Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Regular_01/14/1999• VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 250 Tequesta Drive Suite 300 Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (561) 575-6200 Fax: (561) 575-6203 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 14, 1999 I. II. III. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Village Council held a meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Thursday, January 14, 1999. The meeting was called to order at 7:01 P.M. by Mayor Elizabeth A. Schauer. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, Recording Secretary. Councilmembers present were: Mayor Elizabeth A. Schauer, Vice Mayor Carl C. Hansen, and Councilmembers Joseph N. Capretta, and Ron T. Mackail. Also in attendance were: Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Village Attorney John C. Randolph, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Department Heads. Councilmember Alexander W. Cameron was absent from the meeting. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Schauer gave the Invocation and led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Schauer requested addition under ANY OTHER MATTERS of Jupiter High School. Village Attorney Randolph requested addition under ANY OTHER MATTERS of consideration VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 2 of appointment of Temporary Special Master. vice Mayor Hansen made a motion to approve the Agenda as amended. Councilmember Mackail seconded the motioa. The vote oa the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted aad the Agenda was approved as amended. • IV. COMaICTNICATION FROM CITIZENS Arnold Blum, 410 Tequesta Drive, stated he was reading something into the record on behalf of Robert Cook, 17 Bay Harbor, who could not be present. Mr. Blum passed out booklets to each Councilmember and requested that one remain in the Village Hall office for public viewing. Mr. Blum read from the Advisory Ballot Summary submitted by Citizens for Responsible Government. The advisory ballot had been distributed to a random sample of the Village of Tequesta. The questions on the ballot were (1) Should the Village Council approve an expenditure of up to $3,587,000 plus for land in Tequesta Plaza mall and construction of a new Village Hall and development of Bridge Road? Of 315 responses, 314 were no. (1) Should the village of Tequesta Council approve retention of the existing village Hall as the governing center of Tequesta retaining existing Council Chambers, Public Safety offices, and construct new Administrative offices north at Village Green Park on land already owned by village of Tequesta water Department? 238 - yes, 77 - no. Mr. Blum read a synopsis of items concerning the special Village Council meeting held December 15, 1998 expressing the belief of the Citizens for Responsible Government that the Village had violated VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 3 Florida statutes, and urging that the Village not proceed with the purchase of property at Tequesta Plaza. Mr. Blum stated he had found the agenda for meetings very hard to get before meetings and that the agendas did not provide enough information on topics to be discussed. Mr. Blum requested that the public receive better notification for meetings and agenda items. Betty Nagy, Shay Place, questioned a comment by the Village Manager at a prior meeting regarding the possibility of moving Fire Rescue facilities to the east. Village Manager Bradford explained that the first plan for Fire Rescue facilities had been $1.3 million, which was too expensive, so an alternative to build it to the east of the Annex building behind Village Hall had been considered, and it was discovered that although it could be done it would encroach on the property where the Village Hall was planned to be built; therefore, another plan was now being worked on to place Fire Rescue facilities between the Gallery Square property line and the annex building. Peggy Verhoeven, 18996 Point Drive, stated she was standing in for Mr. W. A. Verhoeven, Chairman of Citizens for Responsible Government, who could not be present. Mrs. Verhoeven explained the ballot figures read by Mr. Blum were not final since more were being received each day. The question regarding where people would like Village Hall seemed to be confusing, therefore she had called some of the people, and some of them had expressed a wish to spend no more money. Mrs. Verhoeven questioned the letter of support of the Tequesta Plaza property purchase by Tequesta Oaks which was attached to the minutes of the December 15, 1998 Special Village Council meeting, since she had spoken to a resident who reported he and his neighbors did not know about it. Mrs. Verhoeven requested the Village Council seriously consider the comments made by Mr. Blum on behalf of Mr. Cook. Councilmember Mackail noted as a point of interest that several people who signed the material furnished by Mr. Blum on behalf of Mr. Cook had . VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 4 --------------- listed their addresses as Jupiter, Florida. VI. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed with an asterisk {*) are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Village Councilmember so requests, in which event, the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda of Business and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. Mayor Schauer read aloud the following Consent Agenda items: • VI. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS *A) Proclamation Declaring March as Red Cross Month in the Village of Tequesta. VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND REPORTS *A) Board of Adjustment Workshop Meeting Minutes, October 19, 1998 *B) Conununity Appearance Board Meeting Minutes November 18, 1998 *C) Village Council Meeting Minutes; December 10, 1998 *D) Special Village Council Meeting Minutes; December 15, 1998 *E) Village Managers Report: December 7, 1998 to January 8, 1999 IX. APPOINTMENTS *A) Consideration of Appointment of Mirian Grzymala as an Alternate Member to the Board of Adjustment with Said Term Expiring May 14, 2000. (Staff Recommends • Approval) . VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 5 --------------- X. NEW BUSINESS *C1 Consideration of Approval of Purchase of Two (2) PCIII In-Car Video Systems from International Pot i ce TechnoZ ogi es, in the Amount of $3, 250 Each for a Total Purchase of $6, 500, Having a FY 1999 General Fund Police Department Budget Allocation of $.7,000. (Staff Recommends Approval) *D) Consideration of Village Police Department Budget Property (Unclaimed Found Property) as SurpZ us, Pursuant to Section 3.02(8) of the Village Charter. (Staff Recommends Approval) *E) Consideration of Approval to Begin Negotiations for the Purchase of Municipal Information Software from • HTE, Inc. (Staff Recommends Approval) Motioa was made by Councilmember Mackail to approve the Coasent Agenda as presented. The motion was seconded by vice Mayor Hansen. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. VIII. COMNSITTEE REPORTS A) Public Norks Committee; December 17, 1998 Village Manager Bradford reported that Tequesta's franchise agreement with Nichols Sanitation expired in 1999 and the Public Works Committee had reviewed the • options available to the Village, which were to renegotiate with Nichols Sanitation, to solicit bids at • VILLAGE COUNCIL bUrETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE b --------------- large for a new provider, or to contract with SWA to use their service provider, BFI. After reviewing the level of service and rates provided by BFI; looking at other rates provided by Nichols Sanitation in the area; and taking into account the Village's limitations regarding negotiation power for collection services because of the size of the Village, staff concluded that the way to get the best pricing was to offer a provider a contract in excess of five years. Nichols Sanitation, when offered extra time, had agreed to give the village the same rate they currently provided to the Town of Jupiter, a municipality approximately six times larger than Tequesta. This was a significant savings to the village, since it meant that in two out of three cases the rates would be less than those charged by BFI to SWA, plus Tequesta would continue to receive a second day pickup of • yard waste which was not a part of the SWA contract. The current single-family monthly rate of $10.89 for refuse, recycling, and yard waste collection would drop to $6.63, a 39$ reduction. The multi-family monthly rate of $8.48 would drop to $6.63 also, a 22~ reduction. Commercial solid waste collection, currently $5.66 per cubic yard would drop to $3.50 per cubic yard, a 38~ reduction. The village would also receive free removal of all of its household and yard trash generated through normal maintenance activities of the Village and free service for vacant residential lots in Tequesta. For the Village, this would mean a savings of $12,000 annually, currently being paid to Nichols Sanitation. The Public Works Committee recommended to the Village Council that they approve an 8-year franchise agreement with Nichols Sanitation to begin 10/1/99 at the rates just reviewed. Village Manager Bradford clarified that the Village would save $12,000 annually on their trash collection, residents would save according to the percentages mentioned, the rates were lower than those charged by BFI to the County, the Village's only negotiating chip was • granting a longer contract in order to receive better rates, and the rates were adjusted annually based on the VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINOTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 7 --------------- Consumer Price Index. The Village Manager commented that a 5-year contract would probably have resulted in only a 10~ to 15$ rate reduction. Councilmember Capretta commented that Nichols had provided good service and frequent pickups. Village Manager Bradford commented the Village received complaints from time to time, which usually coincided with Nichols adding a new driver, and once the new driver had learned their route, the complaints stopped. The village Manager explained that when a mistake was pointed out, that Nichols Sanitation was very responsive and owned up to their mistakes, came back out after hours to make pickups, and went the extra mile to correct oversights. Councilmember Capretta commented he had had only four complaints in ten years, which usually involved a large tree which had been cut down; and that Nichols Sanitation hated to bid for a new • contract so that offering more time provided the Village with a lot of negotiating leverage. Mayor Schauer commented that at the Committee meeting she had requested a notice to commercial businesses be placed in the Village newsletter for them to contact Nichols Sanitation to start a recycling program. Vice Mayor Haasen made a motion to approve the report of the Public works Committee meeting of December 17, 1998 as presented. Councilmember Capretta secoaded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. village Manager Bradford announced that the franchise agreement would be presented to the Village Council for . their consideration at the February 1999 Village Council meeting. • VILLAGE COUNCIL DIETING MINOTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 8 --------------- X. DEVELOPMENT MATTERS A) Consideration of Request to Modify Tequesta Drive Right- of-Nay to Allow Curb Cut/Driveway Entrance at 195 Tequesta Drive and Temporary IIse of the Existing Paved Parkiag Area by McCarthy's Restaurant aad Pub Subject to Future Required Review of Modification to the McCarthy's Restaurant aad Pub Site Plan. Director of Community Development Scott D. Ladd explained that this application came jointly from McCarthy's Restaurant and Gary Van Brock, and that McCarthy's Restaurant was attempting to purchase land from the Dorner Trust for additional parking to enhance their • current parking. Gary Van Brock commented the applicants had requested a curb cut, and that the driveway would provide additional parking for McCarthy's Restaurant and provide ingress and egress for the property to the north sometime in the future. Mr. Van Brock stated he believed the applicants had addressed most of the staff conditions. Mr. Van Brock reviewed the conditions. Mr. Van Brock referred to a comment by Police Chief Allison questioning whether the applicant was aware that at some time in the future the painted safety zone on Tequesta Drive would probably become a raised median, and stated he was not aware of any plan to change the median in Tequesta Drive and believed it would be much safer to leave the median as it was. Mr. Van Brock requested that the Village Council not change the median. Mr. Van Brock explained that the additional parking would well serve McCarthy's Restaurant, and that the property owner of the land had accommodated them in the past by allowing them to use the land for parking; however, when The Flame Restaurant had complied with Ordinance 377 they had closed the access • and as it currently existed people were driving over the landscaped area. • VILLAGE COUNCIL N~ETING ~SINOTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 9 --------------- Brandon McCarthy, co-owner of McCarthy's restaurant, stated the restaurant's need for extra parking and expressed safety concerns regarding the present configuration. Village Manager Bradford explained the unique aspect of this proposal was that the applicants were seeking permission to do the curb cut and driveway absent a site plan package, and that a condition of approval was they would submit the site plan for village Council review with four months time. Ingress and egress for Dorner Trust land to the north of the parking lot was requested, which the village Manager stated would be a very bad precedent to grant at this time because no one knew what type of future land use would be proposed on the Dorner Trust vacant land, and it was recommended that aspect be . dealt with at the time either the Dorner Trust or a future property owner submitted a request. Village Manager Bradford explained that the Tequesta Drive median which currently terminated at approximately the halfway mark at the Flame Restaurant/Alex Webster Restaurant property was supposed to be extended all the way to~the intersection with Tequesta Oaks Drive. The median was not extended in 1989 over the Village engineers' objections in order to accommodate the owners of the Flame Restaurant/Alex Webster Restaurant property. Village Manager Bradford explained that, subject to Village Council allocation of funds for extension, the median would be extended because of the growing traffic. Mayor Schauer questioned what would happen to the Alex Webster building if McCarthy's purchased the land for McCarthy's parking. Mr. Van Brock responded they had no control over that building but reported the owners had no immediate plans far the property, and had no interest at this time in the land that McCarthy's wished to purchase. Mr. Van Brock explained the Dorner Trust was interested • in preserving a right for whatever future development might be to the north. Mr. Van Brock explained the Alex • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 10 --------------- Webster Restaurant facility had its own driveway and parking facilities, and displayed a survey showing the properties with the proposed driveway. Councilmember Capretta commented Dorner Trust could conceivably lease land for parking to Alex Webster's on the north side of their property. Vice Mayor Hansen expressed his opinion that it would not be in the best long-term interest of the Village for the Dorner Trust land to have ingress and egress farther north, but agreed to the parking for McCarthy's Restaurant. Mr. Van Brock commented ingress and egress to this 7-1/2 acre parcel and the median cut were very important. village Manager Bradford stated it was illegal to drive across the yellow painted safety zone, so the median would merely solidify that which was already illegal. Discussion ensued. village Manager Bradford stated that was a prohibited crossing per FDOT specifications and the Village could not override their specifications, and all the Village wanted to do was to control traffic, which was rising on Tequesta Drive every day. Village Manager Bradford explained that if the Village Council accepted the proposed conditions, they would not be denying the ingress and egress but would wait to see what Mr. van Brock proposed to have drive over the parking lot from his proposed development. Councilmember Capretta commented the village Council was not against ingress and egress but would not grant a blanket approval before proposed plans were submitted. Mr. Van Brock described a preliminary plan which he had shown to Councilmember Capretta several years ago which had been based on McCarthy's Restaurant, and requested that the village Council not close the door on ingressjegress, to which the response was they were not closing the door. Mr. Van Brock requested nothing be done to the median until he could come in with a plan and that a decision be made at that time. Village Manager Bradford questioned Mr. Ladd as to • whether McCarthy's Restaurant would be able to meet Tequesta's unity of title or unity of control • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 11 --------------- requirements, to which Ntr. Ladd responded that would come up at the site plan review in four months. Mr. Ladd explained there would be a public hearing for special exception use and a unity of title would be required to tie the parking lot land to McCarthy~s Restaurant as an accessory use. Councilmember Mackail made a motion to approve the request for the parking lot curb cut which was the entrance located at 195 Tequesta Drive subject to the conditions referenced in the memo of January 8, 1999 from the Village Manager and the conditions referenced in the staff report dated January 12, 1999. Councilmember Capretta seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: • Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. XI. NEW BUSINESS A) Resolution No. 11-98/99 - Authorizing the Issuance of a Note of the village in the Principal Amount of $5,000,000 to Finance the Cost of Capital Projects of the village, Providing that Such Note Shall not be a General Obligation of the Village but Shall be Payable Only from Appropriated Funds as Provided Herein, Providing for the Rights, Securities, and Remedies for the Owner of Such Note; Providing for the Creation of Certain Funds, Making Certain Covenants and Agreements in Connection Therewith; and Providing an Effective Date. (Staff Recommends Approval) • Village Manager Bradford summarized that on January 7, • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 12 --------------- 1999, the Finance and Administration Committee had recommended the Village secure a line of credit for $5 million. The terms offered by NationsBank were 3 years interest only payments, floating interest rate at 60~ of NationsBank prime rate, bank fee of $4,000, and no prepayment penalty. Projects involved were Tequesta Plaza, Fire Rescue living quarters site work, furniture, and equipment, demolition of existing Fire Rescue garage, and pay off of Barnett Bank line of credit. Projects total was $3,899,731. The Committee recommended a line of $5 million since it did not have to be paid for unless the money was taken. Village Financial Advisor Clark Bennett explained the interest rate would float with prime, currently 7-3/4~, of which 60~ would be 4.65. Mr. Bennett explained that • the Village would not create $5 million in debt, but would only create debt when funds were drawn, and would only pay 4.65 on the amount drawn. The Village had the right to repay the money drawn at any time without penalty, and the line of credit would extend for three years. At the end of three years the Village would decide how to permanently fund the amount drawn or pay it from other funds; and the line of credit might possibly be renegotiated at the end of three years. Mr. Bennett explained that the merger of NationsBank with Bank America would not affect the line of credit. Hattie Siegel, 498 Dover Road, questioned whether Mr. Bradford had stated the amount for proposed projects had been increased to $5 million, to which the village Manager responded it had not been increased. The Mayor explained the cost for the proposed projects was an estimate and the final cost was not known. Mrs. Siegel inquired why the Village did not just borrow $3 million. Councilmember Capretta explained that the line of credit operated like a credit card with a credit limit, and that • a person only paid back the amount used on a credit card. Mrs. Siegel inquired why the cost would not become a tax • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 13 --------------- to residents when a project was completed. Village Manager Bradford explained there were no plans to have a General Obligation referendum, but the Village planned to have a revenue bond which would be paid from utility taxes and franchise fees, and it was stated numerous times in the documents that this would not become a General Obligation of the Village but would be repaid from appropriated funds of utility taxes and franchise fees. Mrs. Siegel inquired how a new fund would be created. The village Manager explained that the bank required a fund to be set up as an accounting mechanism to account for the expenditures and revenues associated with the line of credit, and the funds drawn would be paid back from franchise fees and utility taxes. Village Manager Bradford explained that utility taxes were not proposed to be increased and that in the past the utility • taxes had been used to pay general expenditures of the Village of Tequesta. Mrs. Siegel inquired what Florida statute the Village Officials were abiding by tonight, to which Village Manager Bradford responded: all of them that applied. Councilmember Mackail stated the Village was abiding by the Florida statutes. Councilmember Capretta explained that there were a few projects the Village wished to do and in order to do them must get money, and this was a cheaper way to finance them than municipal bonds, and the interest would be paid with utility taxes and franchise fees. Mrs. Siegel expressed her opinion that utility taxes should go to pay general expenses. Councilmember Capretta explained that taxes would not have to be raised to pay the interest because the revenue base of the Village had and was increasing, the Village could afford to pay the interest on this capital expenditure, and the NationsBank line of credit was the cheapest way to finance. Mrs. Siegel asked what the total indebtedness was of the Village. Village Manager Bradford estimated roughly $1.3 million for the 1994 Bond Issue. Councilmember Capretta stated that was • very low for a city, and that the Village could afford capital projects. Mrs. Siegel questioned the amount of • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 14 --------------- the Village's cash reserve, to which village Manager Bradford responded it was roughly $800,000. Mrs. Siegel expressed her opinion that the village Council should not approve this Resolution, stating her belief these were too many capital projects at one time. Mrs. Siegel stated she believed not enough information had been provided. Peggy verhoeven inquired what the interest rate was, to which Mr. Bennett responded it was 4.65 floating rate currently, 60~ of the prime rate, and that it was a tax exempt rate. Mrs. verhoeven expressed concern over a crisis in Brazil, to which Mr. Bennett responded that a crisis in Brazil had nothing to do with the interest rate. I~ village Attorney Randolph read Resolution 11-98/99 by title only. Councilmember Mackail made a motion to approve Resolution 11-98/99. Vice Mayor Hansen seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. B) Resolution No. 12-98/99 - a Resolution of The Village Council of The Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, Designating Polling Locations, Election Officials, And Inspectors of Election, And Establishing Election Procedures is The Event it Becomes Necessary to Conduct The Municipal Election/Annexation Referendum Scheduled to Be Held March 9, 1999, And The Municipal Run-off Election, to Be Held on March 23, 1999. (Staff . VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 15 --------------- Recommends Approval) Village Manager Bradford explained this was standard operating procedure and would give the Village Clerk authority to set up polling places, etc., in the event election was required. Councilmember Mackail made a motion to approve Resolution 12-98/99. Vice Mayor Hansen seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for • The motion was therefore passed and adopted. XII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) Ordinance - Second Reading - Annexiag into the Village Certain Areas of Land (Annexation Area VI) (Staff Recoamnends Approval ) Village Manager Bradford stated this item was for second reading of the Ordinance to annex Area 6, commonly known as Tequesta Hills, and if approved the Village would be conducting a referendum on the same day as the municipal election to see if the people of Area 6 wished to join the Village of Tequesta. Mayor Schauer expressed her opinion that since Anchorage Point had not annexed, and she rad heard opinions from Tequesta Hills residents that they did not wish to annex, she felt that more time should be allowed before attempting annexation of Area 6. vice Mayor Hansen • commented annexation was coming, that the State and County eventually wanted all areas annexed, and that • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 16 --------------- Broward County had decreed by 2007 that there would be no more unincorporated areas in Broward County. Vice Mayor Hansen explained Palm Beach County had 40~ unincorporated area so it would take longer to annex everything. Vice Mayor Hansen stated he believed the Fire and Police Departments would be much more effective if all areas were annexed. The Vice Mayor explained he had wanted to make an attempt to annex, since annexation through legislation would only come after the Village had made several attempts; however, he agreed with Mayor Schauer that it would be better to wait. Vice Mayor Hansen stated Anchorage Point had outrageous figures they believed it would cost them to annex, and it would not cost that much. Councilmember Capretta commented that Anchorage Point was getting free services and they were • the richest people in town and paid no taxes for the services, which was not fair, and expressed his opinion they should be willing to pay their fair share. Councilmember Capretta commented that the State or County should correct this unfair situation. Councilmember Mackail commented the information in his packets was completely different than that reported in the newspaper, and the people in the unincorporated areas were very confused. Councilmember Mackail recommended focus on the upcoming projects and moving forward, and minimizing the confusion, rather than wasting the Village's money holding a referendum at this time. Councilmember Mackail made a motion not to approve Second Reading of the above Ordinance. Vice Mayor Hansen seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansea - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for • The motion was therefore passed and adopted. • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 17 --------------- B) Ordinance - Second Reading - Adopting Latest Construction Codes and Countywide Amendments Thereto, as Recommended by the Building Code Advisory Board of Palm Beach County and as Mandated by the State of Florida. (Staff Recommends Approval) Director of Community Development Scott D. Ladd explained this was a housekeeping matter. Village Attorney Randolph read the Ordinance on Second Reading. Vice Mayor Hansen inquired whether Tequesta's Building Codes were more strict than those of nearby municipalities, to which Mr. Ladd responded that he had fought very hard for uniformity among the 39 municipalities in Palm Beach County, and Tequesta had adopted only the minimum standard codes mandated by the State of Florida, while some others--including the Town of Jupiter and Palm Beach County--had codes which were more strict. Vice Mayor Hansen reported he had been informed only Tequesta required samples of building roofing material, but had learned that after Hurricane Andrew that had become a requirement throughout the State. Mr. Ladd explained that everything used must be tested and therefore materials were required. Councilmember Capretta reported one of the oldest roofing companies in town, Harold Turner Roofing, had not been familiar with some of the requirements and stated he was not familiar with how contractors were informed of code information; had also been told Tequesta's Building Inspector did not have his own ladder; and a neighbor had been charged an extra $35 for another permit when his was lost. Mr. Ladd responded Tequesta had one of the lowest re-inspection fees, and that the Building Inspector had a ladder. • Councilmember Mackail made a motion to approve the above Ordinance as read. Vice Mayor Hansen seconded the VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 18 --------------- motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. XIII. ANY OTHER MATTERS Village Attorney Randolph explained that Special Master Paulette Torcivia handled all of the Village's Code Enforcement cases; and that in one of the cases, the • Siegel case, the Siegels had filed a motion to have the Special Master recuse herself from their case because of an allegation that she had some prejudice against them. Village Attorney Randolph explained that briefs were due in that regard and he had researched the law and did not think there was any merit whatsoever to the reasoning for recusing. However; out of an abundance of caution he believed it would serve tree Village best in this particular instance to have Paulette Torcivia recused, and to hire another Special Master just for that case. The village Attorney recommended that the village Council authorize hiring Attorney Randy Selden, if available, or if not, to hire another attorney who met the qualifications of the Village Ordinance. Village Attorney Randolph commented that the Siegels had also asked that he recuse himself, which he might do. Vice Mayor Hansen made a motion that the village Council authorize hiring Attorney Randy Selden, if available, or if not, another attorney meeting the qualifications of the Village Ordinance, to hear the Siegel Code Enforcement Case. Councilmember Mackail seconded the • motion. The vote on the motion was: • VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MIN[JTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 19 --------------- Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. Hansen - for .Joseph N. Capretta - against Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Councilmember Mackail made a motion authorizing the village Attorney to either remove himself or appoint another attorney if necessary in the Siegel Code Enforcement case. vice Mayor Hansen seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Elizabeth A. Schauer - for • Carl C. Hansen = for Joseph N. Capretta for Ron T. Mackail - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Village Attorney Randolph clarified that the first motion regarding Paulette Torcivia was not direction to remove her but in the event it was deemed appropriate to remove her to hire someone else. Mayor Schauer explained that several months ago the Village Council had