Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Special Meeting_06/23/1994VILLAGE 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 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES JUNE 23, 1994 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Village Council held a Special Meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Thursday, June 23, 1994. The meeting was called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Mayor Ron T. Mackail. A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, the Recording Secretary. Council members present were: Mayor Ron T. Mackail, Vice Mayor William E. Burckart, Earl L. Collings, and Joseph N. Capretta. Also in attendance were: Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Attorney Scott Hawkins sitting in for Village Attorney John C. Randolph, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Department Heads. Absent was Council member Elizabeth A. Schauer. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA o Mayor Mackail asked to add an item under Item V Wellfield Protection Ordinance. Vice Mayor Burckart moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Councilmember Collings seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as amended. III. RESOLUTION NO. 16-93/94 - AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE VILLAGE'S IMPROVEMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BOND, SERIES 1994, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $1,365,000; PRESCRIBING THE FORM, TERMS AND DETAILS OF SUCH BOND; MAKING CERTAIN OTHER COVENANTS AND AGREffi~ENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF SUCH BOND; SPECIFYING THE USE OF THE PROCEEDS OF Recycled Paner Village Council ,:{~, Special Meeting Minutes June 23, 1994 Page 2 SUCH BOND AND THE SECURITY FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF; AWARDING SUCH BOND TO JUPITER/TEQUESTA NATIONAL BANK BY NEGOTIATED SALE; PLEDGING ALL FRANCHISE FEES AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE FEES OF THE VILLAGE AS SECURITY FOR SUCH BOND; DESIGNATING THE BOND AS A °QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMP'P OBLIGATION^ WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 265 (B) (3 ) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS AMENDED; HARING CERTAIN OTHER COVENANTS AND CONTAINING CERTAIN OTHER PROVISIONS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. (Staff Recommends Approval) Finance Director Bill Kascavelis explained that 1979 outstanding bonds of $580,000 would be called (plus a 3$ premium for a total of $613,640), and replaced with a new bond at a Iower interest rate issued by the successful bidder, Jupiter-Tequesta National Bank. The new $1,365,000 bond issue would provide funds of $311,000 for Tequesta Park improvements, $408,000 for Constitution Park improvements, $172,000 to pave Country Club Drive, and provide a few thousand dollars extra. Finance Director Kascavelis stated the cost of issuance was less since the normal requirement of one year debt service reserve and underwriter fees had been eliminated. Mark Raymond, of Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, FitzGerald & Sheehan, P.A., retained by the Village to assist as Bond Counsel for this financing, called attention to Section 4, of the resolution where figures had been changed to reflect the true amount of proceeds. In answer to a question by Councilmember Collings, Mr. Raymond explained that General Obligation bonds issued in the State of Florida with a maturity of more than one year normally would be repaid by ad valorem taxes and would require a referendum; however, this is a Special Obligation using franchise fees and occupational license fees for repayment, therefore a referendum is not required. In response to other questions by Councilmember Collings, Mr. Raymond explained that if by improper uses of bond proceeds the interest on the bonds became taxable, the bank had the option to increase the interest rate to prime; and that 35~ is the current maximum marginal rate of income taxation on corporations. If this rate would be made higher by law, the bank would accept a lower tax-exempt rate and receive the same after-tax proceeds. In response to Councilmember Capretta's question, Mr. Raymond stated the entire proceeds would be disbursed at closing. Village Council Special Meeting Minutes June 23, 1994 Page 3 Hal Hutchison of Camiela Circle, stated he felt the total cost of the bond, approximately 2.2 million over 15 years, should be advertised to the village taxpayers. He stated he felt the Council had found a way around the normal referendum requirement similar to the way the School Board was financing their buildings. He stated every resident should have the option to vote whether to tax themselves. Finance Director Kascavelis answered that Mr. Hutchison was including the interest over the 15-year life of the bond, and that no one would loan money for nothing. He stated the interest rate on the outstanding 1979 issue was 8.4% and the interest rate on the new issue would be 6.15%, thereby saving taxpayer money. Mayor Mackail stated that taxpayers would also have the benefit of improved parks from this bond issue. Councilmember Collings moved to approve Resolution No. 16- 93/94. Vice Mayor Burckart seconded the motion. Attorney `" Hawkins read Resolution No. 15-93/94 by title only. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. IV. ORDINANCE - FIRST READING - AMENDING THE VILLAGE CODE OF ORDINANCES AT CHAPTER 11, LICENSES, AMENDING SECTION 11-19, SUPPORTING AFFIDAVITS REQUIRED; AMENDING SECTION 11-20, TRANSFERABILITY; FEE; AMENDING SECTION 11-21, LICENSE NOT IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTIONS OF VIOLATION; DELETING SECTION 11-22 RELATING TO MASTER-SERVANT RELATIONSHIPS; AMENDING SECTION 11-25, UNLAWFUL TO ENGAGE IN TRADE OR BUSINESS WITHOUT LICENSE OR WITH LICENSE ON FALSE STATEMENTS, DELINQUENCY FEES; AMENDING SECTION 11-26.1, REGISTRATION REQUIRED; AMENDING SECTION 11-27, ENUMERATION OF LICENSE TAXES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Staff Recommends Approval) Village Manager Bradford stated in the 1993 legislative session the State legislature passed a bill which authorized Village Council ,.,.~,. Special Meeting Minutes June 23, 1994 Page 4 an amendment to the occupational license structure within counties and municipalities of the State of Florida and allowed an increase in occupational license fees for the first time in several years. In order to increase fees municipalities were required to create an Equity Study Commission consisting of businesspersons within the community to consider the amendment of occupational licenses. The Village Council adopted a resolution creating an Equity Study Commission and subsequently appointed Ed Nelson, John Giba and Mac Goodner to be on the Commission which had reviewed the current occupational license rates of Tequesta and compared them to the other communities in the study area. This ordinance would increase fees in accordance with the recommendations made by the Equity Study Commission. Scott D. Ladd, Building Official, reported the Equity Study Commission had amended numerous categories in the service ~"° classifications by adding definitions to make the license categories more easily understood and to give each category a definition at its heading before listing the fee structure. Mr. Ladd reported 41 categories increased an average amount of 790; 8 categories were higher than 79~; 33 categories were lower than 79$; and the total was in compliance with the State mandate of a 10~ cap. The State mandate had included changing the mailing date of renewal notices from September 1 to August 1, giving a 2-month window before the October 1 beginning fiscal license year. A registration fee was added for persons coming into Tequesta to work who did not have a place of business in the Village. In response to Councilmember Capretta's question, Mr. Ladd responded that annual occupational fee revenue was approximately $70-72,000; Mr. Bradford responded annual franchise fee revenue was approximately $230,000; and the increased occupational license fees would bring in approximately $10,000 more annually. Vice Mayor Burckart opposed increasing the occupational license fees, stating he felt this would send a message to businesses reinforcing what they already feel about Tequesta being hard to deal with, and would make it more difficult to attract businesses to come into the Village, and that the increase in fees was so small it would not be worth alienating the businesses. After discussion comparing the current occupational license :,. fees to surrounding municipalities and a report by Mr. Nelson, Chairman of the Equity Study Commission, who stated Village Council Special Meeting Minutes June 23, 1994 Page 5 the Commission had operated on the theory that an increase would be helpful, but looking at the overall picture the increase would be very small, and much of the Commission's work had corrected inequities. Mr. Ladd explained the major inequities that were corrected were the Property Maintenance category in which the fee had been $40 and was left the same for businesses with 3 or less employees and increased to $60 for 4 or more employees; and the Retail Merchants category requirements were changed and a fourth category added to correct inequities whereby a small retail business had been paying almost as much as a large corporation such as K-Mart. Village Manager Bradford commented that taxes would have to be increased somewhere else if the additional $10,000 from increasing occupational license fees were not available. Councilmember Collings suggested that not increasing fees might provide an incentive to enough businesses to come into the Village that their license fees would make up the loss. Vice Mayor Burckart stated the bad publicity by the ~" newspapers would cost more than $10,000. Mr. Ladd reported by State law an increase could be done next year. Village Manager Bradford suggested in the future that home occupations would need to be considered. Councilmember Collings moved to approve the housekeeping changes to the Village Code of Ordinances at Chapter 11 as recommended by the Equity Study Commission and to keep all rates the same except RM003 and RM004, changing those fees as recommended by the Equity Study Commission. Vice Mayor Burckart seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and consensus of the Council was that the Ordinance be changed to reflect the motion and presented for second reading on July 14, 1994. V. RESOLUTION NO. 17-93/94 - OPPOSING AND OBJECTING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH PROVIDES FOR A PROPOSED PUBLIC UTILITIES FEE AS A SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR THE COUNTY' S DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT WELLFIELD PROTECTION WORR; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR Village Council Special Meeting Minutes June 23, 1994 Page 6 OTHER PURPOSES. (Staff Recommends Approval) Village Manager Bradford explained that the Wellfield Protection Ordinance of Palm Beach County was currently funded through ad valorem property tax revenues received by the County. To take pressure off property taxes, the County Commission had created a Wellfield Protection fee and a public utilities fee where the cost of administering their Wellfield Protection Ordinance would be passed on to the utilities, who would then distribute the cost to their customers. The objection to this system was that the County would be able to impose greater and greater fees over the years which would impact the utilities' customers. By adopting the Resolution the Village would join surrounding municipalities who have taken similar action to oppose the County's plan. Mayor Mackail stated the Municipal League also opposed the County's position. '" Councilmember Collings moved to approve Resolution No. 17- 93/94 opposing the County. Vice Mayor Capretta seconded the motion. Attorney Hawkins read Resolution 17-93/94 by title only. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Collings - for Joseph N. Capretta - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. VI. ANY OTHER MATTERS VII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS Joan Marshall stated she had spoken with a Jupiter Council Member who had indicated since Section 28 had been approved that a new east-west road would be proposed with an outlet onto Island Way. As a resident of Country Club Drive she felt that would create too much traffic on Country Club Drive. Village Manager Bradford stated a traffic study had been performed to review the Section 28 Northfork proposal impact which indicated 1,000 to 1,200 additional trips per day could be expected on Country Club Drive. Other points discussed were that nothing would be known from the State until possibly January 1st on reducing the level of service Village Council Special Meeting Minutes June 23, 1994 Page 7 ------------------------------- for Country Club Drive, and the speed limit might be a deterrent for people to travel that route. Mrs. Leigner, TCCCA, voiced concern over hurricane evacuation routes. Mayor Mackail stated the evacuation routes that were in the present plan would be followed in the event of a hurricane. VI. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Collings moved that the meeting be adjourned. Vice Mayor Burcl~art seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Ron T. Mackail - for William E. Burckart - for Earl L. Callings - for `""""' Joseph N. Capretta - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~" Betty Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST: J ann Mangani to Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: