HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Regular_04/08/1986~.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL
OF THE
VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA, FLORIDA
APRIL 8, 1986
A meeting was held by the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta,
Florida at 7:30 P.M., April 8, 1986 in the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive,
Tequesta, Florida.
Councilmembers present were: Carlton D. Stoddard, Mayor, Edward C.
Howell, Vice Mayor, Jill K. Gemino, Edwin J. Nelson and Ron Mackail. Also
present were: Robert Harp, Village Manager, John C. Randolph, Village Attorney
and Bill C. Kascavelis, Finance Director/Village Clerk.
Mayor Stoddard made the following announcements:
1. A communication received this afternoon from the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement praised the Village Police
Department for a reduction in arrests for the year 1985.
Arrests for this period were reduced 35.9 a.
• 2. Municipalities throughout the state have been asked by the
State Attorney to declare the week of April 20 as Victim's
Rights Week. Accordingly, a proclamation has been forwarded
to the State Attorney on behalf of the residents of Tequesta
declaring the week of April 20th through 26th, 1986 as
Victim's Rights Week.
3. A Conference of Mayors of Palm Beach County has been scheduled
for April 29, 1986 at the Boynton Beach Holiday Inn. Mayor
Stoddard will be present at the conference on behalf of the
Village.
4. The Mayor stated that he will not be able to attend the next
regular scheduled meeting of the County Beaches and Shores
Council since he will be out of town. However, an alternate
will be designated and the Mayor would like the Village to
have a representative attending all future meetings of the
County Beaches and Shores Council.
The tentative council agenda was amended to include a presentation
from the Countywide Beach Erosion Coordinator, Mr. Robert Klinger, P.E.,
Palm Beach County Engineering Department. This item will appear on
tonight's agenda as Item 1. a 1)
1. a 1) Mr. Robert Klinger, P.E. a beach erosion specialist made a brief
presentation concerning the proposed beach restoration project for the
Jupiter/Tequesta area.
S~
~~~ • Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 2 -
It was noted that the Jupiter Inlet Park and Carlin Park have experienced
the most critical beach erosion of all the parks in Palm Beach County.
A slide presentation was presented by P.E. Thomas Campbell, Coastal
Planning and Engineering Inc. regarding positive steps to correct the
Jupiter Inlet and beach erosion problems.
Upon conclusion of the presentation, the Village Council was presented
with detailed cost proposals for Carlin Park Expanded Inlet Maintenance and
the Proposed Phase I Studies and Surveys.
Mr. Klinger requested community support of the project which has a
total estimated cost of $2,704,600, possible state participation $1,803,450,
balance to be paid by the County $901,150.
Council was requested to contact Commissioner Karen Marcus and notify
her of the local support of Tequesta residents. Mr. Klinger indicated the
project engineering will not be undertaken until North County indicates
• approval of the project.
A copy of the engineering proposal is attached and made a part of
these minutes as Exhibit (lal).
la) Discussion of Water Department Matters by William D. Reese, P.E.,
Gee ~ Jenson Engineering, Inc. reported:
1. The unaccounted water loss at Tequesta's new water treatment
plant appears to be solved, The master meter at the plant
was removed and recallibrated. The loss ratio appears to
finally be solved. Test checks during the next few months
should confirm this opinion.
2. Jonathan Dickinson Well Sites: Efforts are being continued
for future well sites at Jonathan Dickinson State Park.
Recent discussions with S.F.W.M.II.and the D.E.R. were
encouraging, future testing for water availability and
quality are pending future discussions with D.E.R.
3. Water Consumption Use Permit: We applied last December for
approval from the South Florida Water Management District to
permit the daily pumpage from .96 MGD to 1.6 MGD. The
staff at S.F.W.M.D. has indicated approval will be granted
at their Board Meeting to be held next Thursday.
• 4. The new water treatment plant is running well, a surplus
of water pumped from our system is being accrued for the
summer draw down period.
. Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 3 -
---------------------------------
5. We are proceeding with the redesign of the elevated water
storage tank and water system buildings, Our recommendations
will be forwarded to Mr. Harp within the next few weeks.
Mayor Stoddard noted that he had received a copy of the Palm Beach
County Well Field Protection Ordinance. ?~9r. Reese indicated he would be
providing comments in regaxd to the County Ordinance in the near future.
1B. Site Plan Review - Tequesta Centre. Scott D. Ladd, Building Official
read a letter from the Long Range Planning Commission indicating approval
of three projects of which Tequesta Centre was included. A copy of the
letter from the L.R.P.C. signed by Chairman Dembski is attached and made
a part of these minutes as Exhibit (IBS.
Mr. Ignacio Salas Humara (P.S,H. Architects) 5601 Corporate Way,
No. 406, West Palm Beach, Florida reviewed the building features and indicated
the building would be a welcomed addition to the community,
Councilmember Gemino expressed concern that the modernistic black glass
• building was unique and she likes the design, however, without any vacant land
near the building site she was of the opinion that the building design would
not blend into the Village.
Mr. Ernest Hamilton, General Partner of Tequesta Centre spoke to
Councilmember Gemino's concerns. He contended that it was difficult to
distinguish what community you were in when driving on U.S. No. 1, near the
planned building site. He felt the proposed building would be a welcomed
addition to the community.
Scott Ladd, Building Official received Community Appearance Board
guidelines of community building recommendations noting it was not necessary
that building be similar in appearance.
The council was assured by Mr. Hamilton that water run-off from the
proposed building site would be addressed to insure that the Village water
lines, pumps and water storage tower would not be endangered.
There being no comments from the residents in attendance.
The Mayor entertained a motion. Nelson moved, "to approve the site
plan review of Tequesta Centre with reservations to assure the Village
that Village Water facilities would not be damaged by water run-off from
the project." Howell seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was:
•
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 4 -
Gemino -
Howell -
Mackail -
Nelson -
Stoddard -
and the motion therefore passed.
against
for
for
for
for
1C. Site Plan Review - N Tire Partners: Scott Ladd, Building Official
reviewed the future uses of this property established with the former owner
of the property, during litigation with the Village.
Mr. Ladd noted retail stores and shops or a professional service
building was appropriate for the site.
