Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 8B_12/19/1991 ems,^,{,, e-^1 , VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA • ,�; Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive L lam ��- Tequesta. Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 l ~° FAX: (407) 575-6203 lavr MEMORANDUM : TO: Village Council FROM: Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manage DATE: December 11, 1991 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4-91/92; Sunsetting of the Palm Beach Countywide Planning Council; Agenda Item In regard to the above referenced, attached hereto, please find the following: O A copy of proposed Resolution No. 4-91/92 O Palm Beach County Municipal League Memorandum dated October 24, 1991 O A copy of Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter which pertains to the Countywide Planning Council O Correspondence from the City of Palm Beach Gardens O Copies of various news articles pertaining to this subject The Planning Council concept was approved by only 51% of the voters in 1986. Obviously, there was never any overwhelming ground swell of support for the concept. Most municipalities were against the Countywide Planning Council concept, and still are, as it is viewed as usurpation of municipal home rule authority. Ultimately, most municipalities accepted the Planning Council concept so long as its scope and authority was specific and limited. In a nutshell, its scope was to deal specifically with preparing the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Future Land Use Element and to, serve as a body for dispute resolution in the, area of interjurisdictional incompatibilities. The beginning of the end for the Planning Council was when its Board and staff headed in the , direction of broadly interpreting what sub-elements the County Land Use Element should include. In general, County appointees to the Planning Council wanted the broad interpretation and municipal appointees the limited interpretation. At one point, the Municipal League voted to remove some of its representatives that did not adhere to the "limited scope" philosophy. Recycled Paper MEMO: Village Council December 11, 1991 Page 2- As of this writing, eighteen of the necessary twenty cities have voted to "sunset" the Planning Council . Now, in a bizarre turn of events, Palm Beach County has taken the position that the Planning Council should be abolished. In its place, and this is subject to change, the County Commission wishes to amend the Charter in a Referendum in March of 1992 that will place countywide planning powers in the hands of non-other than the seven members of the Board of County Commissioners. This is ironic in that the record reflects, and will be revealed to the public in the days ahead, that on average, approximately two-thirds of all residential construction permits over the course of the last five or six years have been issued by Palm Beach County, the same group which insists that we need countywide planning in order to get control of growth management! This would amount to "allowing the fox to guard the hen house" . It is my recommendation that the Village Council adopt Resolution 4- 91/92, sunsetting the Palm Beach Countywide Planning Council. Such ' action will send an appropriate message to Tequesta residents and others relative to the importance of preserving municipal home rule authority and the inherent uniqueness of each community which has sought to incorporate itself for such purposes. 1992 will prove to be a critical battleground for this county vs. municipal struggle. The County has revealed its true intentions and desires to exert its power and influence within municipal boundaries. Municipalities and their citizens must find a way to band together in order to defeat and put to rest the movement toward remote and centralized power, otherwise known as "metro-government" . TGB/krb Attachments RESOLUTION NO. 4-91/92 A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO SECTION 7.19 OF THE CHARTER OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, VOTING TO REPEAL ARTICLE VII (COUNTYWIDE PLANNING COUNCIL) OF THE CHARTER OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; URGING SUPPORT FROM OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS; PROVIDING FOR DISTRIBUTION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter, specifically, Section 7.19 which is entitled "Repeal Provision", the local governments in Palm Beach County, through their governing bodies, have the ability to vote by Resolution to repeal the entire Article VII pertaining to the Countywide Planning Council within thirty (30) days prior to the fifth year anniversary of the effective date which was January 1, 1987, thus making the fifth year anniversary January 1, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta has determined it is in the interest of its citizens and the citizens of all local governments within Palm Beach County to repeal Article VII (Countywide Planning Council) of the Palm Beach County Charter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, as follows: Section 1. The governing body of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, hereby casts its vote by this Resolution to repeal Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter in accordance with Section 7.19 of the Charter which is entitled "Repeal Provision" and which provides that each local government in Palm Beach County has the authority, through its governing body, by Resolution to repeal the entire Article within thirty (30) days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date, which would be January 1, 1992. 1 Section 2. The governing body of the Village of Tequesta urges each and every local government in Palm Beach County to support this position and adopt a similar Resolution during the month of December, 1991. Section 3. The Village Clerk is hereby directed to distribute copies of this Resolution to the Palm Beach Countywide Planning Council, the Palm Beach County Municipal League, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS OFFERED by Councilmember , who moved its adoption. The motion was seconded by Councilmember and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: FOR ADOPTION AGAINST ADOPTION 7 [ The Mayor thereupon declared the Resolution duly passed and adopted this day of December, A.D. , 1991. MAYOR OF TEQUESTA Joseph N. Capretta ATTEST: Joann Manganiello Village Clerk 10-24-91 14:36 P.B. CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 320 P03/05 i t :nF . Palm Beach County MUNICIPAL LEAGUE _" :, , ; ;: P,O. BOX 1989, GOVERNMENTAL CENTER, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402(407)355-4484 MEMORANDUM TO: All Palm Beach County Mayors and Managers FR: Jack L. Horniman, P eA, Beach County Municipal League Executive Director /�'� DT: October 24 , 1991 RE: Article VII -- Palm Beach County Charter Countywide Planning Council The Board of County Commissioners of Palm teach County is proceeding toward a revision to'' Article VII of the County Charter which would expand the powers and scope of the Countywide Planning Council or abolish it in its entirety. They have prepared an ordinance for public hearings dates that have not been Set yet that would provide for a referendum to be placed before the voters of Palm Beach County on March 10, 1992 to accomplish this end. The ordinance specifically deletes the repeal provision (Section 7.19) of the current charter. This repeal provision was originally placed on the County Charter as part of the checks and balances to assure that all parties ' interests were protected from the Planning Council exercising powers and authority beyond the Charter's original intent. To date, the Countywide Planning Council has spent $2. 8 million tax dollars and its current budget for fiscal year 91-92 is $1,106, 278. The month of December is crucial to all local governments as this month represents the only 30 day period in the past five (5) years within which municipalities have had the ability to exercise, , if deemed appropriate, the repeal provision of Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter. As you are well aware, the Palm Beach County Municipal League has played an active role throughout the past year in working with the Palm Beach Countywide Planning Council _staff and their Countywide Future Land Use Element (CFLUE) Committee in developing a future land use element that meets the intent and purposes of Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter. After numerous hours of League participation and expenditure of funds and resources for extensive professional legal and planning expertise, a CFLUE was approved on July 1, 1991 by a 15 to 1 vote 10-24-B1 14:36 P. B.CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 320 PO4/05 All Mayors and Managers October 24 , 1991 Page 2 by the Planning Council acting as the Local Planning Agency (LPA) for Palm Beach County. The Planning Council recommended approval by the Board of County Commissioners who unanimously approved the CFLUE and transmitted it to the DCA at their public hearing held on July 22, 1991 . This revised approved CFLUE now tracks the language of the existing charter and is consistent with the scope and authority granted through the charter. Even though the League and the Planning Council mutually agreed on the content of the CFLUE, and the Board of County Commissioners finally agreed on the content of the CFLUE as presented, the Board of County Commissioners has introduced a proposed ordinance and ballot language to amend Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter. This action by the Board of County Commissioners is inconsistent with the creation of a harmonious relationship among the County, the Planning Council and the League working toward the unified planning of Palm Beach County. This action by the County negates the good faith efforts conducted by the parties in arriving at a workable solution in developing and approving a CFLUE this past year. As of this writing, the proposed revisions by this ordinance would "expand" the powers and the scope of the Planning Council or "abolish" it in its entirety. The proposed charter revision breaches the original agreement reached in 1986 between the municipalities and the County when Article VII of the charter was approved providing a checks and balances system to monitor the activities of the Planning Council . The League' s position over the past year has been consistent and unchanging. In short , the League has advocated that no charter revisions are necessary due to the agreement by all parties. Therefore, the League cannot support the proposed expansion of the powers and scope of the Planning Council . Further, the League would hope that the Board of County Commissioners would not jeopardize the future existence of the Planning Council, but would allow it to actually commence its charter mandated function. The Planning Council, the very body whose powers, functions and duties are being contested, adopted Resolution No. 91-5 on July 1, 1991 by a 12-4 vote. It is strongly noted that the 12-4 vote was not All Mayors and Managers October 24 , 1991 Page 3 a strict municipal/county split in vote. Three (3) of the County appointees on the Planning Council voted for this Resolution along with the municipal membership on the Council. This resolution requested the Board of County Commissioners to "table any discussion and refrain from the consideration of any changes to Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter. " If the Board of County Commissioners forces the issue regarding expansion of the powers of the Planning Council, the municipalities would be faced with making a decision to either exercise or not exercise the repeal provision of Article VII of the County Charter. It is emphasized that the Municipal League has not taken an official policy position on this issue. Each municipality will have to make this decision individually. Specifically, Section 7 . 19 which provides that a majority of local governments, voting by resolution of their governing bodies during the month of December 1991 have the authority to abolish the Planning Council by repealing Article VII of the charter. It is each municipality' s responsibility to place this item on its agenda for careful consideration during the month of December, 1991 since according to Section 7 .19 of the Palm Beach County Charter, if any action is desired, such action }rust be accomplished by resolution and must be taken within thirty (30) days prior to January 1, 1992 (i.e . during the month of December. ) A sample resolution is attached for your municipality' s reference and possible use. It is suggested that your clerk submit a certified copy of the resolution to the League office, the Board of County Commissioners and others cited in your resolution. Please forward a copy of any resolution your municipality adopts to the League office immediately upon adoption. Should you have further questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. 10-24-91 14:38 P.B.CO. MUNIrIrFL LEAGUE .5d0 re /erm RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE , PALK BEACH COUNTY, . FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO SECTION 7.19 OF THE CHARTER OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, VOTING TO REPEAL ARTICLE VII (COUNTYWIDE PLANNING COUNCIL) OF THE CHARTER OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; URGING SUPPORT FROM OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS; PROVIDING FOR DISTRIBUTION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter, specifically, Section 7.19 which is entitled "Repeal P:.. vision", the local governments in Palm, Beach County through their governing bodies have the ability to vote by Resolution to repeal the entire Article VII pertaining to the Countywide Planning Council within thirty (30) days prior to the fifth year anniversary of the effective date which was January 1, 1987 thus making the fifth year anniversary January 1, 1992; and ' - WHEREAS, The has determined it is in the interest of its citizens and the citizens of all local governments within Palm Beach County to repeal Article VII (Countywide Planning Council) of the Palm Beach County Charter; • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the , Florida: Section 1. The governing body of the , Florida,Aereby casts its vote by this Resolution to repeal Article VII of the Palm Beach County Charter in accordance with Section 7.19 of the Charter which is entitled • "Repeal Provision" and which provides that each local government in Palm Beach County has the authority, through its governing body, by Resolution to vote to repeal the entire article within thirty (30) days prior to the fifth year anniversary of the effective date, which would be January 1, 1992. Section 2._ The governing body of the urges each and every local government in • Palm Beach County to support this position and adopt a similar resolution during the month of December 1991. Section 3. The Clerk is hereby directed to distribute copies of this Resolution to the Palm Beach Countywide Planning Council, the Palm Beach County Municipal League, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the Florida Department of Community Affairs. . ,Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of December, 1991. , FLORIDA MAYOR ATTEST: CLERK • T1•\Rc.onitttl PMT. 12-02-91 12:28 P.U.Lis. r:uNiLirru. Ltr+Laut r G+G Uhsbst 1 I 7l PALM BEACH COUNTY CODE t ' 3 ARTICLE VII. COUNTYWIDE PLANNING COUNCIL' Sec. 7.1. Creation of Palm Beach County Planning Council. There is hereby created the Palm,Beach County �Planning Coun• cll. hereinafter referred to as the planning 86.30. § 2, 9-9-86) Sec. 7.2. Purpose. The planning council is hereby established to ensure land e tive harmonious development of a countywidefutureue of as plan element. to coordinate the land use planning process ll governments within the county. and to establish a cooperative effort that will resolve, or more importantly, prevent incompati• bilities and conflicts among local governments' land use plan- ning efforts. (Ord. No. 86•30, § 2,9.9-86 Sec. 7.3. Definitions. (1) Local government Any county or municipality. as defined in chapter 163, Florida Statutes. (2) lnterjurisdicBionol incompatibility which couldall be ed as a impact a po- tential implementation of a localplan other local government and which: (a) Creates a potential unplanned financial burden on one (1) or more local governmental entities: or (b) Creates potential incompatible land uses. density or inten• sity adjacent to one (1) or more local governmental enti- ties; or (c) Adversely impacts one (1) or more local governmental en- tities; or 'Editois note--Ord. No. S6-30.adopted Sept-9. 1986. from which this article is derived.was approved et an election held Nov.4. 1986.to become effective Jan. 1. 1987. Code references—County davelopmeet boardtoa 37: planning ebh d.c. 34; plats and platting of land,ch. 35: miscellaneous a p vision and platting regulations.app.A:toning code.app. B. $upp. No. 51 C.10 12-02-91 12:28 P.b.CO. MUN1L1F'HL UtHIAUt 9104 1-e-1 • 3 CHARTER b 7 4 (di Creates an excess demand on the infrastructure or natural resources of one (1) or more local governmental entities. 'Ord. No. 86.30, 4 2, 9.9.86) Sec. 1.4. Membership. There shall be seventeen (17) members of the planning council, all of whom re•:de in Palm Beach County: (a) Six (6) members shall be duly appointed by the county commission within ninety t90) days of the effective date of this article (January 1, 19811. One (1) appointee shall be a member of the board of county commissioners. Two (2) or more appointees may be members of the board of county commissioners, except that nothing contained herein shall be construed to permit a majority of the board of county commissioners to be so appointed. A minimum of four (4) appointees shall reside in the unincorporated area of Palm Beach County. 16) wine (9) members shall be duly appointed by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, 4nc., in the following manner Three(3) members shall be appointed one(1)from each of the three (3) most populated municipalities in the county as determined by the most recent estimates estab- lished purulent to section 186.901. Filmic- Statutes. Any reappointment of those members initially appointed from the three (3) most populated municipalities shall be de- termined bus upon the most recent population estimates as established pursuant to section 186.901, Florida Stat- utes. Appointments or reappointments made pursuant to this section shall be made from nominations received from the three (3) most populated municipalities as described herein. The six (6) remaining at-large appointments shall be made by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. No more than one (1) municipal appointee shall repre- sent any single municipality. (c) The Palm Beach County School Board shall appoint one (1) of its members as a representative. • Sapp. Na S1 C,1 i %• 12-02-91 12:29 P.B.CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 404 PO4 • PALM BEACH COu'NTY CODE t 7 S �d► The South Florida Water Management District shall ap. point one (1) representative. • (ei All appointments shall be ratified by the board of county commissioners unless a majority of the board of county commissioners plus one 11► rejects the appointment within thirty (30) days after receiving notice of the appointment. Should an appointment be rejected by the board of county commissioners, the appointing entity shall submit another name for ratification until all positions are filled. , (f) Should any appointing entity not present the board of county commissioners its appointment for ratification within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this article (Janu- ary 1. 1987), then, in that event, the board of county corn• missioners shall fill the position pursuant to the require- ments of this section. (Ord. No. 86.30, 4 2, 9.9.86) Sec. 7.5. Vacancies. Any appointing entity may remove and replace any of its ap- pointees at any time by majority vote of the appointing entity. Vacancies shall be filled by the appointing entity. with ratifica- tion by the board of county commissioners. In the event appointments for filling a vacancy are not submit- ted to the county commission upon the expiration of a term, the • planning council shall notify the appointing entity that an ap- pointment must be made within a sixty-day period from the time of notification. The former appointee shall serve until replaced. If an appointment is not made within the sixty-day period, then the planning council by majority vote of all its members shall make such appointments in accordance with the criteria established in this. section and submit them for ratification. The term of a planning council member shall become vacated upon his death. resignation, forfeiture of membership. or removal from member- ship in any manner prescribed by law. Such vacancy shall be filled in the manner described herein.(Ord. No. 86.30, 4 2,9.9-86) Svpp, No. 51 .; C•12 1 • _ 1C-t7C-71 1Ci-MO r.d. LU. I'IUIV1L11'IiL Ltril7UC 404 rk.7 i ti ; 6 CHARTER t 7 $ Sec. 7.6. Terms of office. Members shall be appointed for a term of three 131 years after the initial staggered appointments. The staggered appointments are as follows! The South Florida Water Management District member. two (2)county commissioner appointees. three (3) municipal league appointees including one (1) of the three (3) most•populated municipality appointees shall be appointed for three (31 years. The school board member, two (2) county commissioner ap- pointees, and three (3) municipal league appointees including one (1) of the three (3) most•populated municipality appointees shall be initially appointed for two (2) years. The remaining appointees shall initially serve one•year terms. (Ord. No. 86.30, 2, 9.9.86) Sec. 7.7. Administration. (a) The planning council shall employ an executive director who shall hire such other administrative,.professional, expert and clerical assistants as are necessary to carry out the duties authorized by this Charter and as provided for in the planning council's adopted budget. (b) The planning council shall,adopt reasonable rules of procedure to govern the conduct of its meetings and the performance of its . duties. (Ord. No. 86.30, ! 2, 9.9.86) Sec. 7.8. Preparation and adoption procedures. Each local government in Palm Beach County shall, upon re- quest, furnish the planning council with its current adopted com- prehensive plan.The planning council shall then make a compos- ite of land use plans received and shall analyze the composite plans for potential interj 'ctional incompatibilities as defined herein and shall so advise the affected local government of its findings. All local governments to be affected by potential interjurisdictional incompatibilities as defined herein shall be notified in writing by the planning council as to the specific nature of the potential interjurisdictional incompatibilities. The affected local governments shall be given an opportunity to re- Sem No. 51 tr. 1C"IOC-mil IC;-317 r. rnL LCnl1VC 'fu'? rrJG r ' 7 S PALM BEACH CO1:NIl CODE t79 spond in writing to the planning council regarding the incompat• ibilities, and the planning council shall consider and evaluate the merits of the- responses. The planning council shall then hold public hearings on the composite plan. noting to the public all potential interjurisdictional incompatibilities identified in the composite of the land use plans received ments and the responses received from the affected local govern. ments. The planning council shall then prepare a proposed countywide future-land use element. pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes, considering the potential interjurisdictional in- compatibilities as identified in the composite plan and the com• ments received at the public hearings. The planning council. in preparing the countywide future land use element, shall be lim. ited to the composite plan identified above, and shall only modify that composite plan when interjurisdictional incompatibilities as defined above exist. The planning council shall provide a draft of the proposed countywide future land use element to each local government and