Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Miscellaneous_10/05/1999_Finance & Administration Committee F r VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 • 250 Tequesta Drive • Suite 300 9 c Tequesta, Florida 33469 -0273 • (561) 575 -6200 Fax: (561) 575 -6203 P7�h co y VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 1999 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Finance and Administration Committee held a regularly scheduled meeting in the Village Manager's Conference Room, Suite 300, 250 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Tuesday, October 5, 1999. The meeting was called to order at 4:00 P.M. by Chair Ron T. Mackail. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, the Recording Secretary. In attendance were the following Committee members: Chair Ron T. Mackail, Co -Chair Joseph Capretta, and Co -Chair Basil E. Dalack. Also in attendance were Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Village Attorney John C. Randolph, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Department Heads. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Co -Chair Capretta made a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. Co -Chair Dalack seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Basil E. Dalack - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the agenda was approved as submitted. Recycled Paper FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 2 ------------------------------------ III. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS (NON-AGENDA ITEMS) There were no communications from citizens. IV. REVIEW OF NEED FOR ORDINANCE REGULATING ADULT ENTERTAINMENT village Manager Bradford reported that recent newspaper articles had indicated that North Palm Beach, Juno Beach, and Jupiter had found it necessary to update their ordinances relative to adult entertainment establishments, and explained that Jupiter had narrowly missed getting into a bad situation with the owner of such an establishment right on Tequesta's border, on Old Dixie Highway. village Manager Bradford announced that the village Attorney had provided to the committee members information on adult entertainment in the 1990's and how this must be dealt with by municipalities relative to First Amendment freedom of speech issues. The Village Manager explained that this issue had been brought to the Committee because adult entertainment could no longer be prohibited, Tequesta's current code prohibited adult entertainment, and that constitutionally the present outdated village ordinance could cause problems for the Village. Village Manager Bradford explained that there had been no inquiries of which he was aware, and that in the past Scott D. Ladd, Director of Community Development, had answered such enquiries by stating the Village did not allow adult entertainment establishments. The Village Manager explained that this answer was no longer feasible, and commented that now people would fight to get such establishments into an area. Co- Chair Capretta questioned whether certain types of adult entertainment could be banned within the Village, to which the village Attorney responded that the Village could limit adult entertainment establishments to certain areas and pass reasonable regulations, but could not ban any specific type of adult entertainment. Village Attorney Randolph explained that if the village ordinance limited adult entertainment to FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 3 ------------------------------------ a specific zoning district and also specified, for example, that such an establishment could not be located within 1,000 feet of a church, which caused not enough space to have an adult entertainment facility, then that could be deemed unconstitutional. village Attorney Randolph explained that the Village could regulate the types of activities that could go on within the establishment, such as remaining a specific distance from customers, etc., as well as regulating the location within the community. Co -Chair Capretta questioned whether other municipalities had established ordinances which the Village could use as a model, to which Village Manager Bradford responded that the village Attorney had provided a copy of the ordinance passed by the Town of Palm Beach. Village Attorney Randolph commented that Jupiter's ordinance appeared to have been based on a study indicating where these types of activities would be appropriate - -the desirable distances from schools and churches - -as well as being able to provide a certain portion of the population with adult entertainment. village Attorney Randolph explained that did not mean the portion of the population which liked to go to adult entertainment establishments, but that the courts were actually dealing in numbers and a municipality must allow a certain number of such establishments per population. The Village Attorney cautioned that Tequesta could not look at their small population and say that the number of establishments allowed by Jupiter could allow Tequesta not to have any, since the courts had considered that type of situation and would not allow it because they had determined that would be a way for a particular community to avoid the law. village Attorney Randolph explained that Palm Beach had been more concerned with adult entertainment establishments that served alcohol and had drafted their ordinance to only allow certain types of entertainment within establishments that served alcohol, while Jupiter's ordinance had been more concerned with location. The Village Attorney recommended consideration of a combination of the two ordinances in establishing a new ordinance; and cautioned that taking a position that adult FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 4 ------------------------------------ entertainment establishments would be prohibited could cost the Village a lot of money if someone decided to take them to court. Village Manager Bradford pointed out that the Palm Beach ordinance limited adult entertainment establishments minimum distances from other uses - -1,000 feet from another adult entertainment establishment, 1,000 feet from a church or place of worship, 1,000 feet from an educational institution, 500 feet from a public park, and 250 feet from a residential zone district. Discussion ensued regarding where establishments had been allowed in Jupiter - -in their C -2 zoning district- -and the fact that Tequesta's space was limited and that there was mixed zoning within the Village. Village Attorney Randolph explained that someone must look at appropriate areas and make a determination