MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CAPE CORAL CITY COUNCIL
Monday, July 20, 2009
Council Chambers 4:30 p.m.
Council Member Bertolini moved, seconded by Council Member Tate to adopt the Agenda.
Voice poll: All “ayes”. Motion carried.
BUSINESS
Lynne Rosko, resident, addressed Council regarding Item 2 (c). She questioned the need for portable generators at each lift station. She also suggested holding off on Item 2 (e), design services for the EOC and Fire Department Headquarters, until the economy improves.
John Barth, resident, questioned Item 2 (c). He expressed his opinion that the cost of the generators and the fuel required to keep them running was high.
Michael Buchinski, resident, thanked Council for their dedication. He inquired about Item 2 (d) and the need for a traffic signal at that particular intersection. He asked about the cost of Item 3 (a). He voiced his concerns about cutting the Parks and Recreation Department’s budget by 50%. He also questioned the insurance costs involved with Item 3(b). He concurred with Ms. Rosko’s comments regarding Item 2(e).
Cliff Stewart, resident, questioned Item 2 (a) with regards to the cost of security for the wastewater facilities. He suggested that the Cape Coral Police Department handle the security.
Tim Trimble, resident, addressed Council regarding Items 2(a), (b), (c), and (d). He suggested the records of private contractors doing business for the City be readily available upon request.
.
|
g) |
Motion to approve a 1-year contract extension with Purvis, Gray & Company for Professional Auditing Services, Financial Services, Dollar Value: $142,400.00 (total maximum price) |
Consent Agenda Item 3(b) was withdrawn.
Council Member Tate pulled Consent Agenda Item 3 (a).
Council Member Bertolini pulled Consent Agenda Items 2 (d) and 3 (b).
Council Member Bertolini moved, seconded by Council Member Tate to approve Consent Agenda Items 1 (a), (b), 2 (a), (b), (c), (e), (f), (g), 3, (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k).
Council polled as follows: Tate, Bertolini, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. All “ayes”. Motion carried.
Council Member Tate addressed Ms. Rosko’s comments regarding Item 2 (e), and suggested she speak with Chief Van Helden about the EOC building.
Council Member Bertolini agreed with Mr. Buchinski’s comments regarding Item 2(d). She explained how Pine Island Road was a state road and the City had little to say about placing a light at that location. She also addressed Item 3 (b) noting the insurance cost for the boat would have been $3,500.
Council Member Bertolini moved, seconded by Council Member Tate to approve Consent Agenda Item 2 (d).
Voice poll: All “ayes”. Motion carried.
Council Member Tate moved, seconded by Council Member Bertolini to approve Consent Agenda Item 3 (a) with the deletion of the firm from West Palm Beach, and the $140,000.00 going to one Cape Coral and one Fort Myers firm.
Voice poll: Seven “ayes” and one “nay” (Grill voted “nay”). Motion carried.
Council Member Tate asked staff to address the questions regarding the portable generators.
Public Works Director Pavlos explained that fourteen of the generators were for the water production facilities required by the DEP and the Florida Administrative Code. The five other generators were for the Water Reclamation Division to support 280 lift stations.
Procurement Manager Theile addressed the cost of the generators.
|
|
|
RESOLUTION 37-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF WATER DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES; CREATING THE NORTH 1-8 POTABLE WATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; CONFIRMING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION; ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR EACH EQUIVALENT PARCEL AND EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT; IMPOSING ASSESSMENTS AGAINST REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE NORTH 1-8 POTABLE WATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS; PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF THE ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
|
City Clerk Potter
read the title of the Resolution.
Financial Services Director Mason stated the North 1 through 8 area consisted of 55,601 parcels or approximately 72,000 equivalent parcels north of Pine Island Road. Construction was estimated to be completed over three years or in mid to late 2012. He noted the first phase would be North 1 and 2, and subsequent phases would be west and east of Santa Barbara Boulevard. He stated the assessment was estimated at $6,000 with a first billing scheduled for November of 2012. He reviewed the payment methods available to the residents.
Public Input opened.
Pat Sylvester, resident, expressed her feeling how now was not the right time to go forward with potable water in North 1 through 8. She stated more people were moving out of the City than moving in. She suggested Council review the UEP costs. She addressed the current economic conditions in Cape Coral and suggested North 1 through 8 be postponed. She also spoke against the proposed new hotel and swimming facility. She questioned how the City would collect their money for assessments on foreclosed homes. She expressed her concerns about the possibility of increasing water rates.
Unidentified Speaker, resident, reviewed Florida Statutes 100.361 regarding the way to remove individuals from office. He stated he was told that the silent majority of Cape Coral residents (52,000 homeowners) want the UEP to go forward; he invited them to come forward. He voiced his belief that the possibility of increased utility rates for the current users was just a ploy to pit two groups against each other.
Lynne Rosko, resident, stated Council had been beating the UEP issue around since July of 2006. She reviewed Council’s past actions and votes regarding the UEP. She voiced her opinion how if the City went through with the UEP people would lose their homes. She addressed the recent study showing how if the UEP did not go forward the current users would receive a 92.7% rate increase in their utility bills. She reviewed Florida Statutes 112.3143 regarding the requirement of Council Members to abstain from voting on matters where they would receive a special private gain or loss. She suggested each Council Member state if they own property in North 1 through 8 or Southwest 6 and 7 and what benefit they stand to gain should the utilities go forward.
Chris Eubler, resident, explained why he felt the UEP should go forward. He stated the project would be more expensive in a year or two. He noted there were many residents who needed to go back to work, and the UEP would create jobs.
Gary King, resident, reviewed a recent newspaper article regarding the UEP and reasons given for going forward. He discussed a seven point plan, noting there was a way to pay for the City’s central facilities without going forward with the distribution. He reviewed the deferment plans, noting that with the interest rate and added costs the rate was over 14%. He addressed the need to explore the special bonds in the amount of $38 million and understand how they may be applied, and toward what projects.
Manny Castro, resident, expressed his feeling how the UEP was needed, but now was not the right time. He suggested waiting a year or two so the residents could recoup the equity in their homes and refinance to pay for the assessments.
Charlene Campbell, resident, reviewed her personal experiences with regards to the UEP. She discussed her financial situation and the current appraised value of her investment properties. She asked if the City had investigated the possibility of receiving stimulus money or checked for grants. She expressed her feeling that now was not the right time to go forward with the UEP.
Ralph LePera, resident, stated he lived in the Orange area. He reviewed his recent email explaining why he was not in favor of North 1 through 8 water only. He noted some of the issues involved with the project. He stated he owned property in the North 7 area, and he was not supposed to receive utility services until 2017. He expressed his approval of growth paying for what growth creates. He stated the City had directly and indirectly used “utility capital facility expansion fees” and “impact fees” interchangeably. He reviewed the verbiage of the original Ordinance regarding “impact fees” and “utility capital facility expansion fees”. He also reviewed what was discussed at the informational meetings for Southtwest 6 and 7 regarding “utility capital facility expansion fees”. He noted the Southwest 6 and 7 UEP had been voted on for the past 13 months, and North 1 through 8 has not been fully designed nor had the entire project gone out for bid. He addressed the “utility capital facility expansion fees” for North 1 through 8 for a single family residence at $3,361 for water with irrigation (required if the customer did not hook up to the irrigation system). He noted Southwest 6 and 7 would be paying the same $3,361 for potable water “impact fees” which included the irrigation water. Irrigation services in North 1 through 8 would not be available without a north waste water treatment plant to provide enough irrigation water for the North Cape. He stated he felt that paying for something and not receiving it was unacceptable. He suggested removing the advance fee for irrigation if they decide to go forward with North 1 through 8. He also asked what percentage of the proposed rate increase would be attributed to growth.
Joan Rose, resident, stated that in January of 2003 she had asked Council to reconsider the UEP and its high costs. She noted she received a telephone call last week from a member of the Cape Coral Citizens Committee encouraging her to attend last Tuesday’s Council meeting. She questioned who started this telemarketing scheme at a cost of $30,000-$40,000 and who was going to pay for it. She explained why she felt the current rate payers would experience a 92% increase in their utility bills regardless of the future UEP. She expressed her opinion that if the UEP moved forward at least 30% or more of the property owners would walk away from their homes and several hundred more would opt for the ten year deferral plan. She explained why she felt the current rate payers would see their utility rates jump by 292% or more. She urged Council to vote “no” for the continuation of the UEP.
Lyndia Bradley, resident, advised how she lived in the Southwest 4 area and paid $32,000 for her assessments; she did not want to pay for anyone else’s assessments. She asked Council to represent the majority of Cape Coral residents, those 52,000 households who have already hooked up to City utilities and paid their assessments. She urged Council to go forward with the UEP.
Edward Prince, resident, asked that Council consider the pros and cons of continuing or deferring the UEP. He addressed what he felt were the negative points of not going forward with the project. He noted the increase in rates that would be imposed upon current rate payers, EPA issues, and the fact that continuing with the UEP would create jobs for the residents in Cape Coral. He urged Council to stand up and continue with the UEP.
Linda Prince, resident, explained why she felt Council should continue with the UEP. She suggested everyone work together and move the UEP forward for the betterment of the City.
Chris Marino, resident, stated he had to leave New Jersey because of progressive taxation. He voiced his opinion how now was not the time to go forward with the utility projects. He questioned why Council would consider passing a resolution that would increase taxes and create a “ghost town”.
Elizabeth Rodriguez, resident, expressed her support for stopping the UEP. She stated now was not the right time for the UEP since so many people cannot afford to pay the assessments. She suggested Council wait a year or two before going forward with the water and sewer projects.
John Cataldi, resident, thanked Council for allowing him to speak. He noted between the years 2002 and 2008 the City’s taxes went up 247% while its population only went up 39%. He stated he was against the projects and rate increases as they would both cause economic havoc on thousands of families in Cape Coral. He asked Council to vote “no” on the UEP.
John Troup, resident, stated he lived in the Southwest 6 and 7 area. He questioned where the pressure to continue the UEP was coming from. He stated he had lived in the City for over 20 years and never remembered having to go through this type of security in order to attend a Council meeting. He expressed his feeling that now was not the time to go forward with the projects. He explained why he felt Council should vote against the UEP and the City should go back to the drawing board and draw up new plans.
Jessica Sikoviac, resident, expressed her support for moving ahead with the UEP. She stated she had already paid $14,000 for her assessments. It did not seem logical to double the utility bills for the residents who had already paid for their assessments.
Peter Castaldo, resident, thanked Council for listening to everyone’s concerns. He stated the people need to have a say in what goes on in this City. He voiced his opinion that now was not the time to go forward with the UEP. He addressed the possible rate increase for current users and reviewed the City’s economic situation. He stated he bought his home in 2002 with the belief he would not have to come up with the assessment money for several years.
Leslie DiPaulis, resident, stated she lived in the Southwest 4 area. She noted the residents in Southwest 4 were told if they did not go forward with the project, the costs would go up; that was not what happened. She explained how she was amazed to find out that the cost of the utilities could go from $28,000 to $17,000 in just two years. She questioned how other communities could provide utility services for a fraction of the cost. She stated she felt this was not the right time for the projects and the cost was tremendously prohibitive.
Amy McLaughlin, resident, stated she lived in the Southwest 6 and 7 area. She addressed the City’s economic situation. She noted the majority of the citizens felt this was not a good time to go forward with the UEP. She urged Council to vote against moving forward with both projects.
Jeremy Feraci, resident, submitted into the record a petition with 499 signatures in opposition to the utilities. He addressed the fact that people cannot afford the assessments at this time, and the current rate payers cannot afford to have their utility bills increased. He suggested that the City go back to the drawing board and that Council vote to not go forward with the UEP.
Pete Palerido, resident, addressed Council regarding MWH. He noted MWH never went through an RFQ process; they came in through Brown & Root who could not get the required bonding at the time. He suggested the issues with MWH be resolved. He urged Council to do the right thing and stop the UEP.
Alex Papilla, resident, stated she was one of the 52,000 people who would be impacted by Council’s decision tonight. She explained how she purchased her home in the Southwest 4 area six years ago and paid her assessments. She expressed her feeling that it would not be fair to make the residents who had already paid for their assessments pay again through increased utility rates.
Arlene Henderson, resident, reviewed a flyer she received regarding the UEP. She voiced her opinion how the City had managed to pit one resident against another. She reviewed the proposed increase in utility rates and millage rates, noting if they raised them as much as staff wanted, the City would be the highest taxed area in Florida. She voiced her opinion that if Council voted to go forward with the utilities the Cape would be a “ghost town” because the foreclosure rate would get a lot higher. She noted how the property values in Cape Coral were down. She stated if you drove around the Cape, it looked like a third world country. She addressed some of the declining home values in her neighborhood. She suggested the City Charter be changed to allow the people to decide how much money City Council could spend without voter approval.
Council recessed at 6:49 p.m. and reconvened at 7:12 p.m.
Cliff Stewart, resident, voiced his concerns about City staff and those governing the City going forward and building a $480 million utility plant and then another $140 million plant. He questioned why the City fired Mr. Kessler and suggested that they were looking for a company to rubber stamp the UEP.
Michael Buchinski, resident, briefly reviewed the bonds and their ratings. He stated the decision to be made tonight was a difficult one. He discussed the various opinions of others and mentioned he heard the suggestion of putting this matter out to referendum. He reviewed the predictions of the August edition of Money Magazine regarding the housing slump bottoming out in the third quarter of 2011. He stated he was sympathetic to all the people affected by this project. He relayed a personal story about the family of a veteran who is currently being affected by the utilities program.
Carlos Letorra, resident, stated he felt the UEP should be postponed. He reviewed the unemployment rates in Lee County, the amount of people leaving the area, and the declining property values. He stated people are leaving Cape Coral to avoid the cost of the utility expansion.
Joe Morello, resident, expressed his opinion how there had to be some relationships causing the project to go forward regardless of the economy. He questioned the bonds and the underwriter of those bonds. He stated he felt going forward with the project would cripple the City. He reviewed Lee County’s foreclosure rate along with its current economy. He suggested they put off the project for a few years to allow the economy to recover.
John Sullivan, resident, stated he had always been against how the utilities projects have been delivered. He has stood up against the methodology, costs, and timing. He expressed his opinion how there was something radically wrong with the way they were going about the project. He reviewed recent past history that did not support the idea that adding rate users would lower the overall cost of the projects. He asked who was going to pay for the installation on the foreclosed lots. He stated he felt going forward would only make a bad situation worse; people would loose their homes. He suggested they use staff to formulate solutions, and if they could not, they should get people who can. He asked Council to vote “no” on the projects.
Larry Barton, resident, stated he felt the utility plans were seriously flawed and unfair. He made reference to some possible reasons why staff wanted to go forward with utilities. He suggested they find a win/win situation instead of the usual win/lose situation. He stated he felt the ideal path would be for Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 through 8 to go forward after: 1) a full review of all potential options available, 2) the remaining phases be re-structured without a Manager at Risk contract and be re-bid, 3) all costs be fairly and equitably spilt across all stakeholders, 4) there be a commitment to conduct a forensic audit of the entire UEP/FEP since the first one was never completed, and 5) all expenditures against Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 through 8 be quantified, dated, and sources identified. He stated he felt this was what was needed in order to restore the public trust. He urged Council to vote “no” on the projects and come back with an assessment of what should be done in order to go forward.
Casey Majewski, resident, expressed her sympathy to the residents in Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 through 8 who were having a difficult time trying to come up with the necessary funds for the assessments. She stated she had already paid for her assessments and did not want to pay again. She asked Council to vote to go forward with the UEP.
Unidentified Speaker, resident, stated she lived in the Northwest section of the Cape. She voiced her support for the UEP but stated she felt now was not the right time. She addressed all the foreclosed properties in her area along with the current economic situation. She asked Council to work with the residents.
Lucas Cesario, resident, suggested the UEP projects be re-bid and completed by the City.
Unidentified Speaker, resident, reviewed her real estate investment situation and the cost of utilities for those investments. She stated when people find out how much their homes are really worth they will be surprised. She addressed the methodology used for the assessments. She suggested Council postpone the UEP for a few years until the economy improves.
Mike Andocia, resident, reviewed his family’s economic situation. He stated he and his wife were struggling to get by; however, they were trying to get the money together to pay for the assessments. He also addressed the local economy. He stated the UEP was a very emotional issue and they need an innovative solution. He suggested Council forego the plan for now, until they can come up with a better solution.
Rhonda Cason, resident, stated she had resided in Cape Coral since 1970. She reviewed what had happened over the years regarding the utility assessments. She explained why she felt the City should move forward with the UEP. She expressed her concerns about increasing utility rates for those individuals who had already paid their assessments. She urged Council to proceed with Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 through 8.
Wendy Castanetta, resident, stated she built her home in 2000 and was told to expect the utility assessments in 2014. She explained why she and her husband could not pay for the assessments at this time. She spoke about the foreclosed homes in the north section of the Cape. She urged Council to vote “no” on the assessments.
Jennifer Kent, resident, addressed Council regarding the environmental impact to the City if they continued to draw water from wells. She asked Council to do what was right for the City and go forward with the UEP.
Unidentified Speaker, resident, stated he resided in the northeast section of the Cape. He discussed the proposed rate increase the current rate payers would see in their utility bills if the UEP did not go forward. He questioned the assessment methodology. He stated he felt Council needed to come up with a plan that would satisfy both the north and the south areas of the City.
Kevin McGrail, resident, stated he had been a resident of Cape Coral for 20 years and had lived through numerous debates and discussions as each phase of the utility expansions had occurred. He stated he was still making payments on his assessments which totaled $15,567. He reviewed the City’s assessment history. He addressed the impact the utilities project would have on the area. He stated he believed there was a better way to resolve the situation. He discussed an article in Sunday’s News Press regarding economic development in the area. He expressed his opinion how the UEP would lay the groundwork for job opportunities by attracting businesses to an area that otherwise would be in major jeopardy of complete stagnation. He asked Council to stop violating the trust that Cape Coral voters gave them and make a decision. He stated more delays and half-truths were not a solution. A City of 160,000 needed a better common sense approach that met the needs of all our current and future citizens.
Jim Kelley, resident, stated he had been a resident of Cape Coral for 27 years. He noted if the UEP did not go forward, it would be much more costly in the future. He asked Council to do what was right for the City and move the projects forward.
Unidentified Speaker, resident, explained how he just recently bought a home in the Cape. He stated he was happy with his well and septic and did not want City utilities. When he bought his home his realtor told him the assessments would not go through in the northwest section of the Cape for 7 to10 years, yet within 7 months after purchasing his home he received a notice from the City about the assessments. He addressed the tax situation in Cape Coral and noted the taxes he would have to pay would be close to the amount of his mortgage. He stated he could not afford to pay for the assessments, and if he could not find work his home could go into foreclosure.
Drew Roddie, resident, stated Council should represent the City’s residents. He expressed his opinion how the residents of Cape Coral were being taxed to death. He stated he felt Mr. King had a great idea of applying a $546 fee to everyone who was affected by the projects; if they apply that fee to everyone it could be cut in half.
Erick Kuehn, resident, addressed Council regarding some of the comments made by previous speakers about the UEP. He discussed the timing of the projects. He stated one word he had not heard mentioned was “empathy”. He expressed his feeling how Council needed to listen to what everyone was saying and try to understand what they were going through. He suggested they look deep down into their hearts and think about all the people who are going to be hurt by the projects and really analyze what is going on. He asked Council abandon the UEP and bring it back after the election so the new Council members could be a part of the entire process.
Unidentified Speaker, resident, asked what would happen if the people in the assessment areas abandon their properties and leave the City. She stated the rate payers would have to pay for the assessments on the foreclosed homes.
Ed Morris, resident, voiced his opinion that charging impact fees to residents who would not be receiving the irrigation water was unlawful. He stated the residents in North 1 through 8 should not be paying a charge for irrigation services that will not be available for years. He questioned exempt parcels, residents receiving Pine Island water and not paying anything, and why they needed a storage tank and pump station in the far northwest Cape. He displayed and reviewed a comparison chart prepared by Marco Island showing monthly charges for residential customers utilizing 10,000 gallons of water.
Council recessed at 8:53 p.m. and reconvened at 9:16 p.m.
Ralph Santillo, resident, addressed Council regarding points he felt had not been mentioned regarding the assessments, in particular the method of assessment. He discussed the uniqueness of the north area of the Cape noting some residents own large parcels of land. He stated he owned 3 ˝ acres in the north section of the City, and his assessment bill was $28,000 if paid by October 30th and if it was paid over 10 years the total amount would be $100,000. He questioned the assessment methodology used for large parcels of land. He reviewed his family’s financial situation, noting the bank told him if he took the 10 year deferment program the bank would not modify his mortgage. He stated he bought his property in the northwest because he understood that the assessments were not coming to that area until 2017. He addressed the current economic situation along with the foreclosures in Cape Coral. He asked Council to take his comments into consideration when making their decision on the UEP.
David Graff, resident, asked Council to stop the UEP for two years.
Bud Kamish, resident, noted Cape Coral had a diverse population now; and asked how many people’s lives would be ruined by the UEP. He questioned if the crime rate would go up. He recommended Council not go forward with the utilities projects. He stated there were too many people out of work right now and it was not the right time for the UEP.
Jeff Hangen, resident, reviewed his personal history in Cape Coral. He noted there was no work in the town. He stated he recently took a job in Atlanta, and could not sell his home because it was not worth what he paid for it. He discussed his option of renting out his home. He asked if Council wanted another foreclosure on their hands. He urged Council to not go forward with the UEP.
Jackie Iardo, resident, explained how she had done her homework before building her home in 2004. She was told at that time that the assessments would not come to the area until 2015. She suggested Council delay the projects in order to give the residents more time to come up with the money for the assessments.
Greg Kallon, resident, stated he had lived in Cape Coral his entire life and was ashamed to say he was from Cape Coral because City Council did not tell the residents the truth. He expressed his opinion how Council was tearing everyone apart. He noted the residents in the north section of the Cape were not scheduled to get City utilities for years. He stated he understood how people needed to get to work, and the economy was poor, but he did not want to pay the 7˝ % interest rate on the assessments. He voiced his opinion how the residents were not educated about the assessments. He asked Council to stop the North 1 through 8 UEP since it was not the time to go forward.
Greg Curtin, resident, expressed his support for moving forward with the utilities. He stated the economy was bad, but the benefits of going forward with the UEP outweighed the disadvantages. He continued by reviewing some of those benefits. He calculated a monthly increase of $150 a month for all three utilities and stated he felt that amount should not break the residents. He stated he was looking forward to growth in the City.
Caesar Nunez, resident, stated he had been a Cape Coral resident for 20 years. He stated he believed in the future of the City, investing in the City, and having a vision for the City. He expressed his opinion that going forward with the utilities was the right thing to do. He urged Council to move forward with the UEP.
John Barth, resident, addressed Council about the opportunity to apply Public Service taxes to a dedicated fund; this would provide an opportunity for both the north and south residents of the Cape to pay for the UEP debts. He explained how with a dedicated fund the money could only be spent for the purpose intended. He noted this would give the residents from the north section of the Cape an opportunity to fund the obligations created for their future benefit.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Day moved, seconded by Council Member Donnell to approve Resolution 37-09.
Council Member Day proposed an additional payment option for the assessments, a partial pre-payment option plan. He explained how they had worked on this option for several months and it had received approval from the City’s bond counsel. He gave an example of a resident making a partial payment of $1,000 on a $6,000 assessment bill. He stated the principal portion was estimated at $950 which would go against the $6,000, reducing the balance to $5,050. The $5,050 would then be the principal balance billed for the remainder of the term barring any additional partial payments. This methodology would apply to both North 1 through 8 and Southwest 6 and 7. Modified resolutions would be required in order to allow for this payment methodology to be used. The modified resolutions would be brought back to Council in October, 2009. He noted the savings would be great using this methodology. He asked the Public Works Director to discuss the bids received for the UEP within the past week.
Public Works Director Pavlos explained how they had not bid North 1 through 8 yet. They were in the process of bidding the North 1 and 2 areas. He reviewed the three bids opened for the North 1 and 2 area, noting the bids had come in approximately 35% lower than the planning figure. He stated the bids were very tight because companies were fighting for the work; there was only about a $5,000 to $10,000 difference in the two low bids.
Council Member Day asked the Financial Services Director to discuss what would happen if the UEP costs continue to go down or be much lower than the City anticipated.
Financial Services Director Mason explained how if the costs came in less than what the City anticipated, the assessments would be lower. He noted there would be a refund for the initial pre-pays and an adjustment to the assessments for the remainder of the residents receiving utilities.
Council Member Day explained how after North 1 and 2 were completed, MWH would be phased out and the City would take over the UEP. He stated he anticipated a lower assessment cost, but could not say what the amount would be until the project was completed. He explained how he changed his vote on the UEP after the rate study came back showing that the 52,000 current rate payers would have their utility rates increased significantly. He noted the residents had until 2012 to pay for the assessments. Also, the City had SHIP funds in the amount of $400,000 to apply toward hardship cases in Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 through 8. He addressed the emails he received asking the City to default on the bonds. He explained how defaulting on the bonds would put the City in a bankruptcy situation and would be unconscionable.
Council Member Donnell stated he was pleased with the many citizens who were becoming aware of the issues impacting the City. He encouraged everyone to treat one another with respect and noted it was okay to disagree with each other. He explained that the assessment situation was not one created by the north against the south or rate payers versus non-rate payers; it is about the City’s leadership. He stated Council was elected by the people to make tough decisions. Council was in a difficult position because they could not speak except in front of the camera. He explained there was no simple solutions to North 1 through 8. He noted there was so much misinformation out in the public. The one theme he had heard from the residents in North 1 through 8 was “now was not the right time for the utilities and we do not have the money to pay for them”. He reviewed the payment options and the current bids indicating the estimated utility costs may be lower than expected for North 1 through 8. He asked if the 35% reduction in bids would bring down the cost of the assessments by 35%.
Financial Services Director Mason explained the 35% reduction in bids referred to by the Public Works Director. He noted they were definitely seeing lower construction costs today.
Council Member Donnell stated he supported the projects because they did not impact the residents until 2012, yet a “no” vote would impact the rate payers in October of 2009.
Council Member Brandt requested the article he wrote and published in the Cape Coral Breeze last Tuesday be entered into the record. He noted there were 80 speakers at the Special Council meeting on July 14th; 9 of those spoke in favor of going forward with the UEP. Tonight we had 56 speakers; 14 of those spoke in favor of going forward with the UEP. He reviewed the petition received from Mr. Feraci in opposition to the UEP containing 499 signatures. He pointed out that even after an extensive telemarketing campaign to try to get those in favor of going forward with the UEP to come to the meeting on July 14th, there was still a low turnout at the meeting. He stated the Kismet RO plant was built way ahead of when it should have been. He explained how the people who are saying “they paid their assessments and do not want to pay for others” did not understand they will still see a significant rate increase in their utility bill, even if the utilities went forward. He reviewed the 2009 rate study noting that by 2012 the average utility bill will go up from $82 to $109. He expressed his feeling that Council should find another way to finance the debt and not have to do so by increasing the rates of the 52,000 current rate payers. He strongly recommended looking into the Build America bond situation. He explained that he felt doing water only in North 1 through 8 was a bad idea because it meant the City had to go in twice with the utilities, once for the water lines and again for the irrigation and sewer lines. He noted going forward might be detrimental to what the City may have to agree to in the North Spreader Environmental Management Agreement. He added Council had to finally decide what to do with the large parcels of land in North 1 through 8. He suggested Council put the projects on hold for now and solve all the pending issues. He stated he would not support the resolution.
Council Member Tate explained she was not elected by the people; she was appointed by the majority of Council in December. She stated she had always been supportive of the utilities and made that clear to everyone. She discussed voting ethics and noted she would not gain anything from voting on the UEP. She explained how the Governor’s Office had given their opinion in writing that it would not be a “conflict in interest” for her to vote on the UEP since she would not receive any special benefit. She stated she did own a lot in the northeast section of the Cape. She went on to describe the emails she received regarding the UEP and noted a lot of the residents want the program to go forward. She asked the Financial Services Director whether or not a person could refinance their home and add the cost of the assessments to their new mortgage.
Financial Services Director Mason responded how they could.
Council Member Tate expressed her feeling that tonight was the perfect example of misinformation. She informed Mr. Feraci that some of the information contained in the petition he submitted was incorrect. She inquired about the large parcel discount that was available to the residents several year’s ago.
Financial Services Director Mason explained how including a large parcel discount would require a re-assessment.
Council Member Tate noted the City would have an integrated utility system and that would be the number one thing, besides the City’s waterfront canals, that people come to the Cape for. The City would have the weather, water and sewer, and canal front property. She suggested dedicating a portion of the millage rate to be set aside to maintain, repair, and build any future utility facilities as well as protect the rate payers.
Financial Services Director Mason stated this could be done if the funds were set aside annually.
Council Member Tate explained how she did not agree that the capital reservation fee was a good thing. She believed that an impact fee was the way to go. She stated she had asked to have the capital reservation fee removed from the assessment and had been told that it was not possible because the assessment would have to be re-calculated.
Financial Services Director Mason indicated Council could remove the capital facility expansion charge without having to redo the assessment; however, the City was not in a position to borrow the funds to put in the transmission lines because they were not included in the rate study.
Council Member Tate asked if Council could remove the capital facility expansion fee
and dedicate a percentage of the millage rate to pay for the transmission lines.
Financial Services Director Mason responded he would have to look into that option.
City Manager Stewart explained the ability to borrow money for the transmission lines was not part of the assessment. The current rates in place did not contemplate a rate that would provide debt coverage to enable the City to go out and borrow that money even if you say you are going to dedicate a portion of the millage rate to pay for the lines. Unless it was a general obligation debt, the bonding companies would not look at that as a reliable funding source and would not take it into consideration as the ability to repay the debt. That means it would require future Council’s to come back and continually re-make those decisions; the bonding companies would not look at that as a reliable source. It would have to actually be ad valorem millage based upon a referendum vote of the community.
Council Member Tate addressed former Mayor Kempe’s memo and the newspaper articles regarding special assessments. She asked the residents to give Council the benefit of the doubt and know they are continuing to work towards making the UEP work for everyone.
Council Member Grill asked if the bids received were for North 1 and 2.
Public Works Director Pavlos responded in the affirmative.
Council Member Grill asked if staff was going to do the remaining bidding since MWH would be phased out.
Public Works Director Pavlos responded they could decide to do that, or they could take the bids and staff can manage the project.
Council Member Grill thanked everyone who came out tonight and Tuesday evening to share their opinions with Council. He stated he had read every email he received, but could not respond to all of them. He explained the idea behind the UEP was for the betterment of the City. Years into the plan, and with the plan altered, it has now become a dividing line for our residents. Our community no longer exists. It was just a City divided between rate payers and the residents who cannot afford the utilities. He explained wgt he changed his vote earlier because he felt people could not afford the utilities. His vote in June to go forward was due to the fact he had worked with the Financial Services Department to come up with an option of no “out of pocket costs for two years”. He explained that he did this because of the impending rate increase on the current rate payers and his belief that the City needed utilities. He stated after considerable thought he had came to the conclusion the City had bigger problems than increased utility rates. Our projections have been predicated on flawed logic. If we as a City underestimate connections in a growth cycle, which is what the City had done for years, there was no way we can do it correctly in these economic conditions. Regardless of the UEP, rates are going up October 1st. He stated he has yet to see an analysis on UEP connections that was or is correct, and there was no guarantee the rates would stay as calculated for the future. That being said, I feel we would be causing more harm than good and I do not think we can spend our way out of this situation. Prior Councils, with good intentions, tied our hands on the FEP as evidenced by the Kismet Water Plant. The plant belongs to the City as a whole; therefore, the City was receiving the special benefit. He suggested they take the water plant burden off of the rate payers and address it as a City issue. He offered an option of a one-time special assessment for every taxable parcel in the City. If the assessment, which should be very low, could not be paid upfront then we can split it over two to three years interest free. He stated it was his understanding there were over 4,500 tax certificates in Cape Coral that did not sell; meaning there was a greater shortage of revenue than expected. He asked if the City could really expect people to pay assessments when they could not afford the taxes. He stated the strain on the City was great. Could they meet all their financial obligations? Could they if the UEP moved forward? He voiced his opinion the UEP was not the City’s financial savior for the condition they were in and would not keep the City from bankruptcy. He addressed the poor behavior of the residents regarding the UEP and the opinions of parents expressed through their children and directed at his daughter. He stated if someone had a problem with him or his opinions as a Councilman they should deal with him only. He expressed his feeling how all of the utility and facility expansions should be stopped. The City was not growing at this time; only their debt obligations were growing. He suggested finding a better way of reducing the burden on the rate payers. He explained it was the responsibility of the Council to find a better way. There seemed to be a great misunderstanding. The rate increases had nothing to do with assessments or connections; they had everything to do with inaccurate projections of revenues for the City’s utility system. The economy would eventually turn and financial situations would be different; at that point he would push all three utilities throughout the remainder of the City. He commented on some of the emails he received regarding his prior votes. He noted there was a situation developing with the North Spreader that would alter the plans the City had for the north. He stated he would not support the resolution.
Council Member Bertolini stated she had a vision for Cape Coral and had no special
interests with developers or anyone else. She stated she had worked hard for the City. She addressed Mr. Santillo’s comments regarding large parcel discounts and explained how they came up with the methodology for larger lots. She noted she was elected to Council in 2005 when the housing market was great. The statement made how Council mismanaged at the time they voted for the improvements was not accurate. The City was moving forward and it was a wonderful thing to do. She noted she paid $15,000 for her water and sewer assessments and did not want to pay increased utility rates. She stated she supported the utility projects, and they were important in promoting economic development in the City. She expressed her sympathy for the residents in the assessment areas. She noted her disgust at the audience of the First Baptist Church meeting when a few of the residents came forward and tried to give their opinions; the audience booed and hissed. She stated that type of behavior is un-American and unacceptable. She expressed her support for moving forward with the utilities.
Council Member Deile noted that regardless of what side you were on, you were going to alienate a substantial number of people. He stated he lived in the Southwest 4 area and was told the rates would not go down, which they did. He stated the apportionment methodology (large lots versus small lots, versus oversized lots, and irregular sized lots) was an issue that has rankled him since Southwest 4. He explained the problem with the way the large lot exemption was written was that your lot had to be over a certain size before you could take advantage of the exemption. He voiced his opinion how the focus should not be on the size of your lot, but on the benefit you receive from the project. If we focus on the benefit rather than the square footage it would make more sense to the people who were being assessed. If you have a single-family home on a 10,000 square foot lot and your neighbor had a comparable single-family home on a 15,000 square foot lot, he received the same benefit you received. Just because your lot was larger did not give you a greater benefit. He stated he felt the idea of partial payment options appeared to have merit. The idea that a one-time special assessment on all parcels be looked upon as a way to finance the $140 million Kismet Water Plant also had merit. The dedicated millage was also an idea with merit but it was not before Council tonight. He stated he felt these ideas should be considered before Council voted on this issue. He indicated there was a lot of innovative ideas brought up tonight. He stated he spoke with some of the local business leaders and asked them if they would be willing to participate in a citizens’ committee to help Council solve the problem of how to finance the Kismet Plant. He noted the people he spoke with were willing to step forward to help Council come up with a better solution for the community. He stated he felt the partial payment plan presented by Council Member Day sounded like it had merit, but he was not prepared to consider it without further discussion. He addressed several of the comments made by residents tonight about foreclosures and unemployment rates. He expressed his concerns about placing a financial burden on the rate payers. He indicated he owned ˝ interest in an off-water unimproved lot in the North 1 through 8 area, and taking advantage of the 20% discount is certainly attractive to him. He stated he felt Council could find a better solution to the UEP if they keep working on it. He expressed his how that it made more sense to put all three utilities in at one time, and they should stay with the decision they made to put the UEP on hold. He noted the money from the UEP would not come in until 2012; if the City was not going to get the money until that time, that gave them time now to: stop, rethink, get the project right, and then move forward. He stated his vote would be to not go forward with the UEP at this time and to look at better ways of doing it.