request written comments. If the planning council concurs with the local government, it shall modify the proposed countywide future land use element accordingly. If the planning council does not concur with the local government, it shall then conduct public hearings on the proposed countywide future land use element and shall recommend for- adoption by the board of county commissioners a countywide future land use element pur• suant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The board-'of county corn- ' . missioners shall adopt the countywide future land use element prepared by the planning council by a majority vote of the entire commission. A majority of the board of county commissioners plus one (1) shall be required to make any amendment, addition or deletion to the countywide land use element as recommended by the planning council. The board of county commissioners, in adopting the countywide land use element, shall not establish more-intense land uses or higher densities than provided for by any local government's adopted land use element without the express consent of the local government. (Ord. No, 86.30, 4 2, 9.9-66) Sec. 1.9. Effective date. The countywide future land use element shall take effect one (1)year from the date of adoption by the board of county commis• Sapp. No. 5i) C-14 • 12-02-91 12;31 P.B.CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 404 Pal 1 ; 9 CHARTER stoners and shall be the adopted land use element pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes. for each local government. unless the local government's adopted plan has been certified by the planning council as consistent with the adopted countywide fu• ture land use element. If any local government's plan is not certified as consistent by the planning council, the countywide future land use element shall prevail. Where a local plan has been certified, it shall serve as the countywide land use element for that' area. In the event a future land use incompatibility has arisen be- tween two (2) or more local governments prior to the effective date of this article V11 (January 1. 1987], and in the event that such local governments are then currently litigating such incom- patibilities, the planning council shall suspend a determination regarding consistency of those matters in conflict between such local governments until such conflict has been resolved by litiga- lion, and a final order entered, following final appeal. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit any local government from adopt- ing more restrictive land uses than provided for by the countywide future land use element. (Ord. No. 86.36, 4 2, 9.9.86) Sec. 7.10. Evaluation and appraisal report. Not more than once every two (2) years, the planning council shall prepare an evaluation report of the .adopted countywide future land use element pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Stat. utes. The evaluation report shall identify the success and failure of the countywide future land use element in reviewing the land use planning of all local. governments within the county and noting the potentiality of incompatibilities between local gov- ernment's land use plans. (Ord. No. 86.30, $ 2, 9.9.86) • Sec. 7.11. Review process. The adopted countywide land use element shall be transmitted to each local government. Within a period of time specified by procedural rule, each local government shall, if necessary, pro- pose modifications to its land use element and related elements to make them consistent with the adopted countywide land use element and tratasutit the local land use element, related ele• Supp. Na 51 C-15 1t:Jt h'.C.LU. I1uN Llt'HL Lt 1IaUt 4b4 r'I0C Li PALM BEACH COUNTY CODE ' ' i t ments and any proposed amendments to the planning council. The planning council shall review, within a period of time speci- fied by procedural rule, submitted local elements. including pro- posed amendments, if any, and determine whether or not they are consistent with the countywide land use element. 'a) If found to be consistent, the planning council shall certify the local land use element and related•elements. If the elements as certified included proposed amendments. the local government shall adopt those amendments pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The local government shall forward the, adopted amendments to the planning council within thirty (30) days. If the adopted local amend- ments are different from the proposed amendments which formed the basis of the certification by the planning coun- cil, the local elements shall be resubmitted for certification. (b) If found to be not consistent, the planning council shall identify inconsistencies and specify the modifications to the local elements that are necessary to make it consis- tent. Upon being notified by the planning council that the local elements are not consistent with.the countywide land use element, the local government may then propose amend- ments to the local elements and transmit the proposed amendments to the planning council.The planning council shall review the submitted local land use element and related elements and proposed amendments within a pe- riod of time specified by procedural rule. Upon finding that the proposed amendments to the local land use elements are consistent with the countywide land use element, the planning council shall certify same. The local government shall adopt those amendments pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The local government shall then forward the adopted amendments to the planning council. If the adopted local amendments are different from the proposed amendments which formed the basis of the certification by the planning council, the local elements shall be resubmit• ted for certification. If the planning council finds that the local elements are still not'consistent with the countywide land use element, it shall identify such inconsistencies and Stipp No. Si c•Id •i. 12-02-91 12:32 P.B.CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 404 PM 11 CHARTER f 7 14 specify the modifications to the local elements that are necessary to make it consistent. The provisions of this paragraph shall apply to all subsequent proposed amend. ments transmitted to the planning council in respon8e to the inconsistencies identified and modifications suggested by the planning council in earlier reviews. (Ord. No. 86.30. 3 2. 9.9.86) • Sec. 7.12. Amendments. Amendments to the adopted countywide land use element shall be initiated only by a local government or the planning council. Any amendment initiated by the planning council shall be based on the evaluation and appraisal report. These amendments shall be adopted by the board of county commissioners in the same manner as provided for in the original plan adoption. All amend- ments initiated by a local government must be transmitted to the board of county commissioners with a recommendation by the planning council. Any amendment proposed by a local govern- ment that is not recommended for ap roval by the planning council can only be approved by a majority of the board of county commissioners plus one (1). (Ord. No. 86.30. 4 2, 9-9.86) Sec. 7.13. Consistency requirement. All other related elements of the local goyernment's compre- hensive plan shall be made consistent with the adopted countywide land use element, and all developments undertaken by and all actions taken in regard to development orders by governmental agencies shall be consistent with the adopted countywide land use element. (Ord. No. 86.30, 4 2, 9.9-863 See. 7.14. Planning council as local planning agency. The planning council shall be designated the local planning agency pursuant to chapter 163, Florida Statutes, for all local governments within Palm Beach County only for the purposes expressed within this article. Further, this section shall not be. come effective until the planning council has prepared a proposed countywide tltture land use element in accordance with section 7.8. (Ord. No. 86.30, 12, 9.9-86) Sup No.51 C•17 •' 12-02-91 12:33 P.B. CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 404 P10 • 7 13 PALM BEACH COLNTY CODE 7 Is Sec. 7.15. Funding The planning council shall annually adopt a budget and sub. mit it to the board of county commissioners. The board of county commissioners shall provide the funds requested by the planning council unless a majority of the board plus one (1) rejects or modifies the proposed budget. The county shall fund the planning council each year in an amount reasonably sufficient to permit the planning council to accomplish its responsibilities. (Ord. No. 86.30. 