that by adopting regulations the Village would not be prohibiting adult entertainment establishments; that it was reasonable to establish certain distances from other uses, and someone must look at that issue. Chair Mackail recommended a study. Village Manager Bradford commented that adult entertainment establishments could be limited to the C3 zoning district, located on South Cypress Drive and across the street from Rinker, but that the Village must test to assure that proposed setback distances would not have the effect of negating anyone from having the ability to open an adult entertainment establishment. Village Attorney Randolph stated he could speak to Jupiter's attorney to see if they had conducted a study. Co -Chair Capretta commented that if all the churches, schools, etc., were identified and it was found there was no space between them for an adult entertainment establishment, that was not legal, so that the proposed distances would need to be lowered until there was room, which could be done by using a map and drawing circles of different sizes from churches, schools, etc. Co -Chair Capretta cautioned that the village might not want an adult entertainment establishment in the FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 5 C3 zone across the street from Rinker in light of the improvements planned for downtown and the Bridge Road area. Chair Mackail commented that if he planned to go into the adult entertainment business, he would want it located in an area where he could attract the population, and that Tequesta was not a good area for that. Co -Chair Capretta commented that the least objectionable area must be located and distances adjusted to assure a location for an adult entertainment establishment. The Village Attorney verified that the law was specific in stating how many establishments must be provided per 1,000 people. Village Manager Bradford commented that he would like an ordinance modeled after the Palm Beach ordinance regarding restricting alcohol, because that was hitting where the money really came from. Co -Chair Capretta commented that there was only one thing worse than the Village's current ordinance - -not revising the current ordinance and suffering the consequences. village Manager Bradford suggested that because time was needed for work by staff, possibly this Committee might want to recommend adopting zoning in progress at the next village Council meeting to avoid getting caught while a study was conducted. Appropriate wording for a motion was discussed. Co -Chair Capretta made a motion to instruct staff to make a study to consider applicable locations and ordinances to determine locations allowable and also allowable rules and regulations regarding the type of entertainment that would be permitted; to look at Palm Beach and Jupiter ordinances and utilize their language where appropriate; and to adopt zoning in progress. Co -Chair Dalack called for discussion and questioned whether everyone was convinced there was a need for this to be done. Co -Chair Capretta responded that this could not be done after someone had applied, and if zoning in progress was in place then the village was protected from lawsuits while they were conducting a study. It was pointed out that someone had applied in both Jupiter and North Palm Beach before those municipalities had changed their ordinances, resulting in problems. Co -Chair Dalack FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 6 ------------------------------------ questioned whether the present ordinance could be repealed of ter someone made an application, to which the village Attorney responded the ordinance could be repealed at that time but that would make it legal to place an adult entertainment establishment anywhere in the Village. Councilmember Dalack seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Basil E. Dalack - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. V. REPORT ON R.O. WATER TREATMENT PLANT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Village Manager Bradford reported that the end of the RO contract time was approaching, and that as had been reported to the Village Council on a monthly basis, the contractor was behind schedule, with the time nearing when serious penalties would be imposed upon the contractor. The possibility of granting time extensions to the contractor to assure a quality product was proposed. utilities Director Matthew Morrison reported that the RO plant was approximately 85%- complete, that project had gone very smoothly with the exception of the contractor falling slightly behind the scheduled date for completion. Mr. Morrison commented that in his monthly report of 6/24/99 it had been noted that the contractor had just begun to fall behind schedule, and now was approximately 60 days behind schedule, the major reason being that both the contract and the specifications were very, very demanding. Mr. Morrison reported that Poole & Kent had cooperated very well, and commented that the Village would have a product with first - class workmanship whether or not it was on time. Bill Reese, Consultant, reported there had been no change orders on this $5.5 million job and that none of the $100,000 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 7 bidding contingency had been used, which was a very unusual situation in today's working environment, and in addition, the job was first quality. Mr. Reese explained that the number of days behind would be dependent on the computer software and exactly how long it would take to assure that the software would make the plant operate. Mr. Reese explained that until the software was tested no one could tell how long it would take, and requested that the Committee consider the good working relationship between the village and the contractor, that the contractor had absorbed costs along the way, that all problems had been worked out well, and that staff did not want to cause problems. Mr. Reese commented that the contractor would react when they received a letter exposing them to liquidated damages, which could cause a change in the relationship. Mr. Reese stated he did not recommend a time extension, but preferred that the Committee agree not to assess damages. Mr. Reese explained that the contractor would still be exposed for all other costs under the contract and for engineering costs, which was reasonable. As administrator of the contract, Mr. Reese recommended not assessing damages for 30 days and agreeing to re- evaluate whether to begin assessing for damages at that point. Mr. Reese stated he would not want to set a 60 -day time period and then