Mr. Jim Nash, P.E., reviewed the proposed building features as a
• commercial property compatible with existing store front window shops
similar to the buildings on Cypress Drive, He indicated that the actual
use of the building could not be determined until leased out.
Mr. Ladd reviewed the project drainage and it was indicated that
an on site drainage system would be designed for the project.
Councilmember Howell was assured by the Village Attorney that the
legal aspects of the project had been met.
There being no further questions regarding this matter, Nelson moved,
second by Gemino, "that the Site Plan Review of N Tire Partners be approved
as submitted." The vote on the motion was:
Gemino - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Nelson - for
Stoddard - for
the motion therefore passed.
1D. Discussion of Newspaper Machines - South Side of Tequesta Drive, West
of Riverside Drive,
• A report on this matter prepared by Police Chief Flannery cited
four (4) problem areas associated with mail boxes and newspaper racks
at this location. A copy of this report is attached for information
purposes as Exhibit 1-D.
• Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 5 -
---------------------------------
Village Attorney Randolph recommended. that the concerned parties to
this matter be contacted and asked to remove the mail boxes and newspaper
racks on a voluntary basis, rather than by action of the Council.
It was noted that the Village had requested a four way stop sign at
the location, which might eliminate some of the dangers associated thereto,
however, it would not eliminate all the safety hazards noted.
A motion by Howell, second by Mackail "to request the removal of mail
boxes and newspaper racks at the south side of Tequesta Drive, west of
Riverside Drive and that the Village Attorney notify the interested parties
of Council's action." The vote on the motion was:
Gemino - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Nelson - for
Stoddard - for
the motion therefore passed.
• le. Other Matters, Time for Visitors. The Chair recognized:
1. Mrs. Dottie Campbell, 4 Trade Winds Circle was concerned that the
Tequesta Village Hall was not open to the public during the lunch
hour of 12:00 P.M. to 1:00 P.M. Mrs. Campbell stated that the
Village of Tequesta was the only town hall with the exception of
Jupiter Inlet Colony in this area of the county operating under
such a policy. Mrs. Campbell requested that the Village Adminis-
tration review the current policy and possibly make revisions to
the current policy which would provide greater access to the Village
Hall for residents of the community.
2. Mr. Paul Coben, 360 Tequesta Drive presented a Memorandum to Council-
membersfromthe Community Appearance Board with regard to the ter-
mination of the Village Clerk and Clerk of the Community Appearance
Board. A copy of this Memorandum is attached and made a part of
these minutes as Exhibit 2-le .
3. Mr. Joe Yoder, 147 Point Circle commented on the local news media
reporting of the recent termination of the position of Village
Clerk and merging of the duties of that office with the position of
Finance Director. Mr. Yoder's comments were:
"Members of the Council, I have to admit that it is not with
• pleasure that I am here tonight. More in line of duty. I spent a good
deal of time last week or two weeks ago listening to the discussion that
. Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 6 -
---------------------------------------
went on with regard to Cyrese. I would like to comment on that. I have
been a councilmember for about some five years ago, so I understand the
position that you are in up here and it really bothers me to see some of
our citizens berate people who are trying to do a job. It is not my in-
tent to engage in any debate with the media, that is certainly a no win
situation. But one must remember that one of the perceived functions of
the press is to ferrett out evil doings. Thus, when the Village eliminates
the Clerk's position, they surmise or conjecture some sinister Machiavellian
plot some foul deed must be uncovered. That's a typical press reaction in
my opinion. I respect that's their function. I, too, can surmise and conjecture
and I would like to use Webster's definition if these words because they have a
very clear meaning. Surmise - "thought or idea based on scanty evidence".
Conjecture - "inference from defective or presumptive evidence". or "conclusion
deduced by surmise or guesswork". Now I can also surmise along with the news-
paper the press and the rest of the people that made these comments. I res-
pect their ability and their right to do that and I believe I also have the
right to make some surmises and to do some conjecturing also. My scenario,
though is based not on exposition, which is a function of the newspaper which
considers to expose things, rightly so. But really, my scenario is based on
• business management. I had the pleasure of hiring many people. I also made
some mistakes, which had to be rectified. At other times, organizational
changes depending on circumstances, whatever called for some changes in
personnel and the organization and depending on the circumstances, this
required reassignment, retraining or releasement. Now let me assure you that
there is nothing more distasteful, nasty job that management faces than letting
somebody go, either because of a release or because of lack of work. Let me
make an assign management in this case is dealing with people, a person,
an individual, and I respect Mr. Howell's point, there is a person behind
these positions and many of us know the person, and I always liked Cyrese.
But, I also realized that in certain cases, management has a function to
perform and function has to come ahead and go beyond personal desires.
Paramount in any release is the need to protect the person. So the terms
used in acts serve double meanings. The purpose is to correct a problem
call it a management problem whatever the problem, and it's also to see that
in the correction of this problem the one who leaves, is left with good
face, above all one tries not to embarrass or crucify a person a That's the
last thing anyone in a management function wants to do, believe me. In
this instance, the position according to the Council can be consolidated
with the functions of another position. But to the press and to others,
it's a "firing". Nor this may or may not be true, but the press perceives
it as a firing, the press surmises it as a firing this may or may not be
true but the public implication is cruel, and I'd like to use their own
word, shabby, to take somebody who has not been released for particular
reasons other than business reasons and to say they are fired. If as the
• press implies the clerk was fired, then what. Wash the dirty linen in
public? Great for circulation, possibly devastating for the parties involved.
Much was made of the Council's action made while the clerk was "out of town",
and that it was not specifically on the agenda. One could call this shabby
• Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 7 -
if it were, for the press conjecture, an outright firing. But certainly
one can surmise also that this was a business decision as stated by the
Mayor. If I can recall correctly, the Charter states "that the Council
has the power to appoint and retain all Village Officers which includes
the Village Manager and the Village Clerk". This, in my time was always
done at the annual organizational meeting. That was the logical time,
that a decision to be made to keep people doing those jobs or not too.
If the business decision was not to reappoint the clerk just when or what
was the proper time, next year? If there ever was a time it would seem
logical that the time to make the decision for the next year, that seems to me
to be the time the Council should make that decision. So, I can surmise a
situation entirely different from the innuendoes that the press and others
are saying, addressing to the Council that it is some kind of insidious,
something or another, that somebody is out to get somebody. One can surmise
whatever one .wishes we can all surmise something entirely different than I
do, surmise we can all do, however, my conjecture is that, the Mayor's action
was taken after much soul searching and for the perceived good of the community.
Some of the current editorials seemed to me the old Spanish inquisitions,
charges are made, questions are posed and the verdict rendered, all by the
• same body, in the case the newspapers or others in the Village who are spe-
culating, surmising whatever, I will comment though on only one of the
questions that has been brought about. That question is: How can Ron Mackail
have reached a conclusion and vote for the Mayor? Possibly for the same
reasons that I too would have had, had I been in his shoes. Having been a
councilmember facing audiences sometimes stacked, sometimes nut, I know
that you, the Council, must be asking yourselves, what am I doing here?
Certainly not for the money, the $50.00 or whatever they're giving you now.
Is it worth it all, to sit up here and take this kind of thing and read
about it in the press. I feel I have to take a position and defend the
Council having been through some of these things myself. Let me assure you
Councilmembers, that there are many in our vision, in our Village who appre-
ciate the time and effort that you give on our behalf. I thank you."
4. Mr. John Brandeburg, 50 Golfview Drive. "I'd like to address the job
combination and I'd like to cover four points.
1. Anger
2. Over-reaction
3. Changing times
4. New members of Council.
ANGER: It's hard to understand the anger I perceived because of the
issue at hand. The issue addressed is that of a position, it is extremely
unfortunate that the press chooses to put the name of a person on an issue
• that does not involve a person at a11, but rather involves a position. I
am not insensitive or heartless to the people. I'm Senior Vice President
of a corporation that has 500 to 1,000 employees. I don't feel that I am a
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 8 -
-------------------------------------
heartless unsensitive person, however, there are business issues involved
and similar things that seem to transcend some of the issues that were
involved in the newspaper.
On over-reaction, it appears to me that the issue at hand has not been
dealt with as much as some of the other issues involving a personality and
individual. It is very unfair to that individual to perceive that something
other than the issue at hand is to be dealt with.
Changing Times; Things change. I think it is incomprehensible for
some of the newspaper articles stating that it was that way before so they
see no need for a change now. That's not the kind of thinking I relate to
very well. I think that things do change that doesn't mean wholesale
changes that just means things have to be looked at, continuously reviewed
and if anything it may mean that some of these things in the past have not
been looked at as they have been looked at here recently.
The last item I would like to address is the members of the Council.
If they all don't vote for something or they all don't vote against some-
thing that they seem to be chastised for it. Every person in our Council
• now and every person on past Councils are. individuals. If there is a
collusion or something other than an individual, that's wrong. If they're
an individual, I have no problem with them voting their own mind on each and
every matter, to chastise someone for voting one way or the other seems to
be unfair to me.
The last issue that I would call a cheap shot of the highest magnitude
is the audacity to say that a person newly elected has no voice, that's
ridiculous. Somebody who has been elected by people who come to cast their
ballot for people have as much a right to cast a vote at their very first
meeting as though they were on Council for ten years, and they have at
least as much vote as people who were on Council before or even people who
were Mayors before, and if anyone doesn't see that I submit that, that is
very one cited.
I hope everyone here understands that when you take a little courage,
people understand. Thank you.
5. Mayor Stoddard read a prepared statement as a reply to several questions
posed by a local newspaper regarding the methodology of combining the two
positions of Finance Director and Village Clerk. Said letter is atttached
and made a part of these minutes as Exhibit 5nle.
Mrs. Dorothy Campbell was recognized by the Chair to present her
• remarks with regard to the statement read by Mayor Stoddard. Specifically,
Mrs. Campbell quoted Section 2,13 of the Charter, Interference with the
Administrative Department.
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 9 -
-------------------------------
"Nei her the Council or any of its members shall in any
manner dictate the appointment or removal of any Village
officers or employees whom the Manager or his subordinates
are empowered. to appoint, but the Council shall have the
power to remove the Village Manager as provided by this
Charter and may express its views and discuss all matters
with the Manager. Except for the purpose of inquiries or
investigations under this Charter, the Council and its
members shall deal with Village officials and employees
solely through the Manager and neither the Council nor its
members shall give orders to any such officials or employees
either publicly or privately."
Mrs. Campbell stated she was distressed by conflicting news expressed
in the paper by Mayor Stoddard and Finance Director Bill Kascavelis and
Chief of Police Flannery where they said meetings had occurred, had not
occurred, discussions had occurred, had not occurred so on and so forth.
I think we, in this Village have a right to know why were you talking,
Mayor Stoddard to other employees pertaining to this matter? Could we
• have an answer? Mayor Stoddard replied, do you want an answer now, you'll
get it now: Fine, replied Mrs. Campbell. The Mayor replied: "the inference
that I give directions to any employeee is incorrect. We are entitled as is
every Councilmember to get information to guide us in decisions in the best
interests of the Village of Tequesta. Certainly, I get information from
people I got information, so it would satisfy me in my mind, that these two
offices could be combined. No directive was given by me to any officer of
this Village or even has to any office of the Village. I get help from them,
they are there to give me that help, their advise is welcomed and it is
helpful, as it helps us to do a good job on the Council. But never, never
have I given a directive to a Village employee. That is the job of our
Village Manager and our. Department heads. Does that answer your questions?
No, it doesn't answer everything I have been implying.
Mrs. Campbell stated that in the past, as a member of Council, she never
spoke to Village employees unless she first cleared it with the Manager.. Mrs.
Campbell one of the most frequent visitors to the Village Hall, as observed
by Mayor Stoddard who indicated he had never criticized her for that.
Mrs. Campbell replied that she's not on Council. Mayor Stoddard questioned
Mrs. Campbell to the effect that she is questioning his right as a Council-
member to make inquiries to Village Officials as being improper. Mrs.