3 2, 9.9.86) Sec. 7.16. Contracts, gifts and grants. The planning council may enter into contracts, perform studies and may accept gifts, grants, and/or assistance from federal, state or local governmental units or agencies for the conduct of its work and the realization of its objectives, provided that no condi. Lion or limitation be attached, nor any conflict be generated inconsistent with its duties under this article. (Ord. No. 86-30. 1 2, 9-9-86) Sec. 7.17. Legal rights. If a person, firm or corporation has, by actions in reliance on prior regulations, obtained vested or other legal rights that in law would have prevented a local government from changing those regulations in a way adverse to its interests, then nothing • in,this Charter authorizes any governmental agency to abridge those rights. Nothing in this section authorizes any governmen- tal agency to adopt a rule or regulation or issue any order that is unduly restrictive or constitutes a taking of property without the payment of full compensation, in violation of the Constitution of the State of Florida or of the United States. (Ord. No. 86.30, 4 2, 9-9-86) Sec. 7.18. Prevalence over municipal ordinances. The countywide land use element ordinance adopted by the board of county commissioners pursuant to chapter 263, Florida • Statutes, and this article shall prevail over municipal land use element ordinances as provided for in article 1, section 3 of this Sapp. No. 51 C-18 . . • • 12-02-91 12:34 P. B. CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 404 P11 4 7 18 CHARTER I 719 Charter. The intent of this article is to provide countywide uni- formity which will best further the interests of the citizens of Palm Beach County. This article shall permit regulatory pre- emption but shall never be interpreted by the planning council or -the board of county commissioners as a transfer of functions or powers relating to municipal services. (Ord. No. 86.30. 4 2. 9.9.86) Sec. 7.19. Repeal provision. This article of tht Palm Beach County Charter shall be re- pealed five (S) years from its effective date (January 1, 1987), or • upon a five•year multiple thereafter if a majority of local gov- ernments in Palm Beach County, through their governing bod- ies, by resolution, vote to repeal this article within thirty (30) days prior to the fifth year anniversary of the effective date or any subsequent five-year multiple of the anniversary of the effec- tive date. (Ord. No. 86.30, 4 2, 9.9.86) • • • •$�pp No. bl' (Tice Deg page is C481 C•19 12-02-91 12:34 P.-8.CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 404 P12 • • CHARTER COMPARATIVE TABLE. Ot'Ana Dee Adoption iecdon Nu=ber Dele Date Section Disposition 841 9-11.84 11. 684 1.1--4.4 1.1 • i 4 86.26 8.26.86 11. 4.86 -2 6 d 86.27 8.26.86 11. 4.86 2 2.5 86.28 8.26.36 11. 4.86 2 1.3. 3 3 86.29 8.26.86 11. 4.86 2 1.3 86.30 9. 9486 1:- 4.86 2 1.3. 7.1-7.19 • • • Ms nett page is 11 Stipp. No. 51 C-69 CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS 10500 N.MILITARY TRAIL • PALM BEACH GARDENS.FLORIDA 33410-4698 • (407)775-8200 /F` 1 -ovember 22, 1991 pG K? o MAYOR VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA P.O. BOX 3273 TEQUESTA, FL 33458 Dear MAYOR: The City Council of Palm Beach Gardens held a regular meeting on Thursday, November 21, 1991. At this meeting, a policy consensus was reached to adopt Resolution 109,- 1991 at our December 5, 1991 regular meeting. Resolution 109, 1991 would exercise our option under Article VII, Section 7.19, the Charter of Palm Beach County to repeal the Countywide Planning Council and its various authorities. Our City Council was firm in'reaching the decision to repeal Article VII. However, if the Board of County Commissioners were to consider abandoning its March charter referendum proposals to amend and/or abolish the Countywide Planning Council (Article VII of County Charter) our council members indicated a willingness to, possibly, reconsider the above referenced policy. This BOCC policy statement would have to be in place by December 1, 1991. Further, an interlocal agreement or other binding document would need to be offered with conditions to leave Article VII in place, as presently worded and constituted, for the next five years. We offer the above for your information and consideration only. It is shared in the spirit of intergovernmental cooperation and communication. inc rely, Michael Martino Mayor MM/er cc: City Council Board of County Commissioners t..\ Commission criticized for is handy of growth panel By MATT PRICHARD •ed to weaken municipal authority, Patin Beach Post Staff Writer while most county appointees said WEST PALM BEACH — If a weak council would be ineffec- coumty commissioners want more tive. A compromise temporarily power over the county's growth, eased the conflict early this year. they should make their intentions Smith advised the commission county group t voters, the old om ba]anct tinkering with the council's mi.4sioners Tuesday. balance�of power. . "Way don't.we be straight?Lay voters can tell...that the the cards on the Sable.Winner taw. pig council so far has been a all... said Dale,Smith; executive pretty substantial waste.of mon- e Smith said. The council has director of theonsic Council of Beachpkinty Inc. done little,he said,except to serve ;e Bairnas.a source for embarrassing pub- ` ' ' 'a ooke �'0°��O° licity about 'the bickering.of city• • ed•a teopoaal to ask voters • and county leaders. C +give-the taxpgerusupported "It's becominganother • CaNnt y ode planning Council more hot-dog '. power over growth,igside city um- ilvesujor issue. It's a tar baby that .it1. voters also 'be given the::: Won't,:.go away, because,nobody's . , • �9 +bean honest. It is apower.; jcounty p chance to dissolve the council or.;NAY g water shortages. Marcus•said the job.If the with the leave it as is - ': ....istrog 1e,"Smith said. . . ',' Municipal League had blocked ef- : ballot question, "Our stated goals `..' :04e proposal:would:dilate .,;%"may don't you be honest with 'forts to deal with countywide prob- of improving communications anti j: pa of the D,gigeipal fyeagoe, s:<,;the voters and ask the voters if they. a lems.. '. . • 'relations with county government f. coalition of�eitp:governments with--�wantxto give the Board of County But Michael Martino,president - .would be severely jeopardized,".he a majority on the council's board Commissioners. clear ' authority- 'of the Municipal League and mayor 'said. The council, created by voters over land use and planning?" •; of Palm Beach Gardens,denied the ' Commissioners;'who could nqt in 1986,has spent about$3 million Commission Chairman Karen charge. Martino'said cities "don't agree on the wording of the pro- .while being virtually paralyzed by Marcus said a stronger council is want anybody to dictate to us." posed ballot questions, said they . a power struggle. City leaders ar- needed because no one is planning ` Commissioners, Martino said, would discuss the issue at a future gued some council members want- ahead for future problems such as should allow the council to do its workshop. . • • ' Countywide 3 owth fan Planning Council's fate may rest with voters g COUNCIL from 1 C years,it went through three execu- council had created.With a bloc of cities agree by resolution. :r' Ci Uiil��111g • wrote is too vague. tive directors and completed guide- nine representatives who would re- But the biggest blow to thud Eventually,the fate of the coun- lines for only one of 10 areas it ject the policies,the council's lead- council's work came from the stag agreed to regulate. ershiphad no choice but to start cil may be placed into the hands of Department of Community Affairs. Council voters, who would evaluate a 'Timing killed us' over or start compromising. who issued a review saying then Council may send board that has been mired in con- Then,as the local governments By June,the anger had shifted Planning Council's policies did .. troversy since before voters ap were attempting to meet the state's to the county's appointees,who said meet requirements and was vagu issue back to voters• proved its creation in 1986. requirements for their individual they felt the new compromise plan Planning Council officials said' Large cities,including Boynton comprehensive land-use plans, undermined the Planning Council. the language creating the co By ANGIE FRANCALANCIA Beach, Lake Worth and Delray they didn't want to undergo another "The majority now favor this specifically limited how much . guaranteedrepre- review bybodywatered-down version," said Ken the state statute should apply,b Palm Beady Pose scary writer Beach, wanted a that hadn't decid-Five years ago,a county com- sentation on the council, a move ed what it would review. Adams, former County Commis- state officials said the statu small cities immediatelyfought. "Timing killed us," said Pete sioner and appointee 'No missioner told her colleagues that H from the couldn't be used in part. they sold out in their compromise To win support from the municipal- a entel, an Council.1.inal members e m of South Florida Water Management Now county commissioaet i to create a countywide growth ities, county representatives Planning begged District. "I frankly think it would must be clear and honest iftbe as management plan. • agreed ts on thecouncil.them the majority of the itiehe cities w to erevol eentren entrenched with us. be kind of a hoax for the taxpayers voters to change the Pla ynnin "I felt there were so many corn- with as soon as voters approved with trying to meet the state's f becausethey think they're paying Council,said Dale Smith,eaecutiv promises made it was doomed tocountywideplanning, but director of the Economic Council. failure and it was going to be a it,no one agreed on what the voters plans they didn't have time for us." they're not." veryexpensive experiment," had approved. The proposal that finally "Whenyou reallyboil it out a P Pe P P County commissioners adopted County Commissioner Dorothy Wil- "When they used the term plan- emerged late last year included the plan in July and sent it to the Set honest, the county wants ken said."It's wasted money, ning,it meant something different Policies that would regulate trans- certain level of authorityover Y state Department of Community • and effort." to every person,"Wilken said. portation, housing, agriculture, Affairs for approval.They also be- cities they do not currently have,44. • Wilken is watching her predic- Municipal officials wanted a coastal management, education, gun a plan to ask voters to recon- Smith said."I don't think the peopl historic preservation, public ser- know or care anythingabout people, lion come true as county commis- narrow interpretation of the char- struct the Planning Council's mem- vices,water and the environment. Planning Council.But if you ask th sioners work to recast the Palm ter under which the Planning Coun p. Public hearings are y Beach Countywide PlanningAnd some of the policies were Simi- voters straight forward if the ywi Conn- cil was created, giving it limited scheduled to discuss the proposal In H cil to their liking. powers and giving them the reputa- lay to those in the county's compre- December and January. want to transfer planning ,tee The idea was to create a body lion of obstructionists. Others hensive land-use plan. from the cities to the county, ,� that would oversee planning wanted the council's powers inter- Compromise called hoax State delivered big blow will tell you yes or no." •ia throughout Palm Beach County preted broadly, covering such is- Angry municipal officials Meanwhile, municipal mem- Wilken is not surprised thei and would replace the defunct Area sues as the environment, afford- vowed to rein in the Planning Conn- hers are debating whether they county is going back to the voters. Planning Board,which had no en- able housing and traffic. cil.The Municipal League replaced should abolish the council. They "I guess it has been a brave forcemeot power. Internal problems also hurt the three of Its council appointees who can do so in 30 days of the council's experiment and the outcome.was Five years and$3 million later, Planning Council. In ,;s first two favored the broad policies the five-year anniversary,d,sn. 1,if 20 predictable," ie said. i a countywide plan that is crawling through the approval process likely - will be destroyed before it's used. County officials who agreed to allowing the municipalities nine of the 17 appointees on the Planning Council want to change it so cities • won't have a majority vote. City officials want to kill the council before letting it fall into the county's hands.And state officials, who must approve the countywide • plan before it takes effect,say the compromise language the council , Please see COUNCILAIC ' ea_ • I fl.'iI '1 11 �q} , ;) ';: ; ,rp.� t. • •sB►N BRAN , 1 • ' f�• ri, � 'I; r �., r 1 •1T'(�r mat.i id 4��14�� • $' r I r F � ', , 5 > T. . • I s t cos ; 1`•, {ki is r • 1 1 Vq Offf�'S'C�a • e t • . ' . tdl Mach 'inl6ne " ow t� . r 'i fi1y'V!dp' ,, .tee ;r,a - •i., . • , i i 1 ow/Abet Palm Beach County red•:• ' t �ents have poured 13 tnihlon into; I ; bogus''countywlde ptanntnL� 1_ I 1 Ouncll,'they should Life their re• G i ''/ malnIn strength t eigje March.'' '10 ort their caleedere. • , „ • , ; 1% �, There the dap they're tentatively scheduled`�' �_ i • jinx,ote on whether they want to keep on pour: ' F CF -r1 ' .a..it:e : S;: 4,O QGF 0A• And unilke my Aunt Min,I'm not convinced �l • e that a big fat NO lea foregone coneluskn. '`tt .' 9 • "But who'd be goofy enough to vote year 'fir �- • '�G/,4�O1'99, she riled Ihereb revealing the hisb for her'. /,+ • mlaptat�tlpllm erts.,r' ' 'i�. OFF Qej�. 0 . '' 1 Isn't of f the voters will have the slightest'; N.' CF 'Sr • clue di whether they're yes or no.it t • Isn't,after all,as If they willill be be asked i simple ` // question,such al,"Do you want 14 keep pour-•t 'V ..........t/ Ingrv� 1.s 1 baOr Do you want to throw good Money after • Or,"Do proponents of the Countywide Plan- -j ning Council,elected or otherwise,deserve your trust after frittering away—or acgwesc- .! • tog id the frittering away of--13 million to • las dollars on an I11•concelved,loophole-ridden, '• no-chance scheme whose tole accomplishment_' • i lst since Its Inception has been the frittering ay • of that 13 millionr"i;' ' (ir +That would make tt too easy1,`. ;• No .No questions like that. I le,.k. •. • . • 'Listen,Aunt Min,"I said,"the refers um • will be brokep inty,twp or three aeparetfquec-•t• tioAa,and lhd one that teas previewed for the eommissionere last actually eontolm 74' - - - .. - - "You'a kidding.."':.. i4...i'. "No.It asks,'Shall the Palm Beach County „ - Charter be amended to strengthen the repot]- , 'thitity enercised by the Countywide Planning • Council related to growth management end • dopllon of policies end riorrrtt��rnce stab-�, i• '�a tebleb 1Esd1' I etif FE t Id!=y- . . s aid thepteb1 '1 'r again,AdntMin"..r pf � ''.'' • R�hoopl,sorry„she dsjd_"/iteeni ii ve I dozed oI! ,y t }uyt ' E I Adel lhetNfi lied ��able Oltteo a bf tb a. . >, . Vote ill Mink j'hel, a will be t'c ed'Inlo l: , t ■int�gg and/ ibllnj(( F' !Aa the�' ' rot place. "{ ilFv Bi•f: r - Tbat wit to 1986;tohe they Seen 1610 thil'• i • 6 ! h knell 0,414 oddreaa letuea that talent! .� • II y6nd municipal btidlldar and sg! 11cle,; . . I. that would abort t<liirttlo gtelt1tl�log1-s( cal fashion.•V. t' t!' I}.' r ' • "Good Idea Old 'Coterf th4d'tb9'Mb' •— E j. signing$3 mtlhotlto the trash heap of totems` o+ +•1 aloe'sgoabbllirg,thrt R ra empire building and b )• bureaucraue boondoggling as city bttielats got>i • E ? t;,Qut q(bed*Rh the developers just longhough" . If hQIt•barricades In pious defense of g !r.ale,m�ad planning council members.odcupllled , d{Ch ntletves with the$reation of what form •a.• e i f ;fifty Commisstonef Bed Adams accurately%: 3 • eselibet vSt,`p�aggerld I gas ftllad ith a 1e- r '; ',.Die ,rfi�UKi�.J rr. ``o'";;I Y1 ;:k'► ,:. •i d . f nr ti i'd'ant as'a surprise?r ••r •- ILL ,�1 rocc Ltd kt lho lounty helm couldn't.....-^1 v tlel fed(hat scenerlo In aavtbCe1 . i, leash.r kt.Ff:-:•.,iyi.:: , '• !• t4., . r! The ilftM•6t1(deia Si flocs Middle 5chriol'' ould have anticipated the ecenarso Idd sdvsnce.• • • ,h lick,they probably did;Ssud It's todbad they r ' l' Idny'Nay Something it the time becahae whnt.k, •^ r :^ f al Beach Countyto, 1 ere have w Ir. _ .•' .i';.1 _.._i..•r..' ■ 11 Ninon°lan'�that"faVore such -'"i -- ` �_. _.. .'•b in al'clean elr,clean datlt,'tffordable y i ',bons hg Ind"the proteottbd of fl log made =t l i >�esolrcd tls the noiv ex1aL „.:r;e,t Q;t?:` t • Ujtejectlott of lhatr'plan by the'State oft-5•;,. ' i • ; ie on the ands that it consists'entirely of mitigated twaddle;,•$,•'''-i :,..vim n• _b ■A threat bj etty,ofllc is CO dlaba�fd the `; wide planning cou Ilia of Dad.ll ud- ' t ' I. :'ider udicrou,and self•fdltlillog p eecy of , • • t the 088 ballot in which ejtles would AI.Y'. • •',,,;towed to abolish the council If(ahem) they did ; . .e,dot like what it wet doing. ti^yt L'a,¢ , • `■The Intention of county offlclelj, troek- t ' •. : Ir:the i4constitutton and strengtheningthe . a ' r council In in bninlellIgIb1EYnd amingtfoualy Jr-.'' ' ' ' ' ; hordes referendumpo Mifcli lbt}nd-of(:, r- • • e it r.ta 'e. ..° t l' rz i' Ij j .t L.• the nce to blow another$3 tnllllost;vrhe '•. r..i Planning panel OKs severance_. e package By ANGIE FRANCALANCIA plan,which has not Pa m Beach Post Staff writer been approved, powers and eliminate the munici- WEST PALM BEACH and concentrate on taking care of pal representatives' voice. ticipating its demise, the Counts- its staff. The council asked its personnel Planning demise, agreedY Since last month, the council committee to consider a severance wide to Fri- had been discussing the state's ob- package of eight weeks' Y pay its staff a severance jections to its proposed countywide medical the package if it's voted out of exis- land-use plan. But unable to agree and dental coverage and a Y equivalent of two months' tence by the end of the month. on new language for the plan, the for unused vacation and sick time. And it agreed to payment Janus a postpone until members recessed the meetingun- rY public hearing that til Friday. The hearing was then men AnnunziaCto,who recotmmend- started last month and was to be delayed until January. finished Friday. But they don't anticipate having would ce ost abgout$61,000.He didn't "I can't see spending a tremen- said the pay alone dous amount of time on something ernm nts are compiling the needed council will consider a c meeting. Local gov- have a total for the benefits. The that is going to become meaning- 20 resolutions to repeal the Plan- Dec. 18. less," Charlie Helm, a re resents- package P fling Council's charter, putting it By antici- tive from Palm Springs,said. out of existence at the end of De- that knowingone, members The Planning Council found it- cember. So far, 11 local, govern- Council has survived the local gov- I pate whether the Planning'self racing to finish jobs before ments have passed such resolu- ernments'repeal effort and wheth- I becoming extinct at the end of the tions, said Trela White, attorney er the Count month. Local governments, which for the Municipal League. Y Commission will aff r have spent the past year feuding Many municipalities want to members. l3 Planning Council staff with many'county representatives over the Planningrepeal the: Planning Council be- The CountyCoi Council's'pow- cause they believe it has gone past is working on ballot Commission, n whichor 1 ers,are working swiftly to kill it.' the limits of its charter. They also voters to recast the council in Members decided to stop talk- anticipate the County Commission March,has discussed absorbing the , ing about the countywide land-use asking voters to give it even more Planning Council until then. , , Jupiter wants to e n .��:-,.; l--,m • xa. i ,,,. By Jim Turner planning council as it's constituted To date,the governingbodies of When voted into existence five Staff Writer today,"Town Manager Griff Ro- Lake Worth, Lake Clark Shores, years ago, the concept behind the JUPITER—The Town Council berts said. Jupiter Inlet Colony,Qcean Ridge, planning council was to have one unanimously added its vote of ap- The proposed revisions by this Mangonia Park,Island Beach and coordinating body for the,county proval Tuesday to a group of mu- ordinance would expand the pow- Boynton Beach have all voted to government and the 37 municipal- nicipalities to abolish the Palm ers and the scope of the planning repeal the charter. Please see PLANNING on A7 Beach Countywide Planning council or abolish it in its entirety, Council. Horniman said. — - In November, the Palm Beach "The proposed charter revision County Municipal League re- breaches the original agreement quested that all municipalities con- reached in 1986 between the mu- sider repealing the planning coun- nicipalities and the county ... pro- Pafnsn cil's charter before its future is viding a checks and balances sys- voted on by county voters in tern to monitor the activities of the March,said Jack Horniman, Mu- planning council,"Horniman said. I CONTINUED FROM Al tax dollars and its current nicipal League executive director. At least 20 out of 37 municipal- for fiscal year 'g I_+92 budgeti to encourage reformation of what dies. "The reason that municipalities ities must vote to repeal the plan- $1,106,278," Horniman said, method will work." are considering the repeal is be- fling council's charter within a 30- I don't think its current exis- In agreeing to submit their vote cause the county has alreadyindi- day ,fence is what it was intended for. I If the planning council is dis- for repeal, Sims said the town period, Horniman said. Votes know it isn't what I voted for," solved,stamy planningll be integrated with would like municipalities to be•in- cited intentions to place on the must be cast prior to January 1, said Councilmember Carol Dee- the count department ballot language that would 1992, according to the County y , volved in any county planning ef- Marchcompletely change the countywide Charter. gin. Mayor Karen Golonka said. forts that will follow the repeal. — 1 :.. ."The original ideas were good, concerns about appending won't be i our...-F.--�._ •,;,.. t,per i z— G concepts were good, but some- resolved,"she added. ;where in the past five years, the While voting to repeal the • 'train got off the track," Mayor charter, Councilmember Dominic 'Karen Golonka added. Sims stated that he was a little un- - • •"To date,the Countywide Plan- comfortable with the idea of elect- ning Council has spent$2.8 million ed officials repealing something • that the voters approved. `I think if we approve this mo- tion, we should take another step • + 4ih,.1 ,Gfti-4s41. if"23-4l :Gardens takes d; ,r <b L ` T- �•�-4 7,A- :,,,uh mot. 1 stand against +f`x n y' ..„�tk ,O. ". x'It". - _-. ;1,, r countypanel r, }e �r =vor d � q -Byr•NORV ROGGEN .Pagm.Beach Post Staff Writer ,h -0� • PALM BEACH GARDENS — ° •'• ..:,, The-City Council is trying to help •� n,,.*,.ri ;, ?1# " .abolish the Palm Beach County- ' t o f tr",- r; , wide Planning Council,claiming it ''1 ,„ , ,ii R. ;;;a futile attempt to prevent ,'; i F'" L*44 ,1�,c. cities from controlling their own r','<•k.�V.� .destinies. #; '; '� Hoping to enlist support, coon r`' 2. -r.< ' ,t ,r ?? Gilu�en made Palm Beach Gardens ,;;; 1 ,;�'i 1*h .,- r 5{ thg,�first cityto publiclytake a r „1#� 'rs. " „4* _ stand on the lannig coucil's fu- 'f ' " &£• .lure. :;:::.Their action came on a4-lvote Gardens Councilman Dick ' µrsday night to authorize Mayor Aldred: Planning council was Mike Martino to notify other cities 'stupid' idea from the start. of Palm Beach Gardens' intent to ii,115fort abolishment of the council. commissioners who wanted to ; 'tie City Council will vote officially shield themselves from land-use on the issue next month. hassles but also wanted to maintain The planning council can be some control over planning deci- eliminated if 20 cities pass resolu- sions. tions calling for its abolishment "The idea was stupid," Aldred during December.Jan.1 will be the said. "The County Commission council's fifth anniversary, wanted to avoid the political heat." "The council is ahybrid of what The Treasure Coast Planning the County Commission wants," Council and the state's Department CoUpcilman Dick Aldred said. of Community Affairs can ade- "Since this is headed toward metro quately handle matters intended government, the better course of for the planning council, Aldred action is to abolish it." said. The planning council was ap However council member Lin- proved by county voters five years• da Monroe, who cast the opposing ago as an independent body to re- vote believes the planning council solve planning disputes throughout has tential. t e:county. Nine of the planning po council's 17 members are munici- "There's room for better things - pal,. representatives, who have to happen,"Monroe said."And then wanted a narrow and limited inter- again we may get something stron- pr,etion of its authority. ger in its place." As a result,the council has been But other Cit Council mem- ineffective, causing county coin- Y ;riiis§ioners to consider asking vot- hers look upon the planning council bi .11ext year to approve a change as an attempt to take power away .in the council's membership so cit- from the cities by giving it author- ,Ies-won't have a majority vote. ity to control matters within mu- l:Inb'lic hearings on the county's nicipal boundaries. ii'eW proposal will be held next "The issue is whether Palm ,Wpnth. Beach Gardens people have the Aldred said the planning coun- right to develop a community they cil"was the brainchild of county want to live in,"Aldred said. MI v County urges,: disbanding plan group . Coinmission to ask voters Planning council loses for right to decide land use ; commission's hacking By MATT PRICHARD COUNCIL Palm Beach Post Staff Writer /from I B "take some leadership on behalf of the county" WEST PALM BEACH —A five-year, $3 million over- effort to have .the county and its 37 cities plane' to keep the county's resources from being cooperatively for growth received a virtual deatht.J run by growth. sentence Tuesday when county commissioners agreed Marcus said no one currently requires local the Countywide Planning Council should be disbanded. governments to plan ahead for such problems as Instead of relying on the council to guide growth , water shortages when they approve develop- commissioners said they will ask voters in March:to meet• ' give them broad powers to regulate land use based dh the need to protect the environment,the availabilityof Commissioner Mary McCarty warned that water and the ability to dispose of solid waste. I the county is heading towardhecounty a"metro"oul form of The decision to ask for the new powers was ade,i' government in which the would control an unofficial, unanimous vote with Commissioners ; most important decisions. Mary McCarty and Ken Foster absent.Commission rs City officials also blasted the proposals, said they will consider how the ballot item would 4- which they said would make commissioners too worded at a meeting Dec.16. powerful. - Commissioners also said they would ask voters for power to: y "It's like,'I can't win the game,so I'm going ; to take the IICreate a board to rule on disputes between local ; said Michael ball Mart no,homea nd ayocra nge of Palm Bthe each governments. • • Implement a countywide land-use plan devel- Gardens. oped by the planning council. .-;if - Under the proposals,the county would absorb We, staff of the semi-independent planning council. ' The council was created by voters in 1986 to h coordinate growth and resolve disputes among county's 38 local governments. There were disagr ments,however,on the limits of the council's power,, The cities,which appoint nine of the council's47 members,fought what they considered efforts by fh4 county to encroach on their powers. 4, This year,after years of fighting,the county ap"d the cities agreed on a compromise plan.At the sanis' time, however;county officials said they would ask voters'to strengthen the council.The cities threatex to use their power to disband the council if the coot proceeded with its plans. • And,earlier this month,the compromise plan was thrown into disarray when the state said it was too, vague and didn't require governments to do anything. On Tuesday,one of the forces behind the creation of the council told commissioners the council Met failed."My personal feeling is that It's dead on arrival and we ought to put It ought of its misery," former County Commissioner Ken Adams said. Adams said the council had turned into"a forum that's just for dissent,confrontation and turf wars.Ottr' • best efforts haven't been spent thinking about issues ...but about protecting turf." r„•• • Commission Chairman Karen Marcus said It would. . Please see COUNCIL/3B:, • • A4 THE JUPITER COURIER Sunday.December 1, 1991 5'11f r-dfrr °'G "yy 3'a4 !����y,, 'Tl�fn The Jupiter Courier - A Scripps Howard Newspaper Kerbs Heinstock— Mangle¢Editor Roger Buekwalter— Editorial Page Editor Charles E.Scripps Jr. — General Manager Editorials Next step for planning The Countywide Planning Council apparently is dead. After five years of trying to coordinate land use and other planning in Palm Beach County, disagreements over the council's powers and shortcomings in the way the council was established have combined to doom the effort. The County Commission last week moved toward holding a referendum next March,which would,essentially,transfer the council's planning powers to commissioners. Even if the commission had not taken those steps, the council might have been abolished by the cities — because the county charter amendment which established the council provided that a majority of cities could end it after five years. Palm Beach Gardens already had taken steps in that direction. The planning council was a good idea,which we support- ed when it came before voters in 1986. The concept behind the council,to have one coordinating body—with real pow- ers—for our planning is still a good one. But in retrospect, the council's structure was seriously flawed. The main flaw was giving cities so much power over a council they basically didn't want. They were given that power to gain their support during the referendum. But ex- perience showed it was a mistake to let a quasi-governmental body, the Palm Beach County Municipal League, control nine out of 17 seats on the council,and to include the sunset provision.It also was a mistake to word the council's author- ity so narrowly—essentially,limiting it to resolving land use disputes.When the council's staff and some board members wanted a broader interpretation, the county charter just didn't provide the necessary backing. They had to rely on complicated legal rationalizing that impressed no one. We still need countywide planning,as much as ever.Palm Beach County has 37 municipalities — more than Dade County,which has a much higher population.We need co- ordinated land use plans. We need minimum standards, which cities can and should supplement,on subjects such as environmental protection,water supply,traffic ow and his- torical site preservation — because some cities won't do these things on their own. But rather than rely on a council whose authority was questionable and whose members were irreconcilably at odds, it's better to start fresh. A referendum to strengthen the County Commission's planning powers will be bitterly opposed by the cities. And until specific ballot language is proposed, it's too early to comment in detail on the question. But we can say that countywide planning, at_the commission level, is a sound concept. We must get better control over our growth. And without coordinated planning, we will have no chance.