begin getting change orders, which could happen. village Manager Bradford explained that the contract stated liquidated damages would accrue at the rate of $1,000 per day beginning approximately October 15, which staff believed could cause a bad relationship with the contractor and possibly a second -rate product. village Manager Bradford explained that this matter had been brought for the Committee's consideration because it would waive $60,000 of the taxpayers' money, and commented that staff liked Mr. Reese's plan of dealing with the situation by beginning with only 30 days. Chair Mackail questioned why the contractor had fallen behind, to which Mr. Morrison responded that it was a combination of items, including the strictness of the specifications. An example described by Mr. Morrison showed that some situations were FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 8 ------------------------------------ not the fault of the contractor, such as because specific coatings were required on motors, a motor supplied by a manufacturer with the wrong coating had to be sent back to be re -done, and if still not correct had to be sent back again, causing delay through no fault of the contractor. Mr. Morrison reported that this had been a difficult job for Poole & Kent because the specifications were so demanding, but that they had worked very well with the Village. Chair Mackail questioned whether the contractor had been aware of the demanding specifications prior to signing the contract. Mr. Reese verified that at the pre - construction conference it had been made clear that the specifications were exacting, but that most of the issues were manufacturers issues and not construction issues. Chairman Mackail concluded that the contractor was not responsible for those issues, to which Mr. Reese responded that the contract said performance and delivery of equipment was within the control of the contractor; however, as a practical matter it was not normal for a $5.5 million job to have progressed to this point without any requests for change orders, indicating everyone was clearly working together very well. Mr. Reese stated the contractor had done a good job for the Village, and requested that be considered by the Committee in making a decision. Discussion ensued. Mr. Reese estimated start- up could take 60 days according to how the computer software performed, and stated that the date of substantial completion was 10/15/99 according to the contract. Co -Chair Capretta commented the Village did not really have much financial leverage, and suggested getting commitment from the top management for a first -class date with a new completion date of January 15 or some other acceptable date. Co -Chair Capretta expressed his opinion that the project manager might not want to tell his boss that liquidated damages were due. Mr. Reese reported he had dealt with this company for 15 years, explained that most northern companies bid a job to get it and then counted on change orders to make their money, and that this was originally a northern company; and attributed the fact that there had FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 9 ------------------------------------ been no change orders on this job to the project manager, since on previous jobs there had been change orders. Co- Chair Capretta concluded that Mr. Reese was asking to be allowed to manage this situation as he believed best in order to get the best job for the village. Attorney Randolph questioned whether Mr. Reese could put into his letter to the contractor that the Village Council had agreed to waive 30 days liquidated damages provided that the job was finished in 30 days, or if not, the village had the opportunity to go back and re- evaluate; and also provided that no unexpected change orders were presented. Mr. Reese explained that according to the contract the contractor had the right to present change orders; and that it was a judgement call whether or not the contractor would deliberately take longer to do the job. Co -Chair Capretta commented that the other alternative was to set a different date to finish the job. Other alternatives were discussed, including sending a letter on October 15 to the contractor stating he was exposed for damages and that the village Council would decide whether he would be assessed after he had finished the job. Mr. Reese clarified for Co -Chair Dalack that there was no contractual obligation to send a letter to the contractor. Co- Chair Dalack questioned whether Mr. Reese believed without a letter the contractor would then provide substandard work, to which Mr. Reese responded he was not going to let the contractor provide substandard work. Co -Chair Capretta commented that the letter should not be sent and questioned whether the Village could live with a future completion date. Mr. Morrison stated that there was no problem from an operational standpoint, since the Village could continue to provide water under the old system with no problem, but that staff had made this request with the goals of continuing the excellent relationship with Poole & Kent, and with Mr. Morrison and Mr. Reese being allowed the flexibility to make internal decisions for a better end product, at the same time giving them the clout necessary to return in 30 days to reassess the situation. Chair Mackail questioned the FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 10 ------------------------------------ additional cost to the Village, to which Village Manager Bradford responded the village would actually gain because the money held back by the Village was in the bank earning interest. Village Manager Bradford commented the only question would be how to compensate Mr. Reese and his people if the contract went beyond the anticipated time. Mr. Reese stated that was external to the damages. It was pointed out that the Village had over $1 million in the bank which was earning interest. Co -Chair Capretta indicated he was in favor of granting the request as presented by staff. Co- Chair Mackail stated he did not disagree. Co -Chair Dalack stated he saw no point in re- writing the contract and he did not want to relieve the contractor of his obligations and stated the specifications must be met and substandard work must not be allowed. Co -Chair Dalack commented he saw no benefit to the village foregoing its right to $1,000 per day. Mr. Reese responded there would be no substandard work; that this request had been made based on the reality of the very good working relationship which was unusual in today's construction world, and that there was the possibility of letters