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners to consider the site on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., (MLK) Way, east of US 301, and Newtown Boulevard. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0): Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 25. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: REPORT RE: STATUS OF SOUTHEAST ANNEXATION STUDY - DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE A REFERENDUM FOR PHASE I OF THE SOUTHEAST ANNEXATION AREA AND REVISE THE SOUTHEAST ANNEXATION AREA CUSTOMER INCENTIVE PROGRAM TO INCLUDE PRIVATE PROPERTY SERVICE LINES (AGENDA ITEM VI-3) #4 (0305) through (0480) William Hallisey, Director of Public Works, and Dale Haas, Manager Technical Services Division, Public Works, came before the Commission. Mr. Hallisey stated that April 5, 1999, Regular meeting, the Commission accepted the Southeast Annexation Study Report and directed Staff to present the Report to neighborhood associations and the community to gain input and report back findings; that the Southeast Annexation comprises an area along Phillippi Creek from Bahia Vista Street to the mouth of Phillippi Creek near the Landings Shopping Center; that six meetings were held with neighborhood associations in the summer and fall of 1999; that the reaction was mixed; however, some neighborhoods are very interested in annexation, particularly neighborhoods which will be required to have sewers such as the Southgate neighborhood; that some residents have indicated an interest in considering the City's proposal if sewers are mandated and if the City offers a package competitive with the Countyi that Staff recommends a phased annexation program; and referred to a board display of a map. entitled Southeast Annexation Phase I. indicating the boundaries of the area targeted which is generally north of Bee Ridge Road along Phillippi Creek to the Pine Craft neighborhood and includes some selected properties south of Bee Ridge Road. BOOK 47 Page 19136 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19137 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. Mr. Hallisey stated that Staff recommends directing the Administration to prepare a referendum for annexation; that the exact boundaries of the annexation area may change with additional research; that Staff also recommends authorizing including the cost of the sewer connection from the home to the street in the customer incentive program; that the County is including the cost of the sewer connection in its program. Commissioner Quillin asked if a funding source for the cost of the sewer connection has been identified? Mr. Hallisey stated that the funding sources would be the revenues achieved in the area through the utility user fees and ad valorem fees. City Manager Sollenberger stated that the Administration recommends Staff be directed to prepare a referendum for Phase I of the Southeast Annexation Area and revise the Southeast Annexation Area customer incentive program to include the cost of private property service lines; however, approval will require the Staff devote considerable time to the annexation effort; that substantial resource time will be required; that the Commission should approve the recommendation to assure presentation of a solid position at the February 9, 2000, joint workshop with the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was moved to direct Staff to prepare a referendum for Phase I of the Southeast Annexation Area and revise the Southeast Annexation Area customer incentive program to include private property service lines. Motion carried unanimously (5 to 0) : Hogle, yes; Mason, yes; Pillot, yes; Quillin, yes; Cardamone, yes. 26. BOARD APPOINTMENTS: APPOINTMENT RE: SARASOTA HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD = APPOINTED LAYLA WILLIAMS (AGENDA ITEM VIII) #4 (0480) through (0850) Mayor Cardamone stated that the term held by Valerie Buchand on the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) Board of Directors has expired; that Ms. Buchand is filling the seat designated for a resident or an individual of low or very low income residing in the SHA's jurisdiction and receiving rent subsidy through a program administered by the SHA (tenant's seat) and is eligible for and interested in reappointment; that Ms. Buchand is President of the Janie Poe Neighborhood Association; that four candidates were interviewed for the position as SHA Board member, including Layla Williams whose application and resume are included in the Agenda materials; that several years ago, the opportunity was presented to appoint an SHA Board member for the tenant's seat; that former Commissioner Dupree, representing District 1, was opposed to the appointment of the President of any SHA Neighborhood Association to the SHA Board; that Ms. Buchand indicated an interest in continuing to serve as the President of the Janie Poe Neighborhood Association but also indicating the possibility of serving better by not attempting to serve both as SHA Board member and President of the Janie Poe Neighborhood Association; that Layla Williams is recommended for appointment to the tenant's seat for the SHA Board. Commissioner Mason stated that other SHA Board members have been President of a SHA Neighborhood Association; that the perception may be of taking a different approach; that previously, the other Commissioners also interviewed the candidates; that the reappointment of Ms. Buchand who has done an excellent job is supported. Mayor Cardamone stated that the other Commissioners may interview the candidates if desired; that the reference to taking a different approach is not understood. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that his personal practice has been to support and endorse the Mayor's appointment to the SHA Board, absent a basis for disagreement. On motion of Vice Mayor Pillot and second of Commissioner Hogle, it was movéd to endorse the Mayor's appointment of Layla Williams to the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) . Commissioner Quillin stated that a chronic problem with the SHA is the inability of the tenants to organize and accomplish results; that a meeting was held with Ms. Buchard, who is well respected by the SHA tenants; that the SHA Board member who occupies the tenant's seat is to provide good representation for the tenants at the Janie Poe and Cohen Way public housing complexes and McCown Towers; that not being contacted by the recommended appointee is surprising; that the application of Ms. Williams came through the SHA, which should not be determining representation on the SHA Board; that a key member of the SHA Board is the member occupying the tenant's seat; that the appointment seems out of the norm. Vice Mayor Pillot stated that the process of the recommended appointee contacting other Commissioners is excellent and has been followed recently but has not been the established practice. Commissioner Quillin stated that the process is good; that the greatest control is in the appointment to the SHA Board. Mayor Cardamone called for a vote on the motion to endorse the Mayor's appointment of Layla Williams to the Sarasota Housing Authority (SHA) Motion carried (3 to 2): Hogle, yesi Mason, noi Pillot, yes; Quillin, no; Cardamone, yes. BOOK 47 Page 19138 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19139- 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. 27. COMMISSION BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (AGENDA ITEM IX) #4 (0830) There were no Commission Board or Committee reports. 28. REMARKS OF COMMISSIONERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA - (AGENDA ITEM X) #4 (0850) through (1605) COMMISSIONER OUILLIN: A. stated that the hiring of the Director of Information Systems and Technology (IST) is exciting; and asked the status of the hiring of the Director of Human Resources? V. Peter Schneider, Deputy City Manager, came before the Commission and stated that the consultant was to meet with the final candidates on February 5 and 6, 2000, and will issue a report identifying the candidates recommended for on-site interviews during the week of February 7, 2000. B. stated that the earlier consideration of Ordinance No. 00-4193 providing for revisions to the Zoning Code (1998) was awkward and cumbersome; that an often followed standard practice is to review ordinances on a regular basis. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Commission previously discussed incorporating dates for review or expiration in ordinances; that Ordinance No. 00-4193 represented corrections to the recently adopted Zoning Code (1998), which was not a concern; that a date for review should be incorporated in ordinances; that for example, the City Charter is reviewed every ten years to determine if changes are necessary. City Attorney Taylor stated that Ordinance No. 00-4193 was to make revisions required as a result of adopting the Zoning Code (1998); that in applying the Zoning Code (1998), problems have developed which continue to require correction; that Ordinance No. 00-4193 is one of a series of ordinances to make minor scrivener corrections or clarifications from various departments and does not address substantive issues. Mayor Cardamone stated that in retrospect, eliminating the previous Zoning Code and acquiring a new one may have been preferable; however, the Commission did not have the will to do sO at the time; that change was drastically required; that the compromise to obtain a majority vote was to revise the existing Zoning Code. City Attorney Taylor stated that Ordinance No. 00-4193 contained too many changes; that changes and/or revisions should be presented in smaller increments. Mayor Cardamone stated that returning ideas for a practical method of regular review would be appreciated. City Attorney Taylor stated that ideas will be presented; that a review of the Sarasota City Code (1986 as amended), which will be a major undertaking, will also be conducted. COMMISSIONER MASON: : A. referred to the section in the February 1, 2000, Commission Information Memorandum concerning "Procedures to Notify Media When Bridge is Closed" included in the Agenda materials and asked if efforts could be coordinated with the Town of Longboat Key. Mayor Cardamone stated that coordination may best wait until the conclusion of the City's appeal of the ruling denying the City standing in the case involving the decision by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to build a high, fixed-span bridge. Commissioner Quillin stated that survey conducted by the Longboat Key Chamber of Commerce indicated many Longboat Key residents support construction of a bridge to Longboat Key. Mayor Cardamone stated that the number of Longboat Key residents supportive of a bridge to Longboat Key was interesting. COMMISSIONER HOGLE: A. stated that the appeal concerning the Ringling Causeway Bridge was not supported; however, the appeal may have been supported in the event of a tie vote; that the Commission is making the right decision in appealing the denial of standing. B. stated that construction of a new home on 1168 West Way Drive commenced in 1986; that the home is not yet completed; that the Building, Zoning and Code Enforcement Department is currently attempting to get the home completed or demolished; that the hope is for a resolution by March 31, 2000, or a demolition order will be sought; that the Commission should support Staff's efforts. C. distributed for Commission viewing photographs of an abandoned structure on 3470 Fruitville Road (Saravista Gardens) ; that the property is in bankruptcy; that any BOOK 47 Page 19140 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19141 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. legal efforts to correct the situation should be supported., Mayor Cardamone stated that the Commission has been supportive of Staff; that an update would be appreciated. Commissioner Quillin stated that the property is in bankruptcy court; therefore, the courts must give the City permission to enter the property. VICE MAYOR PILLOT: A. referred to a February 6, 2000, article in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune entitled "Sarasota Commission Relations Strained" and stated that the reporter unsuccessfully tried to contact him prior to writing the article, which was unfortunate; that two errors appeared in the article; that the first error was a reference to an "ancient" disagreement between Mayor Cardamone and himself, of which no recollection is recalled; that the source of the information acted in bad faith and without justification; that the only possible circumstance regarded possible school redistricting during his tenure as Superintendent of Schools for Sarasota County; that school redistricting has been and always will be controversial; that a friendship has existed with the Mayor for approximately three decades; that any difference of opinion with the public or members of School Board Staff would not cause a riff lasting three decades; that the source. of the information was incorrect and malicious; that the second error was a reference to an orchestration of the dismissal of now- Commissioner Quillin from the Nuisance Abatement Board; that the Nuisance Abatement Board through the Chairman and without dissent from any other member came to the Commission and requested the action; that the Commission acted on the basis of the recommendation; that the accusation of orchestration is malicious. Mayor Cardamone agreed; and stated that any prior difference of opinion is not pertinent to current relationships; that the writing of the article by people new to the community without prior history or checking sources is unfortunate; that the article was hurtful to all Commissioners; that exception is taken to several reported items; however, a correction will not be requested; that the Commission should work together and agree to disagree. Commissioner Hogle stated that the democratic process allows for vehement disagreement while still working as a team. Mayor Cardamone stated that elected officials can disagree on one subject and vote together on another. Commissioner Quillin stated that the front-page February 6, 2000, article would not have been written without the actions at an informal Commission meeting; that the basis for the story should be a reason for reflection; that a subject was broached at an informal meeting as a general discussion but turned into a personal attack, which was not appreciated nor deserved; that she was elected to the Commission seat; that issues can be discussed; that the Commission can work together on certain issues; that the identity of the individuals with whom the reporter spoke is not known; that a brief personal discussion with the reporter occurred; that the informal Commission meetings have been to discuss topics of interest to the Commission; that issues not personalities will be personally addressed, which may cause concern for some. Mayor Cardamone asked if interest continues to identify an individual to work with the Commission? Commissioner Mason stated yes; that the desire is to reach an agreement to agree to disagree; that a Commission majority would have to agree to identify an individual to work with the Commission. Mayor Cardamone stated that all Commissioners would have to agree. Commissioner Quillin stated that Commissioners were elected as representatives of the community; that some choose not to respect others; that the Commission deals with the issues; that personal attacks were delivered at the informal meeting; that some statements were made which were found offensive but were not personally made public; that the reporter was in attendance; that the taxpayers' money need not be wasted if all Commissioners do the job as representatives of the community. Mayor Cardamone asked if interest exists to hire an individual to work with the Commission? Commissioner Quillin stated that the job she was elected to do will be performed; that personalities will not be made a personal issue at the Commission table. 29. OTHER MATTERS (ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS (AGENDA ITEM XI) #4 (1605) through (1700) CITY MANAGER SOLLENBERGER: A. stated that the issue of the location of the transfer station for Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT) is on the Agenda of the February 9, 2000, joint workshop with the Sarasota Board of County Commissioners (BCC) i that BOOK 47 Page 19142 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. BOOK 47 Page 19143 02/07/00 6:00 P.M. the an update of the Downtown Sarasota: Master Plan for Tomorrow (May 1986) (CRA Master Plan) is in process; that a suggestion has been the former location of the House of Golf at 1515 Fruitville Road; that making a recommendation at this time is difficult. Mayor Cardamone asked if a decision can be delayed until the completion of the CRA Master Plan update? City Manager Sollenberger stated yes; that the County has an issue involving funding which must be resolved by June 2000; that a recommendation should be made upon the completion of the charette being conducted as part of the CRA Master Plan update in early May 2000. Mayor Cardamone stated that the Commission can act at that time. City Manager Sollenberger stated that a final determination may not be developed during the charette; that identifying other locations would be delayed; that the County should be told additional time may be required; that not determining the site during the charette will cause a major problem. 30. ADJOURN (AGENDA ITEM XII) #4 (1700) There being no further business, Mayor Cardamone adjourned the Regular meeting of February 7, 2000, at 11:41 p.m. OTA 7 Aatisc L MOLLIE C. CARDAMONE, MAYOR ATTESI L E Rolrenson BALKY, : ROBINSON, CITY AUDITOR AND CLERK