Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Workshop_10/25/1994VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 357 Tequesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (407) 575-6200 Fax: (407) 575-6203 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA VILLAGE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 I. II. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Village Council held a Workshop Meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Tuesday, October 25, 1994. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Ron T. Mackail. A roll call was taken by Village Clerk Joann Manganiello acting as Recording Secretary. Councilmembers present were: Mayor Ron T. Mackail, Vice Mayor William E. Burckart, Elizabeth A. Schauer, Earl L. Collings and Joseph N. Capretta. Also in attendance were: Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, Deputy Building Official Steve Kennedy, and Department Heads. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Schauer moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Councilmember Capretta seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for r ~... III. The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. Review of Proposed Staff Plan for Tequesta Annexation Effort and Associated Urban Services Report. Village Manager Bradford listed the contents of the packets for the meeting: 1. Annexation Urban Services Report Memo drafted by Deputy Building Official Kennedy. Rvrvr)vd Pnnnr Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 2 ------------------------------- 2. Annexation Referendum Schedule 3. Urban Services Report - 1995 Proposed Annexation, which Village Manager Bradford reported contained an error in paragraph 3, page 1: Section 171.042 should be changed to Section 171.043. 4. A series of maps showing proposed annexation areas A through E - Village Manager Bradford informed the Village Council that if they should approve this proposed annexation that additional maps would be provided indicating land uses, water lines, and sewer lines within each of these areas. 5. Cost Benefit Analysis - Village Manager Bradford directed the Village Council's attention to footnote 3 in which the 40,000 figure should be changed to 47,965. 6. Copy of Tequesta's Annexation Policy - Village Manager Bradford explained that this policy had been adopted under Resolution 9-87/88, and that the present proposed annexation was in accordance with this policy. Village Manager Bradford reported the referendum schedule being proposed would hold a vote on March 14, 1995 within the Village of Tequesta and the areas to be annexed in which the people would vote whether or not they wished those areas to be annexed into the Village. After advising the Village Council that this was probably the biggest issue they had ever faced since it would change Tequesta forever, Village Manager Bradford explained that if approved, the population would change from 4,500 to approximately 7,100; the tax rate would be approximately 4.07 mills or a 33~ reduction for current property owners in Tequesta; the net effect provided to unincorporated residents would be a grand total of $152 per $100,000 of assessed value for first rate police and fire services which they do not receive today. Village Manager Bradford responded to a question by Mayor Mackail regarding when newly annexed areas would begin paying Tequesta's tax rate by explaining that the issue of timing would have to be _ decided since it would impact the marketability of the annexation--that the sooner property was brought into Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 3 the Village, the longer the property would have to wait to be taxed for Village services--and that the window for annexation was from March 15, 1995 to October 1, 1996. Steven A. Kennedy, Deputy Building Official, reviewed the Urban Services Report, required under state law as a prerequisite to annexation in order to certify that the proposed areas meet certain criteria showing that they are actual enclaves, to show that the Village is in a position to provide all services to the annexed areas at the same level or higher than they presently enjoy, and to set forth the costs of those services and any improvements that might be made. Deputy Building Official Kennedy informed the Village Council that all Department Heads had contributed to this report and that it had been reviewed by the Village Attorney. The Council was reminded of Village Manager Bradford's earlier statement that the millage rate could be ~~~ lowered to 4.07 mills, which he explained included the cost of the following additional items. Village Manager Bradford stated that the Tequesta police department's average response time to emergency calls was currently 1.5 minutes, and in order to continue to maintain that level of service Chief Roderick had indicated he would need to create a third patrol zone, and add as many as 5 police officers to the force along with the associated equipment they would need. The Fire Department would need one additional combat person and equipment and a Class A pumper. Other costs that had not been included were for water mains, etc. in the Jupiter Heights area (Area A) estimated to cost $41,500, which could be paid in one of three ways according to the decision of the Village Council: (1) from the Water Department Capital Improvements Budget, (2) by newly annexed residents who were the beneficiaries, or (3) under Palm Beach County's Annexation Incentive Program whereby the cost would be shared equally by the Village, Palm Beach County, and the residents. Village Manager Bradford explained that another water main deficient area located on Pine Tree Drive (Area D) would require an expenditure of approximately $19,350, but there would be no impact from sewer costs since they are provided by ENCON. Village Manager Bradford stated that Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 4 drainage improvements in Waterway Village subdivision (Area B) which would be repairing cracked structures, was estimated to cost up to $10,000 and other drainage system improvements could cost up to $175,000 over the next five to seven years. The cost of bring Pinetree Drive up to paving standards was estimated at $200,000. Village Manager Bradford explained that staff needed direction from the Village Council as to which of the three options for payment would be used for these major capital expenditures, totaling approximately $400,000. Next, Village Manager Bradford reviewed the Cost Benefit Analysis spreadsheet, and informed the Village Council that residents of the proposed annexation areas could determine their net tax increase by subtracting their current Palm Beach County Fire Rescue millage rate of 2.55 from the Village millage rate of 4.07. The resulting 1.52 mills, or $152 per $100,000 of value, would be the lowest millage rate anywhere in northern Palm Beach County for a full-service city to as far south as West Palm Beach. Direction was requested from the Council for (1) simultaneous annexation of all 5 areas, (2) beginning a public information campaign regarding marketing the annexation, and (3) how the capital deficiencies previously discussed should be paid for, which totaled approximately $400,000. Councilmember Collings commented that the referendum would be a complicated statement, to which Village Manager Bradford responded that the residents of Tequesta would be faced with five items to vote on; however, the residents of each proposed annexation area would have only one--whether or not to annex their own area. Councilmember Collings stated he would like to know costs for however the vote came out, whether all five or fewer areas voted to be annexed at once. Village Manager Bradford stated that would be done, however, explained that one advantage of annexing all five areas at once would be that the lowest possible millage rate would be achieved. Councilmember Collings requested a listing of costs for services now versus services under annexation for the proposed areas, and stated that the marketing approach was critical. Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes ~~ October 25, 1994 Page 5 ------------------------------- Mayor Mackail commented that the residents in the proposed annexation areas would want to know the amount it would cost them and what benefits they would receive, and that the increase in cost to them would be only $12.67 per month to gain police and medical services. Mayor Mackail requested a date where that increase would be absorbed so that the entire Village including the newly annexed areas would benefit. In response to Councilman Collings, Village Manager Bradford explained that the state law that allowed municipalities to automatically annex small enclaves had been challenged but still stood at the present time. Vice Mayor Burckart stated his position that the Council should absolutely move forward with the marketing package and suggested both staff and members of the Council give presentations to every homeowners association so that they would be informed before hearing of any negatives, and that the Village should shoulder the $400,000 cost to make annexation more appealing. Vice Mayor Burckart also suggested that the annexation become effective the day following the election so that the newly annexed areas would get 9 months free services, which Village Manager Bradford responded could be done, however, since the money it would take to start services immediately would not come in immediately, an interim source of funding would have to be found. Another suggestion was to phase services in so they would equal the non-ad valorem revenues such as franchise fees and utility taxes which are now paid to the County and under annexation would go to the Village--typically 45% of total revenue sources. Village Manager Bradford presented the following scenario: All five proposed areas were annexed into the Village on March 15, 1995. Residents of those areas would not pay property taxes on their new services until November of 1996. Councilmember Schauer asked where the money would come from to cover the period from March 15, 1995 to November of 1996. Village Manager Bradford explained it would have to be covered by existing revenues until non-ad valorem revenues were received, and that if timing were planned right no additional costs would Village Council Workshop Meeting 14inutes October 25, 1994 Page 6 have to impact existing r services to new residents. esidents in order to provide Councilmember Capretta sugc not be ready by March t~ holding it in November woL before ad valorem taxes wot $152 per $100,000 figure c in the marketing since it five areas were annexed Capretta also suggested Village would have more opposition. In response question whether there was figure could be promised proposed areas did not ann responded that if the ~ another method to pay the could be promised. Ci ~ested that the Village might ~ hold the referendum, and ld result in a smaller time ld be received, and that the Auld not be presented solely could not be true unless all at once. Councilmember that given more time, the opportunity to combat any to Councilmember Capretta's a way the $152 per $100,000 and delivered even if all 'x, Village Manager Bradford illage Council decided on ?400,000 in capital costs it ~uncilmember Capretta then proposed marketing as no taxes for la monzns ana znen a guaranteed tax rate of $152 per $100,000, and although current residents would not experience a 33~ reduction in their property taxes, they would have some reduction. Village Manager Bradford explained that the present unincorporated areas could not be offered the same amount in taxes that they currently pay since when they became a part of the Village no special favors could be granted to one area of the Village over another area. The Village Manager also commented that the proposed areas were broken into 5 portions in order to comply with State law--and that the Village would love to only have one area and therefore one voting area instead of 5 separate voting areas. He also stated his feeling that all five areas would be voted in, and explained that current land uses in the newly annexed areas would remain the same until the Village changed them. Mayor Mackail summarized the discussion by stating that the only way to deliver the marketing package was what the councilmembers had stated: to have a marketable plan comparing apples to apples, dollars to dollars, and based on the five pockets being considered if four came in what would happen, if three came in what would happen, etc. Village