Council Member Tate displayed a map of the planned utilities showing Southwest 6 and 7 would be completed by 2010. North 1 and 2 would receive all three utilities in 2011 and 2012 if Council failed to move this forward tonight. She inquired about the stimulus funds available, $15 million for public infrastructure and $23 million for facilities and plants. She asked if the City did not have projects that were shovel ready, did they have any other way of using those funds.
Financial Services Director Mason responded how the City could use those funds right up to January of 2011. He explained the stimulus funds available.
Council Member Tate asked if one of the UEP projects went forward could the City use the $15 million for public infrastructure.
Financial Services Director Mason responded in the affirmative.
Council Member Day asked if the Financial Services Director wanted to add anything to the explanation of his proposed additional payment option for the assessments.
Financial Services Director Mason stated he felt Council Member Day had explained what the payment option was designed for. In previous assessment areas the timing between the initial pre-payment and the time it went on the tax bill was so short a period the additional payment option would not have been something the City would have used. It was being proposed now since there was such a wide difference in time between the initial pre-payment and the actual time that it actually goes on the tax bill; it made sense both in the Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 through 8 areas to allow for partial pre-payments.
Council Member Day addressed the North Spreader EMA situation. He stated he was not opposed to putting full services in west of Burnt Store Road in certain areas if deemed necessary. He voiced his concerns about people outside of the City telling the City what they have to do. He stated the City could litigate the North Spreader situation and should not be pushed into anything.
City Manager Stewart asked the Financial Services Director to address the City’s desire to move forward and seek Build America bonds and what it might mean for these projects if the City was successful in getting approval for the bonds.
Financial Services Director Mason explained how if these projects did move forward the City would use those bonds for the debt issues. He noted the bonds could not be used for financing the north plant since the City had already borrowed the money and the bonds could not be used to refund borrowings. Any Build America bonds the City would utilize could only be utilized if they had debt to issue.
City Manager Stewart asked if North 1 through 8 would qualify for the bonds if approved.
Financial Services Director Mason responded in the affirmative.
City Manager Stewart asked if Southwest 6 and 7 would qualify.
Financial Services Director Mason explained the City could not borrow the funds they had already spent for the design work; however, they would qualify for the actual assessment.
City Manager Stewart noted this would all be contingent upon the federal government approving the projects for the bonds. He explained how the Build America bonds provide for a certain amount of repayment from the federal government on the interest rates that were paid on the bonds (35%).
Council Member Deile stated in reviewing the information on the Build America bonds he thought if the pre-existing debt was contracted before the passage of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act you could not refinance it; however, any debt the City contracted after that, would be able to be financed. He noted the advantages to the City of using the Build America bonds; if the City received a 35% credit back from the federal government they could then afford to lower the interest rate going out to the public.
Financial Services Director Mason indicated if the City sold the bonds at 7 ˝% interest and they received a 35% credit back, the affective rate would be around 5.3%-5.4%
Mayor Burch indicated he had a three page memo from the July 13th Workshop meeting that addressed what he considered to be all the myths about the UEP and all the things Council had tried to do; it was available upon request. He stated someone made a comment at last Tuesday’s meeting that he owned the survey company that did all the UEP work; that statement was not true. He explained how the company he worked for had done some pre-design work for Southwest 6 and 7 and North 1 and 2, which was why he always abstained from voting on the UEP. He indicated there were some Councilmembers who rolled up their sleeves to get the job done. He explained why he considered himself one of those Councilmembers. He expressed his frustration about Councilmembers stating we need to look into the UEP more. He stated they had looked into these projects for two years and had tried to mitigate the circumstances for the residents. They understand the economy and how many people are hurting out there. He stated it was unfortunate that politics got in the way, making their job more difficult. He noted the decision on the UEP would be a very difficult one. He asked the residents to submit their ideas about the UEP to Council. He referred to the cost of the bids coming down and explained how the City would continue to see fluxes in prices because of changes in the market. He stated they would evaluate the pricing for Southwest 6 and 7 and would hopefully come up with some savings. He explained how all the Councilmembers had a goal to get the residents the best service for the best price available.
Council polled as follows: Bertolini, Day, and Donnell voted “aye”. Tate, Brandt, Deile, and Grill voted “nay”. Burch “abstained”. Three “ayes”, four “nays”, and one “abstention”. Motion denied.
Council recessed at 11:42 p.m. and reconvened at 11:58 p.m.
|
RESOLUTION 38-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF WATER DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES; CREATING THE SOUTHWEST 6/7 POTABLE WATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; CONFIRMING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION; ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR EACH EQUIVALENT PARCEL AND EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT; IMPOSING ASSESSMENTS AGAINST REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST 6/7 POTABLE WATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS; PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF THE ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
City Clerk Potter
read the title of the Resolution.
Financial Services Director Mason stated the estimated assessment for the Southwest 6
and 7 water was $5,095. The initial pre-payment period would be July 21, 2009 through September 18, 2009. The first tax billing would be in November of 2011.
Public Input opened.
Jeremy Feraci, resident, expressed his concerns about Southwest 6 and 7. He noted the City had never gone forward with utility projects in this type of economy. He reviewed some of the previous comments made about foreclosures and the unemployment rate in the area. He suggested stepping back, taking a look at what the economy and unemployment did, and seeing if we can get the price of the bids down. He stated he felt going forward with the utilities in this environment would be detrimental to the residents.
John Fedichino, resident, stated he felt the utility projects should go forward, however, the timing and methodology of the assessments was wrong. He concurred with Council Member Deile that they need further input on the matter. He suggested Council not make a decision tonight and table the UEP to a date certain. He explained how other municipalities had asked the citizens to vote on a special purpose local option sales tax, a voluntary tax and not a punitive tax.
Gary King, resident, stated he had three points he would like to emphasize on Southwest 6 and 7. He suggested they go back to the conversation about deferred or amortized payments and the affective interest rate to the payer of those services. He stated, impeded within those plans, were fees for administrative costs, collection fees, and the statutory recovery discount fee. Those were very substantial and Council needed to understand the mathematics and the actual amounts involved with those costs and fees. He stated he was encouraged to hear the Mayor say that based upon the bidding returns and the market information the City is receiving it might be worthwhile to re-bid this project to perhaps bring the costs down significantly. He asked Council put the idea of re-bidding the project on their list of things to do before they make a final decision on the UEP. He noted if anyone was expecting thousands of new rate payers to come onto the system to share the revenue requirement in Southwest 6 and 7 they should think again. He noted in the Southwest 5 area there were hundreds of residents who did not pay their fees, had not hooked up, and were not actively paying or contributing to the monthly revenues. He stated of the 7,000 parcels in Southwest 6 and 7 at least 20% or more are vacant lots. He noted it was important to remember that the burden of the UEP would contribute to foreclosures in the City. If the City went from a 30% to a 35%-40% foreclosure rate they would be down to about 3,000 new rate payers on the system.
John Sullivan, resident, stated even after all the discussion on the UEP tonight there was still a lot to consider before going forward. He stated in the past few months we have heard from Council the economy would improve in two to three years. He referred to a recent interview with Warren Buffet regarding the economy. He stated if Warren Buffet cannot predict the future of the economy, Council certainly could not do so. He suggested Council postpone the UEP until the economy improved.
Greg Young, resident, stated he was in favor of going forward with the UEP. He stated all the hardships Council had heard tonight apply equally across Cape Coral.
Don Floyd, resident, suggested Council follow up on some of the ideas presented tonight before going forward with the projects. He stated his payment, amortized over 20 years, would be $272 per month. In addition, there would be a $105 utility bill to pay. He stated he could not afford the cost of the utilities in Southwest 6 and 7. He addressed the foreclosed homes in his neighborhood, the people out of work, and the problems with vacant lots in the area. He questioned the 20% discount and asked why they were not given the discount. He asked why administrative fees were being put into the bonds when they should be paid through ad valorem taxes instead.
Julio Yanez resident, noted there were people in Cape Coral who were afraid of losing their homes. He pleaded with Council not to go forward with utilities. He stated young children and old people were going to be affected by these projects. He suggested they look at other options and stop the projects since now was not the right time.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Grill moved, seconded by Council Member Brandt to deny Resolution 38-09.
Council Member Grill addressed Mr. Fedichino’s comments regarding a special purpose local option sales tax.
Council Member Brandt explained how he felt it would be wrong to go forward with Southwest 6 and 7 at this time. He noted several months ago, Council voted to set this matter aside for two years. He stated he felt the project would devastate a large number of families, and that was something he did not want to be part of. He addressed the bids and noted labor rates were now down as well as administrative and management fees. He suggested the project be re-bid. He stated if we were going to re-bid the project it should be postponed until November when the new Councilmembers were on board.
Council Member Tate stated she felt staff had done a very good job of sending out delinquent notices, and because of that there are a large amount of properties that will be hooking up to utilities and paying their assessments.
Council polled as follows: Bertolini, Brandt, Deile, and Grill voted “aye”. Tate, Day, and Donnell voted “nay”. Burch “abstained”. Four “ayes”, three “nays”, and one “abstention”. Motion carried.
|
RESOLUTION 39-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF IRRIGATION WATER DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES; CREATING THE SOUTHWEST 6/7 IRRIGATION WATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; CONFIRMING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION; ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR EACH EQUIVALENT PARCEL AND EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT; IMPOSING ASSESSMENTS AGAINST REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST 6/7 IRRIGATION WATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS; PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF THE ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.____
|
City Clerk Potter read the title of the Resolution.
Public Input opened.
No public Input
Public Input closed.
Council Member Grill moved, seconded by Council Member Brandt to deny Resolution 39-09.
Council polled as follows: Bertolini, Brandt, Deile, and Grill voted “aye”. Tate, Day, and Donnell voted “nay”. Burch “abstained”. Four “ayes”, three “nays”, and one “abstention”. Motion carried.
|
RESOLUTION 40-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF WASTEWATER COLLECTION FACILITIES; CREATING THE SOUTHWEST 6/7 WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; CONFIRMING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION; ESTABLISHING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR EACH EQUIVALENT PARCEL AND EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT; IMPOSING ASSESSMENTS AGAINST REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST 6/7 WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT AREA; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLLS; PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF THE ASSESSMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
City Clerk Potter
read the title of the Resolution.
Public Input opened.
No Public Input.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Grill moved, seconded by Council Member Brandt to deny Resolution 40-09.
Council polled as follows: Bertolini, Brandt, Deile, and Grill voted “aye.” Tate, Day, and Donnell voted “nay”. Burch “abstained”. Four “ayes”, three “nays”, and one “abstention”. Motion carried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Request that the Temporary Barricades Placed on SW 28th Street to Maintain the SW 28th Street Bridge Closure Be Made Permanent or Be Removed
|
Mayor Burch announced Mr. Orlowski’s request for the temporary barricades placed on Southwest 28th Street to maintain the Southwest 28th Street bridge closure be made permanent or be removed has been rescheduled for the August 3rd Council meeting.
Council Member Tate suggested moving the balance of tonight’s agenda to tomorrow
evening or to the Council Workshop meeting scheduled for July 27th.
City Attorney Menendez recommended that Council read the ordinances, open them, and immediately move to a motion to continue them to a date certain. The only other issue would be that the lot mowing ordinances needs to be heard this week.
Financial Serivces Director Mason recommended that the lot mowing ordinances be adopted tonight since there was a timeframe for the notices to be sent out.
|
APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS / COMMITTEES / COMMISSIONS
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Buchinski, resident, stated he requested some overtime information for City employees for the months of March, April, and May. He explained that he received the overtime information from the Mayor but it could not be deciphered.
|
ADMINISTRATIVE / DISCUSSION ITEMS
|
|
|
1) |
|
|
PUBLIC HEARINGS - DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CASES
|
|
|
1) |
|
|
|
|
|
ORDINANCE 24-09 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ARTICLE III, SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 3.21, GARAGE SALES NOT TO BE CONSIDERED HOME OCCUPATION OR BUSINESS; REGULATIONS, TO PROVIDE THAT GARAGE SALE PERMITS BE OBTAINED FROM THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION RATHER THAN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE._______________________________________________
|
|
City Clerk Potter read the title of the Ordinance.
Development Management Team Coordinator Struve explained the Ordinance allowed garage sale permits to be obtained from the Code Enforcement Division rather than the City Clerk’s Office. He stated staff believed this change would streamline the permit process. He stated at the May 6, 2009 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency voted (6-1) to recommend approval of Ordinance 24-09. There were no speakers during public input, and no correspondence was received.
Public Input opened.
No speakers.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Grill moved, seconded by Council Member Deile to adopt Ordinance 24-09.
Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye.” Seven “ayes”. Motion carried.
PUBLIC INPUT - RESOLUTIONS
City Clerk Potter read the title of the Ordinance.
Comprehensive Planning Team Coordinator Sosnowski explained the Ordinance would amend Section 3.7 of the Land Use and Development Regulations by clarifying the requirements for visibility triangles. He explained the purpose of Ordinance 25-09. He displayed a diagram with the proposed revisions. He stated staff recommended approval of the Ordinance. He noted that at the May 6, 2009 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency voted (6-1) to recommend approval of Ordinance 25-09. The dissenting voter stated that the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) standards were adequate; and he felt the current and revised standards being proposed took away developable land by applicants. There were no speakers during public input, and no correspondence was received.
Public Input opened.
No speakers.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Deile moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to adopt Ordinance 25-09.
Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. Seven “ayes”. Motion carried.
|
ORDINANCE 26-09 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ARTICLE III, SUPPLEMENTARY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 3.2, TEMPORARY USES, TO ESTABLISH SUBSECTION 3.2.4, TEMPORARY HABITABLE STRUCTURES; PROVIDING REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND TEMPORARY BUSINESS STRUCTURES UPON THE DECLARATION OF HABITABLE STRUCTURE EMERGENCY AFTER A DISASTER; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
City
Clerk Potter read the title of the Ordinance.
Planner IV Heath explained the Ordinance would establish regulations to allow temporary housing and temporary business structures after a disaster. This would enable residents, business owners, government agencies, and health care facilities to have temporary shelter while permanent structures were being restored. He reviewed the purpose of the Ordinance. He stated at the May 6, 2009 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval of Ordinance 26-09 with changes to the language on Page 4, Item 3A, to include a preface “except as otherwise provided herein.” He noted that change had been incorporated. There were no speakers during public input, and no correspondence was received. He mentioned staff had been in contact with other agencies that had similar ordinances in place. He stated staff recommended adoption of the Ordinance to include the changes recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Public Input opened.
Rich Bornfriend, resident, asked what engineering requirements the temporary structures would be under.
Planner IV Heath explained how depending upon the type of structure it would have to meet the tie down regulations. The Ordinance also required mandatory evacuation if another hurricane came along while the temporary structure was still in place.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Deile moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to adopt Ordinance 26-09.
Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. Seven “ayes”. Motion carried.
Brief discussion was held regarding which items on the agenda should be continued to another date.
|
ORDINANCE 41-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE V (LOT MOWING SERVICES) AND CHAPTER 17, ARTICLE III (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS) TO PROVIDE FOR THE IMPOSITION OF SERVICE ASSESSMENTS TO FUND THE OPERATING COST OF BENEFIT SERVICES INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOT MOWING SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
City
Clerk Potter read the title of the Ordinance.
Financial Services Director Mason explained this was the enabling Ordinance that would allow Council to levy the special assessments for lot mowing charges that were previously billed on an annual basis in December. He noted that adding the lot mowing charges on the tax bills would allow the City to ensure collection. Currently the City’s collection rate is 65%-70%. The four resolutions for the various lot mowing districts follow.
Public Input opened.
Mike Buchinski, resident, stated he was in favor of Ordinance 41-09.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Brandt moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to adopt Ordinance 41-09.
Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. Seven “ayes”. Motion carried.
|
City Clerk Potter read the title of the Resolution.
Financial Services Director Mason stated he presented the pertinent information on Resolutions 41-09, 42-09, 43-09, and 44-09 at the last Council Workshop.
Public Input opened. No speakers. Public Input closed. Council Member Brandt moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to approve Resolutions 41-09, 42-09, 43-09, and 44-09. Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. Seven “ayes” Motion carried.
Acting Planner I Boyko stated the Applicant’s request was for a partial vacation of a sixty foot ingress/egress and utility easement. He described the subject property, surrounding area on the proximity map, and displayed aerial photographs. He stated staff recommended approval, and no correspondence was received.
Public Input opened. No speakers. Public Input closed. Council Member Day moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to approve Resolution 36-09. Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. Seven “ayes” Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS – ORDINANCES
Property Broker Andrews explained the Ordinance would provide for a second amendment to the tower lease agreement at Fire Station #6.
Public Input opened. No speakers. Public Input closed. Council Member Brandt moved, seconded by Council Member Deile to adopt Ordinance 40-09. Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye.” Seven “ayes”. Motion carried. PUBLIC INPUT – RESOLUTIONS |
||||||
|
RESOLUTION 23 – 09 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2009-2010 CITY OF CAPE CORAL ONE YEAR ACTION PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT THE 2009-2010 ONE YEAR ACTION PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND EXECUTE THE GRANT AGREEMENT FOR THE 2009-2010 CDBG PROGRAM WHEN RECEIVED FROM HUD; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
City
Clerk Potter read the title of the Resolution.
Assistant City Manager/Acting DCD Director Schwing noted there was no staff presentation on Resolution 23-09.
Public Input opened.
No speakers.
Public Input closed.
Council Member Deile moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to approve Resolution 23-09.
Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye”. Seven “ayes”. Motion carried.
|
RESOLUTION 35-09 VP 09-00600004 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION OF PLAT FOR A STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY ON A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN CAPE CORAL SUBDIVISION, UNIT 24, ACCORDING TO PLAT BOOK 14, PAGES 63 THROUGH 77, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF CULTURAL PARK BOULEVARD AND NICHOLAS PARKWAY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
|
|
RESOLUTION 45-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL PROVIDING FOR THE IMPOSITION OF LIENS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT COSTS; PROVIDING FOR THE PRIORITY OF SAID LIENS; PROVIDING FOR A THIRTY DAY PREPAYMENT PERIOD PRIOR TO RECORDING OF THIS RESOLUTION; PROVIDING A LIMITATION PERIOD FOR CONTESTING THE LIEN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
|
|
|
RESOLUTION 46-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, PERTAINING TO STATUTORY EXTENSIONS OF DEVELOPMENT ORDERS, INCLUDING DEVELOPMENT PERMITS OR ANY OTHER OFFICIAL ACTION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT HAVING THE EFFECT OF PERMITTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND AS WELL AS DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT BUILD OUT AND TERMINATION DATES THAT HAVE AN EXPIRATION DATE OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2008, THROUGH JANUARY 1, 2012; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
|
|
RESOLUTION 47-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE IN THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA; ESTABLISHING THE ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICE ASSESSMENTS AGAINST ASSESSED PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL, FLORIDA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2009; DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL; AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF NOTICE THEREOF; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
|
||
RESOLUTION 48-09 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PRIMARY ELECTION FOR THE CITY OF CAPE CORAL ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2009, FOR MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER IN DISTRICT 6 BECAUSE MORE THAN TWO CANDIDATES QUALIFIED FOR MAYOR AND FOR COUNCILMEMBER FOR DISTRICT 6; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Council Member Brandt moved, seconded by Council Member Grill to defer Resolutions 35-09, 45-09, 46-09, 47-09, and 48-09 until July 27th and hold a Special Council Meeting at 4:00 p.m. prior to the Council Workshop.
Council polled as follows: Tate, Brandt, Burch, Day, Deile, Donnell, and Grill voted “aye’. Seven “ayes”. Motion carried.
|
REPORTS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
|
Council Member Brandt – reminded everyone that yesterday was the anniversary of the moon landing. He informed the residents he was behind on answering his emails and would respond to them as soon as possible.
Council Member Day – no report.
Council Member Donnell – no report.
Council Member Deile – no report.
Council Member Grill – no report.
Council Member Tate – no report.
Mayor Burch – no report.
|
REPORTS OF CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER
|
City Attorney Menendez – no report.
City Manager Stewart – no report.
|
TIME AND PLACE OF NEXT MEETING
The next Special City Council meeting was scheduled for Monday, July 27th, 2009, at 4:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. The next City Council meeting was scheduled for Monday, July 27, 2009, at 4:30 p.m., in Council Chambers.
|
|
|
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:25 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bonnie J. Potter, MMC
City Clerk