HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Workshop_08/03/2000VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
DII'ARTMENT OF C01~~VIL)NIT'Y DEVELOPMENT
Post Office Box 3273 357 Tequesta Drive
Tequesta, Florida. 33469-0273 (561) 575-6220
Fax: (561) 575-6239
VII..LAGE OF TEQUESTA
VH.LAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MIlVUTES
AUGUST 3, 2000
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The Tequesta Village Council held a Public Information
Workshop Meeting on the subject of Municipal Facilities at
the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida,
on Thursday, August 3, 2000. The meeting was called to
order at 7:04 P.M. by Mayor Joseph N. Capretta. A roll
call was taken by Betty Laur, Recording Secretary.
• Councilmembers present were: Mayor Joseph N. Capretta,
Vice Mayor Elizabeth A. Schauer, Councilmember Basil E.
Dalack, Councilmember Geraldine Genco, and Councilmember
Sharon Walker. Also in attendance were: Acting Village
Manager and Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, Acting
Assistant Village Manager Richard Diamond, Fire Chief James
Weinand, and Police Chief Steve Allison.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Vice Mayor Schauer made a nation to approve the Agenda as
submitted. Councilmember Walker seconded the motion. The
vote on the motion was:
Joseph N. .Capretta - for
Elizabeth A. Schauer - for
Geraldine Genco - far
Basil Dalack - for
Sharon Walker - for
The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda
•
Recycled Paper
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
Auqust 3, 2000
PAGE 2
was approved as submitted.
III. URBAN DEVELOPMENT ON FLORIDA'S EAST COAST
A) Dr. Lance deHaven-Smith, Professor and Assistant
Director of the Institute of Government at Florida
State IIniversity was introduced by Mayor Capretta.
Dr. deHaven-Smith commented that he had lived in
South Florida for thirteen years and had been a
professor at Florida Atlantic IIniversity; that he
studied urban development and politics in
government and wrote about those subjects; and that
he also helped groups who disagreed. Dr. deHaven-
Smith reported that he had worked with the Florida
Senate and House of Representatives in Tallahassee,
and had worked on a three-year project in Southern
California to allocate water. Dr. deHaven-Smith
• commented that he was used to dealing with
conflict, and that the mast conflict he had ever
seen was on the subject of teaching sex education
in the public schools of Louisiana. Dr. deHaven-
Smith explained that his presentation dealt with
looking at Tequesta within the broad scope of
change going on generally in Florida. Dr.
deHaven-Smith commented that in his experience he
had found that people who disagreed or had strong
feelings about issues were usually focused on one
concern, and it helped to smooth feelings when
people understood the various concerns.
Dr. deHaven-Smith announced that he, rather than
the Village Council, would be facilitating this
meeting, and that anyone heckling or making cat
calls would be escorted from the meeting by the
police officer who was present.
Dr. deHaven-Smith noted that those who had lived
in Florida for some time had seen the
transformation of Florida from rural to urban, and
that the problem facing Tequesta was to protect
itself from the enormous amount of surrounding
• development, and advised that protection would be
affected by what the Village did internally. Dr.
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
Auqust 3, 2000
PAGE 3
-----------------------
deHaven-Smith commented on the beauty of the
Village and spoke about the growth cycle in
Florida. Dr. deHaven-Smith explained that every
community goes through a growth cycle, a part of
which dealt with urban development, redevelopment,
and urban blight. Dr. deHaven-Smith cautioned
that there was a growth wave moving up the east
coast of Florida that was currently about six miles
south of Tequesta, which posed real challenges for
older coastal communities. Dr. deHaven-Smith
invited those who wanted to see those challenges to
drive Dixie Highway from Miami to Jacksonville,
where the changes could be seen approximately every
two miles.
Dr. deHaven-Smith's presentation began with
facility investment cost, and he explained that
although short-term cost could be cheaper,
• maintenance costs would be very high as opposed to
spending more for long-term investment. Dr.
deHaven-Smith noted the effects on property values;
appearance of the facility and how it would fit
currently and long term in a changing community;
impacts in contiguous land uses in surrounding
neighborhoods and to surrounding businesses; the
effects on the Village image short term and long
term, and effects on distal and proximate urban
forum and calendar (the surrounding growth}. Dr.
deHaven Smith explained that what the Village did
along their borders could have an effect on crime
and that who locates around the Village could
affect the property values within the Village.Dr.
deHaven-Smith discussed the image that Boca Raton
projected which added value to their property. Dr.
deHaven-Smith presented a growth chart showing the
state's population of under 2 million in 1930,
increasing over the years to 15 million
approximately eight months ago. Dr. deHaven-Smith
explained that Florida's growth was not all
alike-citing examples such as Cuban, Haitian, and
retirement groups. Dr. deHaven-Smith noted that
in 1985 there had been 17,000 Haitians living in
• Delray Beach, that different groups tended to live
together, and that the population of Florida was
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 4
-----------------------
currently increasing at the rate of 550 people per
day, which was not as rapid as in the past.
Dr. deHaven-Smith discussed the baby boomers,
people born between 1946 and 1964, which were now
approaching retirement, with one baby boomer
turning 50 every seven seconds. This would greatly
impact the retirement population, with enormous
change by 2025. Dr. deHaven-Smith presented a map
showing the percentage of seniors in each county,
and indicating that they do not locate in the big
cities, but rather one or two counties out, which
creates a growth pattern. Dr. deHaven-Smith noted
that around 1975 Miami had been a Jewish retirement
community, which had subsequently moved up to
Broward County, and were now moving into Palm Beach
County. Dr. deHaven-Smith commented that Miami
had changed very quickly, in only ten years, from a
• Jewish retirement community to the center of Latin
disco. Dr. deHaven-Smith explained that Charlotte
County currently has the highest percentage of
retirees in the state, and commented that in 15-20
years there will be a lot more people in the senior
counties.
Dr. deHaven-Smith reviewed four stages of
urbanization: (1) rural (or older cities); (2) a
retirement boom; (3) after that young people move
in to provide services; and (4) retirement decline
(when retirees move to the next county). Housing
left vacant by retirees was then filled by ethnic
minorities-first generation immigrants, which could
have a big effect when there were 17,000 of them in
one area. Dr. deHaven-Smith explained that this
trend was coming right up the east coast, with Dade
and Broward declining in retirees as they moved
north to Palm Beach County. Dr. deHaven-Smith
noted there was also the same trend around Orlando
in Orange County, with most of the seniors living
in adjacent Lake County. Dr. deHaven-Smith showed
a map depicting the Hispanic population, which
showed the Spanish population to be as large in
• areas around Orlando and Tampa as in Dade County.
Dr. deHaven-Smith explained that in central
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 5
Florida the Hispanic population was Porto Rican,
and on the west coast Mexican. The state of
Florida was expected to be 40~ minority by 2025.
The African American population, which had declined
for the last 50 years, was now increasing; and the
Hispanic population was also increasing, changing
the population of the state very dramatically very
quickly. Dr. deHaven-Smith pointed out that the
Hispanic wave coming ug the southeast coast now
came as far north as just north of West Palm Beach.
Dr. deHaven-Smith discussed why urban blight
existed along the coast in predominately African
American neighborhoods, explaining thatstating it
was a vestige of Florida's southern history. The
state of Florida had been the third state to secede
from the IInion, and its motto on its first flag had
been "Leave us alone". The reason African
• Americans live in a strip running up the coast was
because there had been a zoning category "Negro
Housing" in the 1940's and 1950's. This was now
the congressional district of Alcee Hastings. Dr.
deHaven-Smith explained that typically as
predominantly white urbanization occurred inland,
malls were built approximately every six miles.
The reason they were built every six miles was
because it takes 100,000 people to support a
regional mall. As this urbanization moved west,
the jobs held by African Americans, domestic help
and agriculture, disappeared. Also, the civil
rights laws allowed healthy, educated African
Americans to leave this area, so that the remaining
black population consisted mainly of young, sick,
and old individuals. Dr. deHaven-Smith explained
that Tequesta was not insulated from this old
Florida tragedy running up the east coast. In the
growth cycle, Tequesta was in between stages 3 and
4, with young people moving in, creating a mix of
young and old, and a beginning decline in
retirement population. Dr. deHaven-Smith
presented a Palm Beach County population chart and
a Tequesta population chart. Dr. deHaven-Smith
• commented that Tequesta was a small village and had
no control over the pressures created by the growth
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 5
-----------------------
which surrounded them. Tequesta's population was
leveling off as the Village was approaching
buildout. The African American and Hispanic
populations were a little south of Tequesta, with
Tequesta being the last point of growth coming up
from the south. Photographs of urban blight in
locations south of Tequesta were presented.
Dr. deHaven-Smith discussed the impacts of public
investments, and what the Village could do to keep
their community healthy, and to pick it back up if
it deteriorated. Photographs of Las Olas Boulevard
in Ft. Lauderdale were shown. Dr. deHaven-Smith
gave a brief history of Ft. Lauderdale and
explained that the county had invested heavily in
the city and eventually turned it around, and that
they had turned their beach around in ten years.
Another example, Delray Beach was shown. Delray
• Beach had invested a lot of money and had made a
lot of progress. Boynton Beach was now in the
process of turning itself around, as was West Palm
Beach with Clematis Street and the Kravis Center.
Dr. deHaven-Smith discussed Mizner Park, a real
success which had been accomplished with a
publiclprivate partnership to develop a rundown
shopping center with closed down businesses and a
parking lot that flooded with each rain. In
Tallahassee, an example was Kleman Plaza, and Ft.
Pierce was now working on the same kind of
redevelopment.
Dr. deHaven-Smith provided a summary and
implications, and asked the residents to think
about what would happen in Tequesta in the next 15
years, and explained that now was a decisive time
in this community, which could get better, but
which could also deteriorate rapidly if the right
things were not done. Dr, deHaven-Smith commented
that the shopping center in Tequesta where the
Municipal Center was proposed looked like the
shopping center in Boca Raton that had become
Mizner Park. Dr. deHaven-Smith expressed his
• opinion that the Village was doing the right thing,
investing in a place that was a drag on property
VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
• MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 7
-----------------------
values and a source of potential problems, and
could turn a bad thing into something good through
a public/private partnership. Dr. deHaven-Smith
stated his 4].eW was that this was a smart move,
that the agenda tonight was to talk about the
particular locations, and that he would keep the
discussion to that agenda to the best of his
ability.
IV. OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED MUNICIPAL FACILITIES
Aj Acting Village Manager Joann Manganiello provided
an overview of the proposed municipal facilities
and explained that the Village, incorporated in
1957, was a full service community, offered a
highly attractive living environment positioned
between the Loxahatchee River and Atlantic Ocean, a
• small town with home-town friendliness, shops,
parks and recreation, and churches of various
faiths. Acting Village Manager Manganiello
explained that the importance of planning and
managing growth could not be underestimated nor
ignored, and that a priority and vision of the
Village Council for more than a decade had been
building for Tequesta's future. The Village
Council had taken a pro-active, aggressive, and
fiscally conservative approach to ensure that the
vitality and overall quality of life in Tequesta
would not be compromised. An integral part of
building for the Village's future included a
municipal facilities master plan. The history of
_ the Village Council's actions regarding municipal
facilities began with a master plan charrette in
1989, followed by a space needs study in 1993, life
safety and code compliance evaluation in 1995,
space needs study update in 1997, central business
district charrette in 1997, Tequesta Village Center
master site plan approval in 1999, and approval of
the Redevelopment Committee recommendation in 2000.
The Master Plan Phase I had relocated Village
Manager, Village Clerk, finance, and water service
• offices to the Wachovia bank building, making the
east wing of the Village Hall available to the
VILLAiGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
• MEETING MINUTES
Auqust 3, 2000
PAGE 8
-----------------------
Police Department and the east wing in the. annex
building available to Fire Rescue Administration.
In Phase II the public services facility was built
on Bridge Road and the reverse osmosis water
treatment plant had recently been completed. Phase
III, construction of a public safety facility for
Police and Fire Rescue, and a Municipal Center, was
the final planning effort in the municipal
facilities master plan. New municipal facilities
would address the following concerns: space that
was inadequate and overcrowded; functional
obselence; deteriorating physical conditions;
inadequate life safety code compliance; and
occupying temporary facilities. Photographs
depicting existing facilities conditions which were
the Tequesta employees' working environment were
shown, and included inadequate storage areas,
overcrowded employee work space, and inadequate
• space for equipment. A series of pictures compared
existing to prototype public safety operations
space and included a police department lobby,
dispatch communications room, work stations, mail
distribution center, holding cells, and a sally
port. Acting Village Manager Manganiello noted
that the Police Department currently had no
available holding cells or sally port, and that
detainees were now transferred to the Palm Beach
County jail. Next shown were pictures depicting
deteriorating conditions, temporary quarters which
had housed firefighters since 1993, and rented
office space which had cost approximately $50,000
annually since 1996. Acting Village Manager
Manganiello commented that the need for new
facilities was real and warranted, and that the
Village Council had made the decision to provide
new facilities.
A rendering depicting the southeast view from
Tequesta Drive of the new public safety facility
was presented, to be built on the present site of
Police and Fire Rescue with the Village Green Park
remaining intact. Another rendering was presented
• which showed the facility from Tequesta Drive and
that the fire rescue apparatus bays would be right
VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
• MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 9
------------------''---
up front. A conceptual site plan of the public
safety facility delineating separate operations by
use of different colors was presented.
Acting Village Manager Manganiello explained that
in September, 1989, the Village Council had held a
Master Plan Charrette to develop a conceptual
master plan for future development east of the FEC
railway. The area consisted of 90 acres of mostly
vacant land and deteriorating shopping plazas. The
master plan provided for mixed use zoning,
including residential, commercial, cultural, and
civic uses. As a result of this charrette, the
Village Council had created the mixed use zoning
district to stimulate development and redevelopment
in the central business district. A Village Hall
was envisioned in this district, as well as a
traditional urban design pattern with emphasis on
• pedestrian-friendly access. In May, 1997, a
Tequesta Village Center Charrette had been held to
focus more intently on development and
redevelopment of the central business district by
receiving input from property and business owners
in the study area. Preliminary site plans
reflecting ideas and concepts resulted. Among the
many concepts were a new main street, streetscapes,
new buildings with plazas, and people places. In
August 1999 the Master Site Plan for Tequesta
Village Center, which was in keeping with
recommendations from both charrettes, was
unanimously approved by the Village Council.
Acting Village Manager Manganiello explained that
the groundbreaking and subsequent development of
Tequesta Village Center was of major significance
in the revitalization of Tequesta's downtown
central business district as conceptualized in the
1989 Master Plan. The focal point was to be the
new Municipal Center.
Acting Village Manager Manganiello presented a
rendering of the new Municipal Center on Bridge
Road, and explained that a land swap was available
• which would place the facility on Tequesta Drive.
The proposed facility on each site was described.
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 10
The Village Council was requesting the residents'
preference of the two sites at this meeting, which
they would take into account in making their
decision for the location. Acting Village Manager
Manganiello explained that the Village Council
envisioned a Municipal Center that would provide
people places for children to play, adults to
relax, and families to gather; a place to hold
outdoor community events and to host meetings and
seminars; a vibrant Municipal Center of which the
residents could be a part; and that the Municipal
Center would provide a sense of identity for the
Village. The Municipal Center would include space
for administrative offices, public records, finance
department, water customer service, utilities
department, public works and recreation, community
development, and the Village Council chambers. The
Municipal Center would be a place for community
• meetings, such as homeowner association meetings;
business-professional association functions; social
gatherings, such as receptions, parties, and
ceremonies; informational seminars and lectures;
children's special activities such as youth movie
nights; government-sponsored special events such as
a citizens' appreciation barbeque. The Municipal
Center would offer a friendly, small-town
atmosphere.
The Bridge Road streetscape plan was presented,
which together with the Municipal Center would
revitalize the central business area, benefit
existing businesses, attract new businesses,
enhance and compliment new development and
renovation in the downtown area, and increase
property values. Acting Village Manager
Manganiello explained that the Bridge Road
Streetscape Plan would be the finishing touch for
Tequesta's downtown, and revitalization of Bridge
Road would involve major infrastructure
improvements as well as major aesthetic
improvements.
• Costs for the proposed Village facilities were
reviewed. Total estimated cost for the public
VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
• MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 11
-----------------------
safety building and site was $3.2 million; total
cost for the municipal center based on
approximately 17,000 square feet to provide for
future expansion was $1.8 million for the building
and site The cost of the land swap-$106,000;
carillon clock-$20,000; and carillon clock
tower-$65,000, were not included. Acting Village
Manager Manganiello explained that for their
investment the residents would be provided with a
Public Safety Facility which would include Police
administration, communications, patrol services,
investigative services, compliance inspection, Fire
administration, emergency medical services, and
fire suppression services. The Municipal Center
would include administrative offices, public
records, finance and utilities departments, public
works and recreation, department of community
development, and the Council chambers. The
• facilities would be paid for by 30-year bonds using
utility tax revenues now going into the General
Fund. The General Fund would be replenished by
additional revenues generated by new development
and redevelopment, along with revenue increases
from other General Fund sources, so that to a
significant extent the new facilities would pay for
themselves. Acting Village Manager Manganiello
explained that new development generates new value,
new value generates additional tax dollars,
additional tax dollars increase revenues of the
General Fund, increased revenues of the General
Fund replenish utility tax revenues pledged for
debt service on the bond, for which the following
example was provided: The current assessed value
of the Tequesta Plaza property today was $725,000,
while the projected assessed value of Tequesta
Village Center was $10 million. Current tax revenue
from Tequesta Plaza based on a millage rate of
6.7305 was $5,000; while the projected future tax
revenue was $67,000 annually. Acting Village
Manager Manganiello noted that Kimley Horn &
Associates estimated a $4.00 return on every $1.00
invested in streetscaping. The Bridge Road/Main
• Street streetscaping would involve an investment of
approximately $600,000, resulting in a return on
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 12
-----------------------
that investment of $2.4 million increase in
property values, business revenues, and other
monies.
Acting Village Manager Manganiello noted that this
project was the culmination of planning which had
taken place over the years since the 1989 citizen
charrette, and that the Village Council had had the
foresight to reserve funds for debt service
payments over a number of years in anticipation of
the municipal facilities project. .Acting Village
Manager Manganiello explained that the goal of the
past eleven years could now be made a reality. Ms.
Manganiello commented that the Public Safety
facility would bring each resident a sense of
safety and security, and the new Municipal Center
would provide residents with a sense of community
and a sense of identity--of the Village as a place
• for families to call home.
V. INPUT ON MUNICIPAL CENTER SITE OPTIONS
A) Dr. Lance deHaven-Smith requested residents stay
focused on the issue and to share their reasons for
their preference of location.
Jim Hum~age stated he would reserve additional
comments for the Village Council meeting. Mr.
Humpage agreed new facilities were needed,
commented that the presentation was good, and that
he appreciated the endeavors of staff and Council.
Harold Taylor commented two choices of location
were presented and suggested three additional
options: (1) do nothing; (2) lease additional
space, move the Police Department and Fire Rescue
and revamp the current building; or (3) build a new
town center on the current site of Village Hall.
Mr. Taylor commented he had a moral and ethic
question of taking tax money paid by residents to
build a facility which would complete with local
businesses. Mr. Taylor expressed his opinion that
• JMZ properties would continue their development
whether or not the town center was located there,
• VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 13
-----------------------
and expressed his opinion that things such as a
swimming pool should be built to have activities
for children that they would want.
John Giba commented he believed that after all the
years of study, this plan was the best solution.
Mr. Giba suggested the Village look into providing
a small office in the new Municipal Complex for
each of the Village services not represented in the
administration building: Fire Rescue, Police, and
Public Service, so that people inquiring about any
of these services only have to go to one place.
Mr. Giba commented he hoped room for expansion had
been built in.
Mayor Capretta expressed pleasure with the turnout
and announced two more upcoming sessions, one on
Saturday morning and one next Tuesday. The Mayor
• responded to the suggestion of renovating the
present building that studies had indicated it was
in such bad condition that it could not be feasibly
renovated to comply with hurricane regulations.
Mayor Capretta announced that more citizen input
would be requested at future meetings.
Vice Mayor Schauer requested a show of hands to
express preferences for each site. Approximately
30 were in favor of the Tequesta Drive site, and
approximately 15 favored the Bridge Road location.
In response to a question from a resident who asked
whether a vote could be held on locating the
facilities on the present site or on the JMZ site,
Dr. deHaven-Smith reported that decision had been
made, and at that time that there had been many
discussions.
Ron Poirier, Tequesta Oaks resident, questioned
whether one site had any advantages over the other.
Acting Village Manager Manganiello responded that
both sites would have the same parking, both would
be an integral part of the central business
district, the Tequesta Drive site would be more
visible, however, the Bridge Road site was a lovely
VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 14
-----------------------
site, plaza space would be the same, the Tequesta
Drive site would necessitate the cost of a land
swap; however, with the clock tower for the Bridge
Road location the sites would be about equal, so it
was really a matter of preference.
Another member of the audience expressed concern
regarding increased traffic on Tequesta Drive and
questioned whether there would be additional
traffic lights. Dr. deHaven-Smith listed traffic
concerns as an issue and indicated that traffic
differences between the two locations could be
studied. Acting Village Manager Manganiello
responded that the traffic study which was done had
indicated that Tequesta Drive could accommodate the
extra anticipated traffic; howevez, the railroad
crossing presented a problem in that traffic tended
to back up. A resident questioned whether Village
• Green Park would be eliminated, to which Ms.
Manganiello responded the park would remain. Ed
Perin, Tequesta Oaks, favored the Tequesta Drive
location for its visibility. Another member of the
audience commented if she were a store owner she
would want the visibility for the stores, and if
she lived on the east side of the railroad tracks
she would want some kind of fire rescue services
provided on that side of the tracks. Tom Romak,
Tequesta Oaks, favored the Tequesta Drive site
because he felt it would promote development more
than the other site. Jim Humpage questioned why
the Tequesta Drive site would cost $2.00 more than
the Bridge Road site, which Acting Village Manager
Manganiello clarified the land was more expensive
and would be considered in the cost of the land
swap, although the exact square footage did not
have to be swapped, and the cost of the clock tower
could be a trade-off. A member of the audience
expressed an opinion that Bridge road had never
been anything but a back road and never vital,
therefore, did not understand the use of the term
revitalization of Bridge Road. She also commented
that she saw no harm in asking for a show of hands
• in favor of having the municipal complex at another
location. Acting Village Manager Manganiello
. VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 15
responded that shop owners on Bridge Road had
indicated at the charrette that their businesses
had been hurt as a result of FDOT closing access
from II.S. One coming north, which the Village had
fought against, and that their primary concern had
been access, which the new Main Street would
provide and would open up Bridge Road again. Mr.
John Giba asked that the Village do this project
right and commented that one should not try to save
$10 on a mattress that would last 20 years. Mr.
Giba commented he liked two ideas: The choice of
the Tequesta Drive site if ingress/egress problems
could be solved; and the idea of a clock tower as a
landmark. Another member of the audience asked if
the Bridge Road location would help traffic, which
Dr. deHaven-Smith noted was an item to study.
Councilmember Genco asked Dr. deHaven-Smith whether
in his expert opinion the Bridge Road location
• would foster more commercial development, and free
up commercial space on Tequesta Drive. Dr.
deHaven-Smith explained that the commercial spinoff
benefits around these kinds of facilities were not
immediately adjacent, and either location would
have spinoff economic development activities, and
that what he was hearing was two different
considerations, one economic and the other
appearance coming into the town. Councilmember
Genco commented that the main purpose was
revitalization financially.
IV. COMMUNICATION FROM CITIZENS
Harold Taylor asked why the question of preference of
these sites compared to somewhere else was being avoided.
Dr. deHaven-Smith responded that was not on the agenda and
had not been advertised for discussion.
Mayor Capretta announced that two more sessions would be
held and expressed appreciation for those who had attended
and for their input. The Mayor commented that the Village
Council would try to formulate a plan preferred by the
• majority of the people.
VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP
MEETING MINUTES
August 3, 2000
PAGE 16
-----------------------
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Vice Mayor Schauer moved that the meeting be adjourned.
Councilmember Genco seconded the motion. The vote on the
motion was:
Joseph N. Capretta - for
Elizabeth A. Schauer - for
Basil Dalack - for
Sharon Walker - for
Geraldine Genco - for
The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting
was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
•
Respectfully submitted,
~~:.
Betty Laur
Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
J ann Manganie o
Village Clerk
DATE APPROVED:
l~. 02 000
•