given her permission to write a letter to the School Board, and submitted her letter for review. Mayor Schauer stated she was asking that Jupiter High School be considered as one of the five schools in their 5-year capital improvement plan, that the science building had air conditioning, roof leaks, and mildew, and asked that this school be a priority. Councilmember Mackail commented Jupiter High School at one time was 12th on the list for renovation but other schools had taken priority. Mayor Schauer explained Jupiter High • School was now in the top 10, but only schools in the top 5 would be renovated. It was the consensus of the VILLAGE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 20 --------------- Village Council that the letter be sent. Ed Resnik, Country Club Drive, stated he was not objecting to the presentation by the Citizens for Responsible Government, who represented 8~ - 10~ of the population. Mr. Resnik stated he was one of the other 90~ and believed the Village Council provided very responsible government, and very well considered planning. Mr. Resnik stated he had attended budget hearings and committee meetings, and as items progressed up through the planning process and finally got to Village Council level they had been well considered. Mr. Resnik stated the planning process was open to anyone who wanted to come, and village residents were kept informed by Smoke Signals. Mr. Resnik stated he had the June 1998 • issue of Smoke Signals, which outlined completely the village Center concept, including the Village Council s plan to acquire the property purchased by Mr. zuccarelli, and if at that time there were people who wanted to object or offer alternatives to beautify the Village Hall he did not recall them coming forward. Mr. Resnik stated he considered that the Village residents were kept informed, he considered that the people who wanted to find out what was going to go on at village Council meetings and could pick up the agenda in the Police Department at least 3-4 days in advance. Mr. Resnick commented he believed that the line of credit plan was excellent to provide a source of funds later when projects were approved, he thought the Village had become more attractive and had grown appropriately, the tax base had increased, there had been a very low tax increase, and he was very happy to live in Tequesta. Nlr. Resnik stated he hoped the Village Council continued to do what they were doing. XIV. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Mackail moved that the meeting be adjourned. i ©?/2?11999 11:29 4D?6941591 VILLAGE COUNCIL ]~SSTIDiG ffiINtJTES January 14, 1999 PAGE 21 vice Mayor Hansen seconded the motion. Mas: PAGE D1 The vote oa the motioa Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Carl C. 8aasexs - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Roa T. ~ackail - for The motion eras therefore passed and adopted and the meeting Mas adjourned at 9s32 P.N. Respectfully submi ted, /~ Betty Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST Joann Manganiell Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: c~ l/, / p p~ • FORM 86 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS L..4ST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE Holloman, Connie Village of Teauesta, ~~aanceComru~e°rrCommit TAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHOKITY, OR COMMITTEE ON 4g~~ Sj~ F,lminl C1rC1e S. WHICH I SEKVE IS A UNIT OF: _ CITY ~X COUNTY OTHER LOCAL AGENCY CITY COUN"rY Palm Clty ?',lartin NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: DATE ON }1'HICH VOTE OC'C'URRED 1999 MY POSI1lON IS: ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE XX WHO MUST FILE FORM 86 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who aze presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 1(2.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although the use of this particular form is not required by law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law. Your responsibilities under the laH' when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES ED OFFICERS: A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 1S DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: ou should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for .ecording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. • A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest. (t r~~K•I HB I11-R6 PAGE 1 IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION OR VOTE AT THE MEETING: • You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. You should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF STATE OFFICER'S INTEREST I, Connie IIolloman ,hereby disclose that on January 14 1999 (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) ~ inured to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of , by whom I am retained. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: Recommendation to the Village Council to authorize contract negotiations with HTE, Inc. to purchase computer software. NIy husband and I personally own 100 shares of common stock of said company. January 4, 1999 Date Filed G~+G~~~- Signature ~TICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED SCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED 55,000. CE FORM 8B - 10-86 PAGE 2