Campbell replied, "yes Sir, different rules for the Council and different
rules for the public". Mrs. Campbell proceeded to cite Section 9.02 of the
Village Charter "all meetings of the Council shall be open to the public
and the rules of the Council shall provide that the citizens of the Village
shall have a reasonable opportunity to be heard at such meetings. in regard
to any matter pertaining to the Village." Mrs. Campbell also advised the
Council to have a serious discussion with the Village Attorney regarding the
Council's methods and techniques of conducting Village business.
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 10 -
---------------------------------------------
Mrs. Campbell stated she also understands that the Finance Director
made a statement at a recent meeting of the Community Appearance Board
that he does not want his job, that he had a full time job. Mrs. Campbell
asked Mr. Kascavelis if that was true?
Mr. Kascavelis' reply was to the effect that upon appointment. to the
position of Village Clerk, that he had reservations at first. However, after
careful consideration was given to the matter, he decided the Council's
decision had merit and accepted the appointment.
Mayor Stoddard indicated that the Council had received a letter from
Mr. Kascavelis accepting the appointment. A copy of such letter is attached
for information purposes as Exhibit 5-2e.
There, being no further discussion on this matter from the floor,
Mayor Stoddard recognized Village Manager Robert Harp, who read a prepared
statement on this matter. Such remarks are attached and made a part of these
minutes, referred to as Exhibit 5~3e.
After Mr. Harp read his presentation, the Chair entertained a motion
from the members of Council to reconsider its action on this matter, that
was taken at the Council Meeting of March 25, 1986.
There being no motion received from any of the Councilmembers, the
Mayor proceeded to the next item on the Council agenda.
2. Village Attorney's Item:
a. First Reading of a New Sign Ordinance:
Attorney Randolph noted the substantial Ordinance Changes:
1. Signs must conform to laws applicable to State Statutes.
2. Concerns were made with regard to signs for theaters and
Mr. Stoddard requested that the Village Attorney address
these matters.
3. Real Estate Signs residential areas, R-2 and R-3 areas
addressed, see Ordinance for specifies.
Mr. Randolph read the Ordinance by title:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF
TEQUESTA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION
XII, SIGN REGULATIONS OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING ORDINANCE
OF THE VILLAGE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING
THAT ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT
HEREWITH ARE HEREBY REPEALED; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE".
Minutes of the Meeting
• April 8, 1986
Page 11 -
Councilmember Gemino moved, second by Councilmember Howell, "that
the first reading of the Ordinance amending Section XII - Sign Regulations
of the Official Zoning Ordinance of the Village be approved." The vote on
the motion was:
Nelson - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Stoddard - for
Gemino - for
and the motion for the first reading of the Ordinance was passed.
2B. The next item on the agenda was a Resolution adopting the International
City Managers Association (ICMA) Deferred Compensation Plan by the Village.
Esq. Randolph noted that the contract with Mr. Thomas Bradford required
adopting the ICMA Deferred Compensation Plan to enable participation by Mr.
Bradford when he begins his employment with the Village. Mr. Randolph
• noted there will be three (3) attachments to the Resolution concerning
Mr. Bradford's contract and the potential participation by other Village
employees desiring to participate in the plan.
Mr. Randolph also noted that the plan required a minimum annual
contribution of $7,500 or .33-1/3a of an employees earnings or whichever
is less, for participation in the program. It was also noted that Mr.
Bradford's contract required participation on behalf of the Village in an
amount of 60 of his annual contract.
Councilmember Nelson moved second by Councilmember Gemino, "that
the Village adopt the Resolution providing for the ICMA Deferred Compensation
Plan for Village employees and that the new Manager, Mr. Thomas Bradford be
appointed coordinator of the Plan." The vote on the motion was:
Stoddard - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Gemino - for
Nelson - for
and the motion was therefore passed.
Mayor Stoddard noted that he had received some correspondence regarding
the "Fair Labor Standards Act" and recent legislation concerning the Act.
Mr. Randolph was questioned if he felt the need for any local legislation
i regarding this matter. Mr. Randolph replied that he was of the opinion that
the Village did not need to address the Fair Labor Standards Act at this
time.
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 12 -
---------------------------------------
Mr. Randolph distributed a booklet to each Councilmember regarding
the State of Florida Sunshine Law.
The Council and Village Attorney briefly discussed the creation of
the Long Range Planning Committee. It was noted that the intent of the
Council was not to establish another layer of government by establishing this
committee (LRPC). The purpose of its creation was to get additional input
from citizens of the community concerning future planning of the Village.
3. New Business
3a) The next item appearing on the agenda was a Resolution of Commendation
for Cyrese Colbert. A copy of such resolution is attached and made a part
of these minutes. Mayor Stoddard also suggested that consideration be given
to having a plaque prepared and given to Mrs. Colbert expressing the gratitude
of Council for her approximate 12 years service to the Village.
Councilmember Howell moved, second by Councilmember Nelson "to
approve the Resolution of Commendation for Mrs. Colbert. The vote on the
• motion was:
Gemino - for
Nelson - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Stoddard - for
and the Resolution therefore passed.
3Bc The next item on the agenda was a report on the Fire Rescue Services
Study provided by the Town of Jupiter fox the Jupiter Area including Tequesta,
Juno and Jupiter Inlet Colony.
After a brief discussion, Mr. Harp noted that the Village had made a
commitment to the Town of Jupiter to pay its pro-rata share of the report
costs. The costs applicable to Tequesta are $7,658.00. Mr. Harp suggested
that the prior commitment be honored by Council and the funds available for
payment could be provided by the Federal Revenue Sharing Fund.
Mayor Stoddard commented that the North County municipalities should
continue to maintain a united stand with regard to making their voices heard
by the County Commissioners, to insure that Fire/Rescue Service Budgets are
kept within reason. He also noted the state legislature should address the
taxing authority provisions for fire/rescue service districts.
Councilmember Gemino moved, second by Howell, "to accept the Fire/
Rescue Service Report received from the Town of Jupiter and approve payment
to the Town of Jupiter for the Village's share of costs in the amount of
$7,658.00. A letter thanking the Town of Jupiter for considering Tequesta
in the study." The vote on the motion was:
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 13 -
Gemino - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Nelson - for
Stoddard - for
and the motion therefore was passed,
3d. The next item appearing on the agenda was the June 1986 Palm Beach
County Municipal League Meeting to be held in the Village of Tequesta.
A brief discussion regarding the Palm Beach County Municipal League
meeting scheduled for June was presented by the Mayor. Mayor Stoddard
suggested that guests other than the Palm Beach County Municipal League members
be determined by invitation since the parking facilities would limit the
• number of persons who could attend. A barbeque at Village Green Park was
suggested after the meeting.
It was suggested that the matter be reviewed in more detail and
presented as an agenda item for consideration at a future Council Meeting.
4. Minutes and Reports
4a. The minutes of the Council Meeting held March 25, 1986 were approved
as submitted. Councilmember Gemino praised Mr. Harp for providing the Minutes
within a ten day period. Mayor Stoddard also thanked Mr. Harp for his efforts
and a job well done.
4b. The Village Manager's Report for the period March 23 through April
5, 1986 were accepted as submitted. Mayor Stoddard also noted as a matter
of record that the Village Manager's Reports and the Finance Director's
Financial Statement are always submitted promptly.
4c. The Village and ~Nater Department Financial Statements for the month
ending February 1986 were accepted as submitted.
4d. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Village of Tequesta,
Florida, for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1985 was submitted to the
• Council fox approval. Mayor Stoddard commented that in his opinion, the report
submitted herewith appears to be the most professional report submitted to date,
and he is of the opinion that it will win the Village and Finance Director another
national award.
• Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 14 -
---------------------------------
Mayor Stoddard recommended that after Mr. Bradford arrives that a Workshop
Meeting be set up to review the Village Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
Mr. Kascavelis reviewed briefly the General Fund Financial position of
September 30, 1985, which indicated a surplus after all reserves were taken
into consideration of $180,000.00. Upon the completion of the discussion,
Councilmember Howell moved, second by Councilmember Nelson that the Compre-
hensive Annual Financial Report of the Village of Tequesta for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1985 be accepted as submitted. The vote on the motion
was:
Gemino - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Nelson - for
Stoddard - for
and the motion was therefore passed.
• 5. The next item on the agenda was Councilmembers Reports.
5a. Councilmember Gemino said it was encouraging to see the school children
using the Village Green Park facilities each morning while they were waiting
on their school bus.
5b. Ms. Gemino also raised some questions in regard to the repairs on the
Lift Station at the Dover Road Park. Mr. Harp indicated he would be reporting
on this matter soon. Mr. Gary Preston will also be reporting to the Council
d.n this project in the near future.
5c. Councilmember Howell commented on the Long Range Planning Commission.
Member Howell indicated that the purpose of the Commission should be reviewed
and the Commission should either be supported by the Council or abolished.
It was suggested that a Workshop be set up to review the Long Range
Planning Commission functions with the commission members.
Transportation facilities for senior citizens was discussed briefly.
5d. Mr. Brandeburg commented with regards to the possible function of the
Long Range Planning Commission to establish a vision of acceptable commercial
preliminary planning for future projects within Tequesta.
5e. Mayor Stoddard recommended that Council establish a deadline of sixty
(60) days for Step-Saver to remove the large sign located at the northwest
corner of U.S. Highway No. 1, and Tequesta Drive which is in violation of
Tequesta's Sign Regulation Ordinance and have Step-Saver present a color
• Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 15 -
-----------------------------------
drawing of a new sign which is in compliance with Tequesta's Sign Ordinance,
such new sign to be presented to the Council for consideration at the May
13, 1986 regular scheduled Council Meeting.
Mayor Stoddard turned the Chair to Vice-Mayor Howell. Mayor Stoddard
moved, second by Councilmember Gemino "that Step~Saver be notified to remove
the sign located on their property which is in violation of the Teauesta
Sign Ordinance regulations within thirty (30) days."
Discussion on the issue and comments provided by Village Attorney
Randolph indicated the action being taken by the Village Council with this
motion was appropriate. The vote on the motion was:
Gemino - for
Howell - for
Mackail - for
Nelson - for
Stoddard - for
There being no further business before the Council, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:56 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
G~~ .
Bill C. Kascavelis
Finance Director/Village Clerk
BCK:mk
Enclosures
4/16/86
Minutes of the Meeting
April 8, 1986
Page 16 -
C~~l.~ ~~ ~ ~4
ate Approv d
t
~ ,~
ill K. G in
~ ~ ,,
~~~~ ~ ~ ~L.zL~~ ~-
Edward C. Howell
~ C~~r tj
on Mackail
~.,C'~C..[...1.
ti~ v
Edwin J. N so
Carlton D. Stoddard
•
CARLIN PARK EXPANDED INLET MAINTENANCE
'(POSSIBLE)
TOTAL STATE
Dredge & Fill Costs
(350,000 cubic yards)
Dune Restoration and
Overwalks
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION
Engineering, Env.
Studies, Supervision
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
COUNTY
$1,625,000 $1,218,750 $ 406,250
779,600 584,700 194,900
$2,404,600 $1,803,450 $ 601,150
300,000 300,000
$2,704,600 $1,803,450 $ 901,150
350.000
C. Y.
BORROW ATLANTI C OCEAN
AREA ~ /
• •~~
EXHIBIT 1-Al
LEGEND OF
~
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS '
L'D BEACH RESTORATION '
"' DUNE RECONSTRUCTION
( DUNE OVERWALK
i WOOD SLAT WALKWAY
N.T.S.
JUPITER //~~/~ P.B.C. INLET PARK
INLET
COLONY / ~f
// ~
o ~~
O~
JUPITER
=o
.Q
0
CAR!_IN PARK
S.R. A-I-A
COASTAL PLANNING &
ENGINEERING, INC.
JUPITER/JUNG RESTORATION
~~'
~-o ~~~,
EXHIBIT 1-Al
• i •
EXHIBIT 1-B
MARION K. TAYLOR • REAL ESTATE, INC. • REALTOR°
• P.O. Bcr. 3325 •Tequesta, Florida 33458-3325
384 Tequesta Drive, Gallery Square South •Tequesta, Florida 33458-3031. 305/746-1762
April 4, 1986
•Mr. Scott Ladd.
Village of Tequesta, Building Official
357 Tequesta Drive
Tequesta, Florida 33469
Hi Mr. Ladd!
Thank you for your presence at our April 2, 1986,-Long Range Planning
Commission meeting at the Village Hall and for arranging our viewing
of the plans and artist's sketches for Tequesta Shops North, N-Tire
Partners and Tequesta Center's proposed buildings.
Presentations were given to our commission by Mr. Hamilton on Tequesta
Center. Afterwards, a number of questions were asked of him and his
associate and all were answered to our satisfaction.
Mr. Broedell then followed with his presentation on the N-Tire Partners
and he, likewise, satisfactorily answered all of our questions. You then
• gave your presentation on Tequesta Shops North and you, also, adequately
answered all our questions.
As you know, Scott, everyone was very pleased with the esthetics of the
new buildings for Tequesta, particularly those planned for Highway #1
because of the much needed crispness and color in their respective areas.
Our commission would also like to take this opportunity to again register
the fact that while we would appreciate your advising us, in detail, about
all future buildings planned for Tequesta, we felt that Wednesday's
"exercise" was unneeded duplication. We say this in all sincerity,
particularly after learning that the C.A.B. had already given approval
to the building's plans presented to us.
Thanks again, Scott, for your time and enlightenment and we will be
looking forward to your subsequent reports, as they will help us in our
long range planning.
Cordiall ~ ~ ~,_
r
~i ,f
~u7 ~,~ few ~:
Gregory A. Demb~TCi ,.,;, ~"
_~~ r
,...~ ~--
. Mr. William E. Burckart .s~ ~' ,~
Ms Mary Snow Corr ~:~` ~~' ~ ° :^
Mr. Alfred S. DeMott '~~;
Dr. Stanley B. Jacobs v`r' ~ , i ~ rn
Mr . H . D . Mantz ~S' .--~
Mrs.-.Eloda Tangney
FRANKLIN E FLANNERY
~ CH~Ef OIL POUGE
-` ~ •: VILLAGE OF TEC3UESTA ~~
357 TEQUESTA DRIVE '
. , TE~UESTA, FLORIDA
i
TELEPHONE MAILING ApDRESS
AREA CODE 305 ' ' ri.l 4, 1986 P.O.80X 3273
746-7474 ~ TEOUESTA, FLORIn.4 33458
Tof Mr. Robert Harp -Village Manager. .
From: Franklin E . Flannery - Chief of Police
Subject: Traffic Survey - Tequesta Drive just west of
Riverside Drive at news stand racks.
.:. .. .. -
,... .. ,,
. _ ~ _
Sir: _ ~ - - ;;. ?: ~ -
_ ,.
.,
_ - L' '
"~ ' From March"~.28th_ through April 4th, 1986, spot checks were ~oon-
• ducted ~ to determine. if a hazard exists ~ at the above location . A
total of approximately 10 man hours were spent on this survey at
.. - - ;, ~ .
various times of they day. Starting times ranged from 6:45 A.M. to :.~.
2:30 P.M. and an average of eight (8} cars per hour were observed
purchasing papers or depositing mail during early morni„g hours.
This figure dropped sharply after 10:00 A.M. and on three occasions
only one person used the racks between noon and I2: 30 P.M. On two
occasions between,7:00 A.M, and 8:00 A.M. two vehicles were parked
to purchase papers and a third vehicle was waiting. their turn.
One of the problems noted during the survey concerns the fact
that each time a vehicle pulls up, the driver parks across the bicy-
cle/gedestri.an path which is a violation of State Statute 316.1945
p
(1) (a) 9.` On one occasion during the survey a jogger and a vehicle
were at the location at the same time.. It i.s difficult not to park
on the bicycle/pedestrian path when purchasing newspapers or using
the mail box due to the fact that a vehicle must pull reasonably ..
close to the racks in order for the driver's door not to be opened
into the street when they exit the car. The second problerri is ve-
hicles that are westbound, driving on an angle across the eas"~.bound
•' - ~' - -"
r:
~F ~ ~ '~
lane in order to get to the. racks. .This happened on one occasion
during the survey. It does not appear that an unusually large
rnunber of peo~;le use the paper racks and/or the mailbox at tY.is
location. For example: on March 31st from 11:00 A.M. to 11:30 A.M.
' 2 vehicles stopped and the drivers deposited mail; no papers were
sold. From noon until 12:30 P.M. one newspaper was sold. From
1:10 P.M. to 1:25 P.M. one paper was sold.
There is always a potential hazard when vehicles cross aside-
walk or bikepath, and this situation is no different. The close
proximity of the mailbox and the news racks to Riverside Drive is
the third problem. Some individuals who have stopped to purchase
papers or use: the mail box feel that they have the right of way
over .vehicles that have stopped for the stop sign on Riverside
Drive. For exanq~le: A driver enters their vehicle after making
or depositixlg mail and proceeds eastbound at the same time that a
vehicle is leaving the stop sign headed either north or south on
Riverside Drive. Since Riverside Drive is a stop street, the people
leaving the bike path have the false impression that since they
have no stop sign to comply with, that they are allowed to proceed
before a vehicle that has come to a stop at a sign. This is un-
derstandably confusing. A fourth problem concerns drivers that
pull into the area and subsequently make a U turn to return home.
To a point I agree with the administration of the various
newspapers when they say that poor drivers are the problem and not
the location of their vending boxes. However, unless a person is
walking or riding a bicycle it is close to impossible not to vio-
late the. law when you pull into this area. TYie consensus of opin-
ion among the officers of the department is that the mail box and
•
•
,; .:: -
:..
.i. 316 ".. ... - . ~ .. - .- - -. _; ~ ,
'' .TE.UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL F.S.198S
~ the hic,,hway opposite a standing vehicle-shall be left for
the free passage of other vehicles, and a clear view of
the s~oppecr vehicle shall be available from a distance
of 200 feet in each direction upon the highway.
(2) This : action shall not apply to the driver or owner
of any vehic; which is disabled v hile on the paved or
main-traveled portion of a highway 'sn such manner and
to such Extent that it is impossible to avoid stopping and
temporarily leaving the disabled vehicle in such position,
or topassenger-carrying buses temporarily parked while
loading or discharging passengers, where highway con-
ditions render such parking off the paved portion of the
highway, hazardous or impractical.
(3)(a) Whenever any police officer finds a vehicle
standing upon a highway in violation of any of the fore-
going provisions of this section, the officer is authorized
to move the vehicle, or require the driver or.other per-
sons incharge of the vehicle to move the same, to a po-
sition off the paved, ormain-traveled part of the highway.
(b) Officers are hereby authorized to provide for the
removal of any abandoned vehicle to the nearest garage
or other place of safety, cost of such removal to be a lien
-against motor vehicle, when said abandoned vehicle is
found unattended upon a bridge or causeway or in any
tunnel, or on`-any public highway in,the following in-
stances:
1. Where such vehicle constitutes an obstruction of
traffic; _ ,
2. Where such vehicle has been parked or stored on
the public right~f--way for a period exceeding 48 hours,
in other than designated parking areas, and is within 30
feet of the pavement edge; and _
3. Where an operative vehicle has been parked or
stored on the public right-of-way for a period exceeding
10 days, in other than designated parking areas, and is
more than 30 feet from the pavement edge: However,
the agency removing such vehicle shall be required to
report same to the~Depa-tment.of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles within ~q hours of such removal.
(c) Any vehicle moved under the provisions of this
chapter which is a stolen vehicle shall not be subject to
the provisions hereof unless the moving authority has re-
ported to the Florida Highway Patrol the taking into pos-
session of the vehicle within 24 hours of the moving of
the vehicle. ~ _
Ntatory.-~. t, cn. ~t•tas: a. t, cn. rlas~ s. t, cn. rs.~lt.: -.: _.; __ .
Note.--fomro~ A 318.124. -
316.1945 Stopping, standing, or parking prohibittxJf
in specified places.- - :. -
(1) Except when necessary to avoid conflict with
other traffic,'or in compliance with law or the directions
of a police officer or official traffic control device, no per-
son shall:
(a) Stop, stand, or park a vehicle: - ^ ~-
1. On the roadway side of any vehicle stopped or'
parked at the edge or curb of a street. - _ -
2. On a sidewalk. _
3. Within an intersection. -
4. On a crosswalk. - .
5. Between a safety zone and the adjacent curb or
within 30 feet of paints on the curb immediately opposite
the ends of a safety zone, unless the Department of
Transportation indicates a different length by signs or
markings.
6. Alongside or opposite any street excavation or
obstruction when stopping, standing,.o parking would
obstruct traffic. _
7. Upon any bridge or other elevated structure upon
a highway or within a highway tunnel.
8. .On any railroad tracks.
9. , On a bicycle path.
10. At~any place where official traffic control devices
prohibit stopping.
11. On the roadway or shoulder of a limited access
facility or on the paved portion of a connecting ramp; ex•
cept that a vehicle which is disabled or in a cpndition im-
proper to be driven as a result of mechanical failure or
accident may be parked on such shoulder for a period
not to exceed 6 hours. This provision is. not applicable
to a person stopping a vehicle to render aid fo an injured
person or assistance to a dsabled vehicle in obedience
to the directions of a law enforcement officer or to a per-
son stopping a vehicle in compliance with applicable
traffic laws.. - - _
" 12. For the purpose of loading or unloading spas- .'
senger on the paved roadway or shoulder of a limited ac-
`cess facility or on the paved portion of any connecting
-ramp. This provision is not applicable to a person stop-
ping a vehicle to render aid to an injured person or as-
sistance to a disabled vehicle.
•. - (b) Stand or park a vehicle, whether occupied or not,
except momentarily to pick up or discharge a passenger .
or passengers:
1. In front of a public or private driveway.
2. Within 15 feet of a fire hydrant.
3. Within 20 feet of a crosswalk at an intersection.
. 4. Within 30 feet upon the approach to any flashing
signal, stop sign, or traffic control signal located at the
side of a roadway.
.. 5. Within 20 #eet of the driveway entrance io any fire
station and on the side of a street opposite the entrance
to any fire station within 75 feet of such entrance (when
property signposted). -
6. On an exclusive bicycle lane..
7. At any place where official traffic control devices
prohibit standing.
(c) Park a vehicle, whether occupied or not, except
temporarily for the purpose of, and while actually en-
gaged in, loading or unloading merchandise or passen-
gers: • .
1. Within 50 feet of the nearest rail of a railroad
crossing unless the Department of Transportation es-
tablishes adifferent distance. due io unusual circum-
stances. .
Z. At any place where official signs prohibit parking.
(2) No person steal{ move a vehicle not lawfully under
his control into any such prohibited area ar away from
a curb such a distance as is unlawful.
(3) A law enforcement officer or parking enforce-
ment speciatistwho discovers a vehicle parked in viola- .
lion of this section or a municipal or county ordinance
may:
(a) Issue a ticket form as may be used by a political
subdivision or municipality to the driver; or
:28
315.195
tai agenci
(1) Ea
ing jurisdi
operated
bar of sp
parking. s
dement
(2) Th
spaces
(a) O
which ho
vision, inc
and court
on the pr
(b) O
ing spa
(c) F
cilities int
graph (a
persons
Total
. ~
EXHIBIT 2-le
i.
i•
~I>=.'~ i0 R.~~i DUP~t
T0: Village Council
FROM: Community Appearance Bu:~rd
DATE. April 8, 1986
Our Community Appearance Board ~cas surprised and shocked to hear
that our Secretary, b1s. Colbert, `aas summarily fired after many years of
service and no evidence (stated) that her work was unsatisfactory, We wish
to protest this action for the "shabby" manner in which it was taken, and that
it was allegedly based on an obviously out-of-date organizational analysis.
As Secretary of the Community Appearance Board, Ms. Colbert's
participation was invaluable because of her expertise in Village matters and
the Sunshine Law,
Based upon our contact with her, it is apparent that she is an
effective professional. It is difficult to believe that hers was not a
full-time job.
As concerned citizens, we believe that our Village government
should develop an enlightened system for handling employee relations,
including job descriptions and regular performance reviews. These and
other generally accepted techniques should keep employees and management
aware of any emerging efficiency or organizational problems and prevent a
recurrence of such an abrupt dismissal.
We urge that the new administration conduct a thorough review
of Ms. Colbert's situation.
'~ ~ ,yam.
Leslie A. Cook
Chairman
Community Appearance Board
LAC/mk
•
EXHIBIT 5-le
Statement by Carlton D. Stoddard, Mayor of Tequesta --
r~
LJ
By majority vote March 25, 1986, the Tequesta Village
Council combined the offices of Finance Director and
Village Clerk in the interest of cost-efficiency and smooth
coordination of village staff operations. The separate office
of Village Clerk was eliminated.
A study of village finance operations revealed that,
among many factors considered, our computer system has
become so efficient, saving so many staff hours, that. the
finance director can now assume the added duties of village
clerk.
No advance knowledge of the Council's action combining
the offices could have been conveyed to the village clerk
because none of the Council members knew in advance what
action would be taken. Any preliminary non-public meeting
of Council-members to consider the proposal would have been
a violation of the state Sunshine law.
No preliminary public meeting of the new Council could
have been held prior to March 25, because the new Council
members could not be sworn in until that day. Rules of the
village charter govern this. No meeting could be held
before the fourth Tuesday in March following the election.
• Until the motion to combine the offices was presented
at the Council meeting March 25, and it was adopted by
majority vote, the Council itself could not have known what
action would be taken.
Any advance message to the village clerk by a council
member would have pre-empted and violated the right of
both new and incumbent Council members to make their own
independent decision after discussion at the public meeting.
March 25 was the proper date for Council consideration
of the motion to combine the offices. The village charter
assigns to the Council the responsibility for annual
appointments of the village manager, the village clerk, and
department heads at this first meeting of the new Council
after the election.
Certainly it would have been desirable to counsel with
the village clerk privately in advance about the elimination of
her job, but constraints of the law prevented it. No
Council member could do so without authorization by majority
vote of the Council at a public meeting. Unlike private
business, all village Council voted actions are confined to
public meetings.
It was a good thing that the village clerk was present
at the March 25 meeting when Council action j,ras taken. She
• and all other citizens who asked to speak were given every
-2-
opportunity to be Yieard-
Some have asked, why wasn't tre possibility of combining
the offices of finance director and village clerk initiated
at budget time last year? T.he answer is -- Budget time
is not the date set by the Village charter for annual
appointment of staff officers. At budget drafting time
nearly a year ago, our computer system had not yet been
perfected to the point where the offices of finance
director and village clerk could readily be combined. Nor
was it realized at budget time last summer how severely costs
would escalate in 1985-86 and the years ahead.
As with other municipalities throughout the nation, Tequesta
is confronted with hard facts in budgeting to deal with
loss of federal revenue and other constraints. Costs of
local government are steeply escalating. Unnecessary
staff expense must be eliminated.
Other equally hard decisions may well be necessary for
local governments to meet the coming cost squeeze. The
federal Gramm-Rudman Act sends advance notice of what is
coming.
The Tequesta Council majority acted conscientiously
in combining the offices of finance director and village
. clerk. Eliminating the separate office of village clerk
will save a substantial sum annually in salary and fringe benefits.
This fiscal year's budget for the village clerk was.:$27',950.
The Council directed the village manager to be generous
in allocating several months severance pay for the village clerk.
Tequesta thanks her for 12 years of service, and wishes her
well in finding new employment.
•
i ~ T0:
FRO,`.:
\, r.
MEMORANDUM 1
Councilmfmbers
Village Manager
SUBJECT: VILLAGE CLERK
DATE: April 8, 1986
/~
EXHIBIT 5-3e
After much thought and consideration follo4ving the March 25, 1985
Council Meeting at which the full time position of Village Clerk was eliminateds
thus resulting in the termination. of Cyrese Colbert, I believe it would be appro-
priate for you to reconsider the action taken.
As I stated at the meeting, it would seem to be quite appropriate at
this time for the new Village Manager to evaluate the activities of alI personnel
and determine any changes in the organization that might lead to cost savings for
the Village. As you are aware, there has been a great increase in the scope and
intensity of all Village acti~rities since the 1979 analysis and i.t would no
longer be applicable.
I do not feel that there are any part time Village personnel being paid
• on a full time basis and no indications of this were ever made or alluded to
in prior years budgeting sessions either by myself or Cauncilmembers.
~ As you know, Cyrese has been an employee of the Village of Tequesta since
August !9, 1974, Village Clerk since December 1, 1974, and to me has been a faith-
ful, professional Village employee and fully dedicated to the Village of Tequesta,
always acting with the best interests of the Village in mind. As you are aware,
this position requires the attendance after regular working hours at .Council
Meetings, Special Council Meetings and Workshop Meetings. Cyrese was involved in
many meetings and many hours during the Village Council's process of selecting
the new Village Manager. Cyrese continually attended meetings, conferences and
seminars to increase her ability as a b4unicipal Clerk so that she could better
serve the Village,
The events and activities that took place at the March 25, 1986 Council
Meeting were overwhelming and I apologize to you, to Cyrese and to all the
residents of Tequesta for not taking a stronger position .at the meeting..
Robert Harp
RH:mk
•
MEMORANDUM
T0: Counci:.~~nembers
Village Attorney
Village Clerk
FROM: Village Manager
SUBJECT: PROPOSED JUPITER/JUNG BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT
DATE: April 16, 1986
EXHIBIT 1-A1
You will recall the presentation made by Robert W. Clinger,
Palm Beach County, Beach Erosion Control Coordinator, at the April 8,
1986 Council Meeting pertaining to the referenced project.
In a hand-out explaining the project, copy enclosed, the pro-
posed improvements include Beach Restoration, Dune Construction, Dune
Overwalk construction and Wood Slat walkway construction, with an esti-
mated total cost of $2,704,600 of which $2,404,600 is construction costs
and $300,000 is for engineering, environmental studies, supervision, etc.
Clinger said the County expects to receive $1,803,450 from the
state with the balance of $901,150 to be paid by the County. Clinger said
he is looking to the North County Municipalities to support this project.
Such support could be in letter form to County Commissioner Chair Marcus.
The Village Council's consideration of support of this project
will be an agenda item for the April 22, 1986 Council Meeting.
Robert Harp
RH:mk
Encl.
i