beginning between the contractor's attorney and the village's attorney if liquidated damages were begun. Mr. Morrison requested a 30 -day extension not to assess damages. Discussion ensued of whether that meant $30,000 would be waived. Village Attorney Randolph clarified the first $30,000 would be gone but the second $30,000 would not. Co -Chair Dalack stated there was nothing improper about getting the benefits of the contract, which gave the Village the right to recover $1,000 per day, and if this would jeopardize the relationship between the Village and the contractor then there had never been a good relationship. Co -Chair Capretta made a motion to recommend to the village Council that the 30 -day extension be granted as requested by staff. Chair Mackail seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 11 ------------------------------------ Ron T. Mackail - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Basil E. Dalack - against The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Village Manager Bradford stated he would place this item on the agenda for consideration at the next Village Council meeting. VI. REVIEW OF PROPOSED GENERAL EMPLOYEES' 401(a) DEFINED CONTRIBUTION RETIREMENT PLAN Village Manager Bradford explained the Village currently offered a traditional defined benefit retirement plan for all three classes of employees: Police, Fire, and General employees, all of which had expressed an interest in going to a defined contribution plan. The Village Manager explained that some employees were in the Florida Retirement System and all employees hired on or after January 1, 1996 were in the Tequesta retirement plan. village Manager Bradford reported that presently it was the General employee group which was most adamant about making the change to a defined contribution plan. The Village Manager explained that the primary difference between a defined benefit plan and a defined contribution plan was that the risk for the investment of retirement assets lies with the Village in the defined benefit scenario and with the employee in the defined contribution scenario. The Village had to pay the promised benefit even if the market failed to perform. Portability was another difference in the two plan types, there being no portability in a defined benefit plan. Also, many employees liked to make their own investment decisions. In response to the employee's desire to have the Village propose a defined contribution plan, the Village had worked with the ICMA Retirement Corporation to prepare a proposal which included a provision of a separate disability insurance component because the current retirement plan had FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 12 ------------------------------------ a disability component. Village Manager Bradford explained that the proposal entailed a maximum contribution from the Village of 9W of salary compared to the current contribution of 5.54, which was scheduled to soon rise to 7.59W. This amount was proposed to entice the employees to make the switch and accept the risk for retirement benefits, and the village Manager explained that not all employees would take advantage of the incentives to cause the village to contribute the maximum. The proposed plan for general employees was also the same for firefighters and police except that the contributions for firefighters and police were much higher in line with what was currently contributed for these workers. The Village Manager requested conceptual approval by the village Council so that he could then present it to the employees. Village Manager Bradford reported that the Communications workers of America union had indicated that they wished to bargain on such a change; therefore, the Village could not unilaterally switch to a defined contribution plan for general employees and must keep a pension board intact for this group until such time as a switch to a defined contribution plan could be properly accomplished with the CWA regardless of what the non -union workers desired. Only one General employee was in the union. Because union contract negotiations for a new contract were anticipated between April and June of 2000, the Village Manager anticipated being able to implement an approved 401(a) retirement plan very shortly in spite of the CWA, but must first have the conceptual plan approved by the Village Council and the general employees before moving on to the CWA. Village Manager Bradford reported that he had a meeting scheduled with police and firefighter employees the next morning and that if asked he would recommend keeping what they had and having a joint board. Chair Mackail recommended an example be presented to the employees of a typical employee at age 25 working until age 60 and showing that employee's benefits at retirement under each scenario. village Manager Bradford stated he could do that under each plan. Chair Mackail expressed serious concern FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 13 ------------------------------------ for the employees, and commented that under House Bill 261 the Village could have as many as three retirement boards, which could increase administration costs by three. Co- Chair Capretta commented the police and firefighters had a much better plan now. Co -Chair Dalack made a motion to recommend to the village Council approval of the outline of the proposed 401(a) plan as presented. Chair Mackail stated he wanted to make sure the employees understood the differences in the plans. Village Manager Bradford commented that Mr. Morrison was an example of an employee qualified to make his own investments; however, many of the employees knew nothing about investment, and the presentation to the employees would show pros and cons. Co -Chair Capretta seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Basil E. Dalack - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. VII. ANY OTHER MATTERS Co -Chair Dalack requested that his packet for the Village Council meeting include a copy of the RO contract obligations on construction of the plant and the $1,000 per day. VI. ADJOURNbrhNT Co -Chair Capretta made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Co- Chair Dalack seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES October 5, 1999 Page 14 ------------------------------------ Ron T. Mackail - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Basil E. Dalack - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 5:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Betty Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST: Joann Manganiello village Clerk DATE APPROVED: