Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Workshop_01/12/1990 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (407) 575-6200 FAX: (407) 575-6203 V I L L A G E O F T E Q U E S T A V I L L A G E C O U N C I L W O R K S H O P rI E E T I N G M I N U T E S J A N U A R Y 1 2 , 1 9 9 0 I. The Tequesta Village Council held a workshop meeting at the Village Hall., 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Friday, Jant.tary 12, 1990. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 P.M. by Vice Mayor Edward. Howell. Councilmembers present were: William E. Burckart, Ron T. Mackail, Earl L. Collings, and Vice-Mayor Edward Howell. Thomas G. Bradford, Village Manager; Bill C. Iiascavelis, Finance Director, a.nd John C.Randolph, Village Attorney were also in attendance. Mayor Joseph N. Capretta was not in attendance, but submitted a written statement representing his views on the • following issue. `lr. and Mrs. Jerry Hartman, landowners in the parcel under discussion, were also present. II. REVIEW OF TEQUESTA ANNEXATION RESERVE AREA AND DISCUSSION OF STRATEGY TO RESOLVE CONFLICT WITH JUPITER. Village Manager Tom Bradford recapped Tequesta's annexation situation pointing to the map (attached) which originated approximately 1.5 years ago when the Village delineated the areas of interest for annexation. An enlarged copy of Section 27, the area in question, was given to each Council member. Jupiter is only contiguous to Section 27 only where the very corners touch. Landowners in this area are the Hartmann and the Gildons. Abotat two years ago, Palm Beach Gardens and Jupiter had a battle for Frenchman's Creek on the north side of Donald Ross Road. The County realized that with all the future growth in northern Palm Beach County it would behoove all concerned to indicate the areas they desire for future annexation for the purpose of identifying conflict areas. Then, when conflict areas are identified, it could be given to the countywide, Planning Council. Tequesta participated i.n that and did Resolution 9-87/88 in May 1.988 to delineate Tequesta's future annexation reserve areas. Tequesta has always had those delineated areas in Martin County, which will require ~'.l.lage Council Workshop "1ePting Minutes January 12, 1990 Page 2 ------------------------ special legislation to ultimately someday obtain. But, Tequesta also included Jupiter Inlet Colony in that area, which now has been taken out and modified to include Sections 27 and 26 west of the river. Jupiter purchased the MacArthur property out west and annexed the same. Once that was done, Jupiter felt they were contiguous to the area currently under discussion. Palm Beach County received all of the information relative to the proposed annexations. The county has an interim annexation policy which they use in reviewing all applications for annexation. In so doing, the County indicated the annexation was not in compliance with Florida Statute 171 since the annexation was not contiguous according to the definition in that Statute. Meanwhile, Tequesta. contacted Griff Roberts, Town Manager of Jupiter, advising Tequesta objected. Mr. Roberts felt Tequesta did not have good grounds to annex those areas, that Tequesta could not, annex them promptly, and that the landowners in that, area had i_n fact petitioned Jupiter to allow them into their city. Jupiter was scheduled for second and final reading for the annexation on January 2, 1990 and Jupiter agreed to postpone that to allow time to meet with Tequesta. This . meeting takes place Monday, January 15, 1990. Jupiter has apparently already met with Palm Beach County to settle differences. The issue of annexation can be broken down into a few different areas of focus: o Pockets that are contained within the areas of Tequest.a's current boundaries; o Northward into Martin County...this will take some special legislation by the State to do so, but it is not as problematic as it appears. This may have bearing on the annexation issue in this aspect: If Tequesta relinquishes their claim t.o Section 27, Jupiter might. be persuaded to agree to work with Tequesta to get this special legislation. Mr. Hartman (landowner) interjected that in October of 1988 he had contacted Tequesta and Jupiter to determine the benefits of annexing into one or the other, but, that Tequesta never responded. Mr. Hartman also informed Council he was getting water service from Jupiter on his property. Vice Mayor Howell stated the issue was not particular pieces of land but the fact that properties are ~c-~ntiguous to Tequesta. Mr. Bradford reminded the Board that. the c~f~cision relative to annexation lies with the cities which are • ~{<,sirous of bringing properties in, not ~:ifih the property owners Village Council Workshop ~9eeting Minutes January 12, 1990 Page 3 ------------------------ Mr. Bradford asked Council if they were willing to alter the Village's current reserve annexation. Councilmember Collings responded that it was his understanding that a city could not reserve an annexation. Village Attorney Randolph stated the question is, does it have any force in law. There is certainly nothing to preclude the Village from having a reserve annexat.i.on. It's really a determination as to whether the courts would sustain something like that. Attorney Randolph suggested if Tequesta could get some sort of a concession from Jupiter that they would. not allow this to be a `leap-frogging' to the properties that Tequesta is interested in, this may not. be so objectionable to Tequesta. But if this was used by Jupiter to get into properties to the north of Tequesta, there might be a.n objection. Councilmember Collings stated his concern was he did not want to enter into a battle where there is very little to gain and a great probability of losing. There is a much more logical battle by making a natural boundary up the L,oxahatchee River and going east to the Atlantic Ocean. Mr. Bradford felt the Council needed to take a firm position, whatever their decision. The options are: • c~ Fight all the way for principles sake; o Amend the reserve annexation area to accept the reality that in fact landowners want to be in Jupiter; or o Do nothing, and let the `hodge-podge' border lines be a possibility. Councilmember Collings he felt the most logical solution would be for Tequesta to head up the River, going as far north as they would want to go on an extension line to the east. Councilmember Mackail felt the issue was bigger than that and Tequesta needed to be looked at as a whole, on a long-term base, regarding its tax base. Where will Tequesta's increased revenue come from? He felt Tequesta should stand firm on the westward property now in question, and enter the battle, if necessary. Attorney Randolph explained that the real issue is "what governmental entity has the right to serve that area", and whether there is any legal weight to the reserve annexation policy. The next issue is whether or not. this area is appropriate for annexation under Florida Statute 171. • Tillage Council Workshop ^leeting Minutes 7anuary 12, 1990 • Page 4 ------------------------ Councilmembers Burckart and Collings felt it was logical for Tequesta to annex on a natural. boundary like the I~oxahatchee River. Attorney Randolph interjected that as far as two communities saying they're going to reserve specific properties has no force of law behind those reservations. The outcome would be a `toss of the coin'. The things that would be added to that formula, however, are the current ability to serve natural geographical boundaries which would best determine where the line should be drawn. This is the type of thing that a mediator, or finder of fact, would consider in making a determination. Village Manager Bradford reminded Council that the County's position was still that Jupiter's claim to this property does not meet the requirements of Florida State Statute 171 (i.e., under its definition of "contiguous"). This Statute wa.s drawn up to provide for orderly annexation and to keep communities from attempting to "grab" properties which should not naturally be a part of that community. Attorney Randolph felt Tequesta has a standing, under this Statute, to object to the appropriateness of Jupiter's claim. Annexation does not have to take place now if it is not appropriate in either • circumstance. No one is entitled to annexation if the requisites of law do not exist. It may be that this should merely remain as unincorporated property for now. Councilmember Burckart asked Loxahatchee River. Attorney Randolph responded he was not certain, but did not think that was possible. He did. confirm by reviewing the Statute it was possible to annex across such natural boundaries under certain criteria, but that legislation could change. Vice Mayor Howell stated he would like to see everything east of the River annexed. into Tequesta. Attorney Randolph stated. that, regarding Jupiter north of the river, which already belongs to Jupiter, it would be very difficult to get those people to agree to be annexed into Tequesta. Councilmember Collings asked what happens on the acceptance of second reading of the annexation at Jupiter's Council meeting. Attorney Randolph responded it would then be annexed, but there is a procedure whereby Tequesta would have 30 days in which to object to the annexation under Statute 1.71. And, that perhaps between now and Jupiter's second reading, it was not possible for Tequesta. to form a firm position in regard to whether they want to give this property up or not. And, Tequesta might have to go back with the position that this land is still within Tequesta's area and because Tequesta wants to have ongoing discussions with Jupiter, Tequesta would not want to see this annexed. Or, Tequesta could object. as • Village Council Workshop Meeting Minutes .January 12, 1990 Page 5 ------------------------ an adjoining community which objects to "urban sprawl". Tequesta is indirectly effected by Jupiter's proposed annexation. In the future, because of their annexation, which may be improper, Tequesta may be affected deliteriously, to the point that some property Tequesta may have opportunity to annex in the future is annexed by an adjoining community. By taking a firm stand, Tequesta would be saying to Jupiter, "we want to see you annex properly". Two points of objection that the County has are: o Jupiter does not have the substantial part of the boundary of the territory sought to be annexed by a municipality coterminous with the part of the boundary with the municipality; and o State requires that annexations be reasonably compact and precludes any action which would create enclaves, pockets or finger areas in serpentine patterns. Thereby the County is saying this i.s not appropriate annexation. Councilmember Collings asked what would happen if Tequesta defends its position and Jupiter annexed at second reading. Attorney Randolph answered then Tequesta would bring an action under Statute 171 or ask for mediation by the Countywide Planning Council.. Councilmember Mackail felt Tequesta should hold its position and just see what will happen at Jupiter's next Coz.zncil meeting. Councilmember Burckart felt there should be a. meeting between Tequesta and Jupiter to see if a better plan could be worked out and perhaps obtain Jupiter's cooperation. Councilmember Collings felt Tequesta's position is still sound and their previous decision to reserve the area at issue was a, fair decision on Tequesta's part. Village Manager Bradford felt that at some point, Tequesta. must take a firm stand. Attorney Randolph agreed that at some point in time, Tequesta will have to address the issue. Vice Mayor Howell agreed that the Village ought not to "just do nothing" and that a firm stand should be taken right at this point. Village Manager Bradford stated he knew Council's opinions on this issue and that. Mayor Capretta was in favor of this area remaining on Tequesta's reserve annexation list for the time being. With the agreement of Council, Mr. Bradford stated he and Attorney Randolph would appear Monday, January 15, at the meeting with Jupiter and fiPf~~nd Tf'('S;]P=,t:?':-, tzr;~,j t ~ n;;, i i~illage Council Workshop ^leeting Minutes January 12, 1990 Page 6 ------------------------ III. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember rlackail moved to adjourn the meeting. Councilmember Burckart seconded that motion. The vote on the motion was: Vice Mayor Howell - for Earl Collings - for Ron Mackail - for William Burckart - for the motion was therefore passed and the meeting was adjoured at 5:50 P.M. A T~ . • ~~ ~%f ~~ ~ I Bill C. scavElis Finance Dire_tor/VIllage Clerk DATE APPROVED: °?S 11~-- _t-_ f R.espe~,tfi~l.l,.' snr~rn;tr~c3, ti~ /~~ 2~ . Fran 13i t.t.et~s Recording Secretary