Manager Bradford explained the marketing plan must conform to a public information plan and not a political campaign. Councilmember Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 7 ------------------------------- Capretta urged the Council not to make the same timing mistakes that had been made in the past, and to go forward with professional packages for presentation to homeowners' associations. Gary Thomas, Bermuda Terrace, stated he was Chairman of the Bermuda Terrace Homeowners Association during 1992/93, and reported that there was a rumor that the new Chairman Dwayne McPeake had spoken to the Council, and that Bermuda Terrace was in favor of being annexed. The members of the Council informed Mr. Thomas that none of them had spoken with Mr. McPeake. Mr. Thomas questioned how realistic the $152 per $100,000 figure was. Village Manager Bradford explained that since annexation was last considered, Tequesta had established the Fire Rescue service which allowed deduction of the cost of current Palm Beach County Fire Rescue millage rate of 2.55 from the Village millage rate of 4.07. Mayor Mackail assured Mr. Thomas that the 1.52 millage rate had been seriously scrutinized. Village Manager Bradford stated this was a first draft and if the Village Council decided to go forward, details would be fine tuned in order to arrive at the lowest possible price for everybody. Mike Meder, 114 Chapel Lane, questioned if zoning were grandfathered how the Village would prevent construction of a 15-story building on Beach Road. Village Manager Bradford responded he believed that current law stated land use could not be changed for 2 years unless Tequesta had passed new zoning and land use regulations for that property, and that would be a marketing tool to present to Beach Road residents who did not want taller buildings to be constructed. In response to Mayor Mackail, Building Official Scott D. Ladd stated it would take a minimum of 200 days for a comprehensive plan change that would have to occur prior to the zoning change, but the zoning change could begin at some point within the 200 days, resulting in 200-230 days to accomplish both. Helen Laughter, Bermuda Terrace, questioned if annexation failed whether the Village could try again to which Village Manager Bradford responded it could be reconsidered after two years. Hal Hutchinson, Camelia Circle, questioned since there Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 8 ------------------------------- could be no special tax advantages how the Village could offer 18 months free of taxes as an incentive for annexation. Village Manager Bradford explained that the annexed areas when brought into the Village would fall under the same tax rate as the rest of the Village and that by finding the money within existing revenues to provide additional services that current residents would not be impacted. Mayor Mackail explained that since the Village had no other way to grow that if annexation were not accomplished that the only way to pay increased costs in the future would be to increase the current residents' taxes. Mr. Hutchinson stated he could see no benefit in annexation, and cited the Fire Rescue program as an example of an item costing more than projected. Village Manager Bradford responded that the same principle was used for fire rescue--spend now to save later--and the people had voted for it. Louise Guadiguoli, Bermuda Terrace, asked what percentage of votes would be needed to either defeat or «~ bring in annexation. Mayor Mackail replied a majority was needed. Betty Nagy, Shay Place, asked why the referendum couldn't be December 31 so that newly annexed areas would be on the January 1 tax rolls and reduce the period of free services to nine months. Village Manager Bradford explained that holding the referendum at the same time as a regularly scheduled election would save money. Ms. Nagy expressed concern that the Village had too many things to consider at this time. John Cunningham, Shay Place, asked which areas would be the least costly to take into the Village. Village Manager Bradford replied that it would be least costly to take all five areas, and that Area D would be the most costly. Gary Thomas questioned whether there would be service costs for Bermuda Terrace and how Area D could be considered the most costly. Deputy Building Official Kennedy explained it would be most costly if it were brought in alone. Helen Laughter asked whether Bermuda Terrace would be required to connect to the sewer system, and was told no, because sewer service was provided by ENCON, and Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page 9 ------------------------------- Village Manager Bradford stated that in his opinion residents within the Village would have more protection against low pressure sewer than residents in unincorporated areas, since the Village had won a lawsuit against ENCON to stop low pressure in the Village. Village Manager Bradford reviewed the Village Council's directives: 1. Pursue hiring a firm to help in creation of the public information program. 2. Fine tune costs to make sure they are absolutely correct. 3. Proceed under assumption that Village will pay 100 of the $400,000. Mayor Mackail requested not to proceed under that assumption yet, but to show all the numbers. 4. Look at the phasing of the 18-month window as to what would happen in regard to dollars and services, with services to start as soon as possible after annexation. Councilmember Schauer also requested a game plan to advertise to homeowners associations. Village Manager Bradford advised that it was probable all the association presidents would be invited to attend a presentation at the Village Hall. Councilmember Capretta suggested enlisting support of other organizations also, such as Chamber of Commerce, as well as that of the newspapers. VI. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Collings moved that the meeting be adjourned. Vice Mayor Burckart seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Elizabeth A. Schauer - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes October 25, 1994 Page l0 The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~~x_ U Betty Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST: Joann Mang iello Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: