A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
The
Lake County Board of
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commr. Hill gave the Invocation and
led the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA UPDATE
Ms. Cindy Hall, County Manager,
noted that she had no updates to today’s agenda.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, under
his reports, he would like to have some discussion in regards to street
lighting in rural areas, and it will not require a vote today.
Commr. Stivender wanted to know if
this is the same discussion that she brought up a few months ago on street
lighting in rural areas, with Commr. Cadwell noting that it may be but he was
not sure at this time.
PRESENTATION: GOVERNMENT FACILITIES BY THE FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT
AND MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Commr. Stivender stated that, before
they get started on their discussion of the government facilities, she needed
to make a comment about the article that was in “The Daily Commercial” over the
weekend where the article had indicated that the City of Tavares and the County
are not working together to annex into south Tavares, which is totally
incorrect. She stated that the County
Manager, as well as the City Administrator, and she have met the week before last
and they are working on a solution that would come back to this Board on the
timing of this. Commr. Stivender stated
that she just wanted that on the record for “The Daily Commercial.”
Mr. James P. Bannon, Director of the
Facilities Development and Management Department, stated that he would like to
review the projects, as shown in his power point presentation provided in the
backup. They have been categorized in
Groups, as shown on Page 2, Group One – Downtown Tavares Development; Group Two
– South Tavares Government Complex; Group Three – Projects in Design Phase;
Group Four – Projects under Construction; and Group Five – Miscellaneous
Project. Mr. Bannon stated that his
intention is to review Group One and Group Two this morning, but he is flexible
with what the Board would like to do this morning.
GROUP ONE – DOWNTOWN TAVARES
DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Bannon explained that there are
four distinct items for the Downtown Tavares Development and, at this time, he
reviewed the funding, activities, and issues relating to this development, as
follows:
·
Multi-Story Parking Garage
Offices for Constitutional
Officers
Retail Spaces
·
Central Energy Plant
·
Detention Center Expansion
·
Judicial center Expansion/Renovation
Funding:
$4
million approved by Board, also to be used for S. Tavares Complex
Architect: HLM, contract pending for Phase I - $508,000
Project
Construction Estimate due on completion of Schematic Design
Proposed
½ cent sales tax revenue bond
Activities:
Jan.
2006 – Parking Garage/Offices Schematic Design
Feb.
2006 – Parking Garage Cost estimate review by BCC
April
2006 – All other Facilities Schematic Design/Cost estimate review by BCC
May
2006 – Construction Manager Selection by competitive negotiations
\
Issues:
Location
of parking garage
Temporary
location of Guardian Ad Litem & Library Services
Site
Acquisition
Mr. Bannon pointed out that they
were slated to have a Construction Manager on board by May, 2006, but they may
change that given some recent developments.
Mr. Bannon stated that one of the
biggest issues relating to the Downtown Tavares Development is the location of
the parking garage (parking deck), and the architects are here today to talk
about this issue. He pointed out that
the architects have not begun the programmatic study or the design, so it is
important for the Board to identify the location of the parking garage. Mr. Bannon stated that staff had discussions
with numerous parties, and they have identified five potential locations. He suggested that they select at least three
parking garage locations, so they can develop schematic designs for those
three. He noted that there are also
issues relating to the temporary location of the Guardian Ad Litem and the
Library Services, because they would potentially be on their future parking
garage location. If they can turn around
the parking garage in 16 months, then they were planning on putting them in
that location, but it all depends on where they want to locate these
offices. As part of the South Tavares
Government Complex, they also have the opportunity to essentially move Public
Works to that location and, if Public Works moves out, then that frees up that
space as well. At this time, Mr. Bannon
explained that staff is wanting the Board to give them direction as to which
options they want staff to pursue as part of the design for the parking garage.
Mr. Douglas Kleppin, AIA, Project
Designer, introduced himself and recognized Mr. Robert Egleston, AIA, Project
Manager, and Mr. Michael Vass, V.P., P.E., Project Director, and stated that
their intention today is to review options for the parking garage. He noted that they have not begun the design,
so the footprints being shown are really representational only. They are all based on the Carter Goble Master
Space and Facilities Plan (Carter Goble), or recommendation, for a target of
600 cars, as shown in the master plan needs assessment. He noted that, if the Board elects to put
more or less cars on these sites, the configuration or the height of these
structures would change. Mr. Kleppin
reviewed each option noting the number of cars and stories, as well as the
advantages and disadvantages, as outlined.
Commr. Pool pointed out that there
has been discussion with the City of Tavares and the Constitutional Officers in
relationship to their desires, and he sees Option 1 and Option 4, from his
perspective, as the best two options.
Commr. Stivender pointed out that it
was her understanding that the site noted under Option 5 is presently under
contract and is going through due diligence.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
explained that the Board asked staff to meet with the property owners (Option
4) some months ago; they had at least two meetings with them, as well as the
City of Tavares. They are interested in
going forward in the process where they would end up owning the value of what
they have now, i.e., if half of the block was worth $1 million and they were to
own $1 million worth of office space and structure, they would be willing to
proceed. They also suggested, if they
were to do a public/private partnership, they might look to extend it to the
north all the way out to Alfred Street and invite those property owners to
participate. He noted that the City of
Tavares has been at those meetings, as well.
Mr. Minkoff stated that they are interested in participating but he does
not think they would prefer to sell; they would prefer to end up with something
at the end but they would have to work out those details.
The Board members were in agreement
that Option 1 and Option 4 were the best two options; Mr. Bannon was of the
understanding that this was the direction that the Board wanted staff to precede
with the architects, to instruct them to come up with schemes that show parking
garage locations, with them having some schematic design on those two locations
in January, 2006; the balance of the project will be designed by April, 2006.
Discussion occurred regarding the
calculation for the number of needed parking spaces, with Mr. Kleppin
clarifying that the final count on the parking will be based on city
requirements, code requirements, and functional requirements. As with Option 1, there will be room for
future expansion, as he explained. Ms.
Hall explained that, since that study, they have added the Constitutional
Officers, so it is likely that the number they are working with now, the 600,
will be larger.
Commr. Cadwell noted that, when negotiating
Option 1 and Option 4, he wanted to make sure that there is nothing on Option 4
that would keep them from doing what they talked about in regards to additional
office space for the Constitutional Officers; it may limit any retail or
anything else but there is room on that footprint to do those offices; and Mr.
Bannon clarified that all of this can be taken into consideration when
reviewing Option 4.
Mr. Minkoff noted that staff would
like some direction from the Board. On
the concept of the public/private with the private folks not selling them the
land but ending up with some kind of value in the new building, he wanted to know
if that was an acceptable way to go with the Board, and Commr. Cadwell felt that
this theory is acceptable but, at some point, they will need to look at the
math.
Mr. Minkoff stated that, at that
last meeting where they talked about asking the property owners to the north,
Colonial Bank, Gene Smith who owns the one office space, the building where
Hospice is currently leased, about looking at this as a two block project, and
he wanted to know if this was something that the Board would like staff to do. He explained that it would have the potential
of lowering the height of the parking garage or providing more spaces for the
same height, if they went out further.
In Option 1, the County owns about a quarter of the block to the north
and about a quarter of the block to the south; the County owns all of site
shown in Option 4.
Commr. Cadwell pointed out that he
did not want the second block to slow this process down, and he would only want
them to proceed in this direction if it did not, and Commr. Hanson felt that this
was something that staff could investigate in the process.
Mr. Minkoff stated that staff would
like to go ahead and appraise the block noted in Option 1 including the
County’s parcel, so that they can begin these negotiations with the property
owners and find out the current values; he is anticipating $15,000 to $20,000
to do that; and a consensus from the Board would be sufficient for staff to
start that process. He clarified that
the owner of the lot noted in Option 1 wanted an opportunity for a retail
and/or office space.
Commr. Pool noted that the County
would lose potential revenue, if they build and create some retail space on the
lot noted in Option 4.
Mr. Minkoff explained that, with
this site, the County could purchase only the air rights, as he explained in
more detail, and this could be negotiated between parties. It was also pointed out that, in 20 years,
they may be looking at the need for more sites.
Mr. Minkoff noted that staff will
bring back all options for Option 1 and Option 4, from both architectural and
usage, as well as cost and everything else, and staff will investigate going
all the way up to Alfred Street with Option 1.
GROUP TWO – SOUTH TAVARES
GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
Commr. Stivender stated that, before
Mr. Bannon begins the discussion on the South Tavares Government Complex, she
went back and looked at the space study done by Carter Goble, and the square
footages shown in the backup material are not the same as those in the study. She wanted to know if staff could justify
that the Public Works building needs to be 40,000 square feet; the Emergency Operations
Center (EOC) needs to be 50,000 square feet; and a Public Safety building needs
to be 25,000 square feet.
Mr. Bannon explained that the new
numbers came through their new program and exercise with their architect. They asked the users to tell them the space
that they need and they rely on their input.
He noted that the information shown, as noted by Commr. Stivender, is
the completed area with a little bit of an expansion, and they will clarify
that when they do future presentations on the schematic design. He pointed out that they are eager to look at
future expansion on all of these buildings.
The information reflected the
following areas that would be considered for the South Tavares Government
Complex, with Mr. Brannon noting that this would be in the planning for over
the next 15 to 20 years, which the Board will need to discuss for long term
planning, and with staff giving them intricate costs in order for them to make
that decision:
Public
Works (40 k sf)
Sheriff
Administration (80k sf)
Public
Safety (25k sf)
Emergency
Operations Center (50k sf)
Health
Administration and Clinic (40k sf)
Fleet
Maintenance - Fire, Sheriff, Public Works (26k sf)
Central
Energy Plant
(Other
offices that have the potential of being relocated, as discussed)
Water
Resource Lab (3 k sf)
EMS
Mosquito
Control
Commr. Cadwell stated that staff
needs to add Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to Fleet Maintenance. He knows that the EMS building is a separate
issue but, as far as maintenance, they definitely need to be on that list.
Mr. Bannon reviewed Page 16, which
reflected the funding, activities, and issues related to the South Tavares
Government Complex and noted that Starmer Ranaldi is contracted as the
architect for Phase I; and PEC is contracted as the site engineer for Phase
I. He noted that, under funding, there
is a proposed one-half cent sales tax revenue bond, and a schematic design will
be reviewed by the Board in January, 2006.
Commr. Cadwell noted that, with the
Constitutional Officers not moving to this location, and the pressure they have
received from the courthouse, this project, the South Tavares Government
Complex, has slowed down considerably, and the other one, the parking garage,
has accelerated; and staff also wanted to confirm the location of the Sheriff.
Mr. Bill Starmer, Starmer Ranaldi,
addressed the Board and presented a brief explanation of the proposed site plan
for the South Tavares Government Complex.
Mr. Starmer explained the vehicular access through the site that will
feed the residential subdivision, which has been part of the conversations
between the City of Tavares and the County; he pointed out the existing entry
into the landfill off of CR 448; their attempt to tie a main entry into the
site that will line up with the existing entry in the park across the street;
and the idea of a right-in, right-out only type of access at another location but
not a major intersection. The design would include buildings built
around a central core, and parking lots with access to the buildings, as well
as parking for staff. They identified
some retention by basically following the natural topography of the site. The building pads, for the sake of
discussion, represent somewhere between 20,000 to 30,000 square feet, whether
or not they are multiple story. They
took the Carter Goble study as a guideline and met with staff and leaders of
the different departments, and they are starting to rationalize that square
footage and give them a real number fairly quickly. At this central core, because of the number
of agencies/departments of the County that are moving to this site, they are
looking at a potential conference center.
The proposed master plan also shows some future sites for the next five
to 20 years where significant property is available for future expansion and
additional needs. Mr. Starmer stated
that today they were asking for their thoughts on the agencies to be placed on
the site and discussion about priorities.
Commr. Stivender noted that Ms.
Dottie Keedy, City Administrator, City of Tavares, is here today, and the City
needs clarification that the road has been designed so that it will run up the
side of the complex and then goes out the second entrance and feeds into that
residential subdivision and, because this has been an issue, she wanted to make
sure that there was a consensus.
Mr. Starmer explained that they feel
this potential design is really the best for both the government complex users,
as well as the residential users.
Mr. Bannon explained that staff is
asking the Board for clarification and confirmation that this is what they are
instructing their architects and planners to do; that they are going to have a
road that is going to be one of their main entrances in and out of their
development.
Mr. Minkoff clarified that, in terms
of the cost of that right-of-way, these are all things that would have to be
negotiated.
Commr. Stivender clarified that this
is the alignment; it is an access to a development that is in the City of
Tavares; this complex will be in the City of Tavares; and it was a requirement
of the City’s planned development that there be an access to CR 448. Commr. Stivender emphasized that a right-in,
right-out will not work, if there are 900 homes. She did feel that the
layout with the buildings is great and putting a central conference area was a
good idea.
Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of
Public Works, explained that a right-in, right-out would be in between those
sites, and right now that works very well and fits their access management
countywide, so they are not stepping over any boundaries. In terms of a light at any of these
intersections, Mr. Stivender noted that it is very close to being warranted at
SR 19 and CR 448.
Mr. Bannon noted that, when staff
comes back with the schematic design, it will be with dollars attached and then
they will ask for direction as to which of the buildings they want them to move
forward with to the next phase.
Commr. Stivender stated that, in
regards to the Sheriff, it has always been her opinion that the Sheriff’s
Department needed to stay downtown at the site noted in Option 4 where they
have proposed a parking garage. In
talking to the Sheriff, he has indicated that he does not care; he just needs a
bigger facility, a newer facility, to put his employees, because the County is
growing. To have him downtown keeps him
close to the jail and judicial center and, in her discussions with the Sheriff,
he was amenable to having it on that corner.
It would be a prominent building and parking could be a part of his
building; it could be four or five floors; and it just made sense with the
downtown redevelopment going on that the Sheriff’s Department stay downtown. She stated that, even though he may outgrow
it in the future, that department could be left in a phase 2 or 3 of the other
complex, but right now she thinks the facility needs to be updated, improvised,
and he needs to stay downtown. She
stated that this is her personal opinion, and that is the way she will vote. She does think they need to keep a spot for
him in the future at the South Tavares Government Complex because, as the
County continues to grow, he is going to need it, just as they need to look for
additional parking going toward Alfred Street.
They need to keep all these options open but, for right now, she thinks
that they can make him an adequate facility downtown and keep him part of
downtown. The people in Tavares love
being able to see the Sheriff’s Department downtown, and it has been an
integral part of the County complex and her growing up and, with this being her
district, it is what she would like to see happen.
Commr. Cadwell stated that there
were two things that started these whole projects, the judicial center and the
space they are going to need and parking where they have had to negotiate with
the City of Tavares for years on parking.
They looked at the places the general public does not need to go to
every day, and they looked at how much parking space it would free up if these
offices were gone. The Sheriff’s Office
was one of the top ones, because there are so many employees in that building
and then there are the cars. It is the
same with Public Works and Public Safety. He stated that this is one of the reasons that
the Constitutional Officers came to them, the Tax Collector and the Property
Appraiser, and said that they still need to be where the people are coming to
do government business. He understands
that the Sheriff is not excited about moving out there, but he thinks that
moving the Sheriff’s Office is probably one of the most important things they can
do to make this campus work. If they
build that building now, they will have lost those parking places, and the
ability to do something on that site later.
He thinks it is key that, at some point, the Sheriff moves out of
downtown.
Commr. Hill did not know whether the
Sheriff would want to break up his operations even in the future, and there was
the question about piece mealing it, if they have two different sites.
Commr. Hanson recognized that there
is no perfect answer but it is short-sided for them to not look at something
that they will eventually have to do anyway, so she thinks they should go ahead
and move the Sheriff to this new location.
Commr. Pool explained that, if they
keep the Sheriff downtown, then clearly they would try and eliminate the parking
garage, Option 4, and utilize that for the Sheriff, and then go ahead and
negotiate Option 1 for a parking garage, and that would be the only way that
this would work, in his opinion, to keep the Sheriff downtown next to the jail,
he did not know how to design Option 4 with both the Sheriff and parking in the
same concept.
Commr. Cadwell clarified that they
are not going to tear the Sheriff’s Office down, so that building is still
going to be there, and they still have to count parking spaces for it. If they build a new Sheriff’s Office, they
will be losing the parking that was there and creating more parking problems
because they are still going to utilize that building and that building is
going to require parking spaces, so it does not make any long range sense to
him.
Commr. Hill agreed and noted that
she did not see any reason to piece meal the Sheriff operations and in the
future have him move out to another site and have half of his operations in
town and half of his operations somewhere else.
Sheriff Chris Daniels addressed the
Board and stated that he would prefer not to have the Sheriff’s Office
fragmented. They have outgrown the
current facility and need additional office space. He still believes that they have the ability
to expand in some existing space, possibly the Historical Courthouse, when the
Tax Collector and Property Appraiser move out because they will be vacating two
floors, as well as additional space. In
regards to the parking noted in Option 4, the site at the corner of Main and
Sinclair, Sheriff Daniels explained that he would have security concerns about
a six story building that towered above the jail and being immediately adjacent
to the jail, being accessible to the public, and being an open parking garage. He explained that Mr. Bob McKee, Tax
Collector, and Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, have been kind enough to let
him tour the facility in the Historical Courthouse, which he feels can meet his
needs, and he thinks that they could build very inexpensively a covered walkway
from the back of the Administration Building to the back of the Historical
Courthouse without interfering with the aesthetics of it.
Commr. Hanson stated that she thinks
it is very short sited to take Option 4 and use it when they know they may need
it in the future. She noted that Option
4 is not needed today because there are other options.
Commr. Cadwell felt that, with the
understanding that this is not going to happen for awhile, they need to give
staff direction, and he thinks that the long range plan would be for the
Sheriff to be at the South Tavares Government Complex, with the understanding
that he may share some additional space here until that can happen in a year or
two from now; but long range, he needs to know that they plan on having him
move out of this downtown area.
Commr. Hanson agreed with Commr.
Cadwell’s comments.
Sheriff Daniels explained that the
square footage of his existing facility is about 45,000 and there are four
floors; the Carter Goble study shows 80,000 square feet. He explained the different areas they have
turned into office space noting that they are now out of space, and he pointed out that it is important to
understand that he needs to keep his operational sources together and in one
location, if possible.
Commr. Cadwell pointed out that,
once the Sheriff was gone, they were planning to utilize those buildings for
County activities, so it is not like there is not going to be a need but it
would be a good temporary fix, if they had to wait for them to build the
Sheriff’s Office.
Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which
was seconded by Commr. Hanson, to direct staff to move forward with the
schematics for the South Tavares Government Complex being presented today in
the site plan, and to add EMS to the Fleet Maintenance.
Under discussion, Mr. Bannon asked
for clarification of Board direction as to the buildings defined on Page 15,
and it was noted as the Board had discussed.
Commr. Hill called for a vote on the
motion, which was carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote.
Ms. Hall explained that, in January
or February, the architects will be coming back with actual cost estimates of
everything on Page 15. Staff needs
direction as to whether the Board is okay with everything on this page eventually
going out to the South Tavares Government Complex and, then when they come back
with the actual cost of each building, that might have an impact on what they
ultimately decide to do first. She also
clarified that the list on Page 15 had been amended to include the EMS in the
Fleet Maintenance.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he took the
Sheriff out of his first motion, because Commr. Stivender, the District Commissioner,
wanted to make sure that it was separate. Commr. Stivender clarified that she does
not disagree with the plan and she does not disagree that the Sheriff’s
administration may end up at the South Tavares Government Complex in 20 years,
so it depends on how Commr. Cadwell makes his motion.
Commr. Pool asked the Sheriff about
Pod E and Sheriff Daniels explained that, if they build it, they have estimated
264 beds; the number has been increasing about 10% per year; and it would
depend on the population of the County today.
Sheriff Daniels explained that there has been discussion about building
Pod E being larger and taller than the rest of the facility and noted that the
Pod will be filled the day it opens its doors.
Commr. Pool pointed out that, in
looking at a long term plan, he can agree that the site indicated in Option 4
needs to be reserved for the jail.
At this point, Ms. Hall understood
that it is the consensus of the Board that the items listed on Page 15, the buildings
for the South Tavares Government Complex, would be a schematic design by the
architects including EMS and the Sheriff’s Administration Building.
Sheriff Daniels asked for
clarification on whether, in the immediate future, it is planned that he will
expand into the Historical Courthouse, and Commr. Hanson explained that this
would make sense, and it would be a natural transition, but timing is going to
be the issue. Sheriff Daniels explained
that, if that is not something in the immediate future, he will begin to look
for additional lease space, which the Board agreed would probably be necessary.
Ms. Hall suggested that, once they
determine the location of the parking garage, they can certainly with Board
direction build that into the plan and, with the timing of the garage, they
will know what timing they are dealing with at the point, so they can make the
determination that, if the timing works out, the Property Appraiser and Tax
Collector could be moved out fairly quickly into the garage, and then they
could work with that expansion.
Ms. Dottie Keedy, City
Administrator, City of Tavares, addressed the question about height
restrictions in the City noting that right now it is four or five stories for
buildings, but they are looking at going higher because they recognize the
need.
Commr. Stivender stated that, in her
discussions, she is really just throwing out all the different options, because
she does not like for it to be said that this is what is going to happen and
that is the end of it; there are other options and what they are building is
for the future, and she wants so make sure it is right.
Commr. Stivender stated that she
wanted to address Group Three – Projects in Design Phase, the health clinics,
because this has been going on for the last two years. She believes that they are all in agreement
that the Umatilla Health Clinic needs to be done and it needs to be larger.
Mr. Bannon noted that the architect
will be coming to the Board with schematic design options on whether they expand
on the existing building or they knock the existing building down and build
another building.
Commr. Stivender stated that she
thinks that the Tavares clinic is adequate to use for office space, but they
have never moved on that one.
Ms. Hall explained that they have
some money in the budget to do some renovations in that facility should they
need additional office space for whatever downtown department, but they have
not moved forward with any of that at this time. She noted that right now they do not have a
concrete plan for it, but they would have to come up with some options for the
best use for it.
Commr. Stivender pointed out that
other city representatives have asked about the use of that building; it is not
being utilized and they have all of these space needs. They need to be doing something with that
building. She stated that the Leesburg
clinic is located in a bad area and she does not believe they need to reopen
that one; maybe they need to sell it or trade it to the City of Leesburg for some
land. She stated that they need to move
forward on these clinics instead of letting them sit there idle.
In terms of a South Lake clinic, Mr.
Minkoff noted that it is going to come up when they get to the leases later,
because it is not programmed as a construction project; it is currently
programmed as a lease project.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 10: 15 a.m., Commr. Hill
announced that the Board will take a 15 minute recess.
PRESENTATION: FINANCING PLANS FOR BOND ISSUANCES BY THE
COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE
Ms. Hall noted that she had included
a couple of pages in the Board’s package for today, and she is basically going
to go through the information that she provided to them. She explained that they are likely to have
two bond issues coming up in the near future.
One is to fund the government facilities that they just talked about;
the other is to fund the acquisition of environmentally sensitive lands that
was approved by the voters a year ago.
She has included a timetable and basic information for each one of those
bond issues
Half-Cent Sales Tax Revenue Bonds
Ms. Hall explained that staff
envisions recommending to the Board the half-cent sales tax revenue bonds to
fund the facilities that they will be building in both the South Tavares
Complex and the expansion of facilities in downtown Tavares. They would word that bond issue and the
project description broadly enough so that, if there were funds that were left
or the Board wanted to use them for another government facility, there would be
no problem. The payback that they will be using to support
those bonds is the State shared half-cent sales tax, which was discussed with
the bond agency a year ago. The County has about $4 million in the budget for
this year to start them out with the process with the architects and
engineering and any additional things that need to happen with these facilities
now. So they do not need to go out
immediately with the bond issue for the sales tax. She also explained that they are in a
position, since the County has a line of credit available through the existing
voted sales tax, to use that funding for bridge financing for a period of
time. Staff is looking at the bond issue
taking place some time between April and December of this next calendar
year. If it seems that, because of the
timing of the projects, or the sizing of the bonds, and it seems prudent, they
could do two different series; they are not really envisioning this right
now. Bond issues in general are only for
capital expenditures; they cannot be used for operating expenditures, as she
explained in more detail. She also
explained that, in terms of expenditure requirements, when they issue bonds and
they are tax exempt, there is an expectation that they will be spending that
money fairly rapidly and, at the time of closing, the Chairman will need to
sign a tax certificate that states that they reasonably expect to spend 5% of
the proceeds within six months, and 85% within three years. On construction projects, they can take that
out to four years, if there is a professional engineer that states that the
construction is likely to take a year longer.
Limited General Obligation Bonds
Ms. Hall explained that the project
for land acquisition and development of environmentally sensitive lands is limited
to the bonds of $36 million, and the pledge for that is ad valorem tax, which
they are authorized to levy up to 1/3 mill to pay for debt service; the ad
valorem tax cannot be used to purchase the land or do any of the development,
or for any of the costs that are associated with the purchase of
environmentally sensitive land.
Currently there are some land acquisition projects that are under
research as far as timing. Before they
actually purchase any of this land, a process needs to take place. The Public Lands Acquisition Advisory Council
(PLAAC) will make recommendations to the Board to consider parcels of
land. Once that happens, there are
surveys, appraisals, and due diligence that takes place before they actually
would move forward with a purchase.
There is $400,000 in the budget that would take care of any of the
preliminary appraisals and other things that they would have to move forward
with for any parcel they were studying.
They also have the opportunity to use the line of credit, if they need
to do bridge financing; if there are some smaller parcels that come available,
this would be their recommendation to use some bridge financing prior to
issuing the bonds. They have the same
expenditure requirements that she mentioned with the sales tax bond. Staff is envisioning this bond issue to take
place some time after April, 2006. When
they do the bond issuance, the Chairman will be required to sign a tax
certificate that says that they expect to spend 5% of the bond proceeds within
the first six months; 85% of the bond proceeds within three years.
Ms. Hall explained that staff is
following interest rates, and they do tend to be going up a little bit
now. She has included some charts in
their book to see what they are in a short time period. Over the long run, they are still at
historical low level compared to the last 10 or 20 years, so they are still in
a very good position financially to get very favorable interest rates with the
bond issues.
Mr. Minkoff informed the Board that,
at the recommendation of bond counsel, for each of these issues, the Board
adopted a resolution that would let them spend money now and, then when the
bonds were issued, to reimburse themselves.
It would be the same way on the land acquisition. If they acquired some land after the date of
that resolution, they could reimburse themselves for that land purchase.
Ms. Hall explained that, as far as
the bond issue process, they have done quite a bit of preliminary work on that
a year ago with the bond rating agencies.
Staff would need to update the information because it is now a year old
and, at the point in time that they were actually interested in moving forward
with the bond issue, they would update that information and enter into
communication with the bond rating agency in New York. It was their understanding that their
presentations were viewed very favorably and that they would be eligible for
very high bond ratings in both circumstances.
She explained that the whole process to do a bond issue does not take that
long, between 60 and 90 days, to have the money in hand.
Commr. Stivender pointed out that
the information indicates there are other issues to consider such as the
interest rates going up and, if they wait until April or next year, she wanted
to know how much money will be involved in terms of interest.
Mr. Mitchell Owens, Managing
Director, RBC Dain Rauscher, explained that they ran some scenarios showing
increases over the next six months to a year and, for example, on a $35 million
bond issue, the difference is approximately $100,000 a year over a 20 year
period in debt service payment, so it would be taking a risk of some
substantial increase. Everybody
recognizes that rates are trending upward and it is important that their legal
counsel require certain certifications and certain base line facts to be
available before they can actually issue the debt. Mr. Owens stated that what they are doing
today in a workshop session is putting together their thoughts and process as
to the cost of the project, to basically come back with a concept that they
were talking about and giving them actual portrayals of what the costs are so
that they can actually go out in the market place.
Taking into consideration land
prices and what is happening in land values particularly in the last year,
Commr. Pool felt that they would want to try and find partners to leverage
their dollars. His position would be
very clearly that, if they do not lock in these properties today, or the next
six months to a year and buy what they want for the future, they are going to
be lacking in the amount of property they can buy for the dollars.
Mr. Owns explained that there are
specific requirements in the referendum that passed as far as acquiring the
land, or basically determining what pieces of property are going to be
purchased by the County under this program.
After talking to bond counsel, they cannot go out and borrow money just
based on the millage levy; they can only borrow money on the actual property
purchase itself. If they had $10 million
to purchase today, they would have to have $10 million in property.
Mr. Minkoff explained that, in
talking to Mr. Tom Giblin, Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, he suggests that, if
they do one issue, it is going to be cheaper; if they break it down to two or
three, it is going to be a little more expensive; if they try to do ten $3
million issues, it would be very unwise.
The point was made by Ms. Hall, any Tuesday the Board can get $15
million; it is already set up and it is already paid for. If somebody brought in a piece of property tomorrow
for $15 million, they could close on it Friday, because the money is sitting
there, so the bonds are not driving it; it is more of the acquisition process
to identify the properties and what they want to buy.
Ms. Nadine Foley, Public Lands
Acquisition Advisory Council (PLAAC), stated that there is nothing holding up the
process other than their council is trying to do a good and proper job, and
they want to bring good partnership parcels to the Board, so that they are
fulfilling their duty. They hope to
bring a couple of things to the Board very shortly for their approval. They feel that they are charged with
expending that money in a way that will be long term, and the citizenry will be
proud of what they acquire.
Commr. Pool wondered if there were any
landowners coming forward offering their properties today, with this option
being part of the ordinance.
Ms. Foley noted that some have come
forward but they hope there will be more people once they know of that
option. The applications and criteria
are on the web page. She noted that the
property on Dora Canal will be on the Board’s agenda next week. They are also excited about looking at a
package deal on the CSX abandoned railway, so they do not have to piece meal
that along as the Rails to Trails are being developed and the County would
actually be owner of all of that.
Mr. Owens stated that the actions
the Board took previously with the line of credit and, by establishing a
committee, it gave them a lot of flexibility to leverage with other particular
state or federal entities that might be able to participate in a project with
them, so they have that flexibility.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he does
not want to give the appearance that one of the main reasons the referendum
passed was that they said this was going to be a citizens committee; it is not
going to be political; the Board members are not going to get involved in it;
the citizens will bring the projects forward; and he does not want them sitting
here and saying hurry up they want to spend the money and trying to influence
the process.
Commr. Hanson felt that the committee
clearly understands that they need to move forward rapidly but with a plan in
place. They had talked before about green
printing, and she thinks that they are back to that now. They need that green printing and it can tie
in with those abandoned trails, but they have got to have the connectivity of
these properties, so they are not buying hit and miss all over the County
without a plan. They have the matrix,
and the committee has done a fine job putting together the criteria, but they
still do not actually have the green printing.
Staff has a lot of that information, but the committee still needs to
make that decision to move forward and actually have it on paper where they
would like to have those properties.
Commr. Hill stated that the Board
had a request from a citizen, Mr. Ken LaRoe, several weeks ago whenever this
was brought forward and he asked whether he could speak to the group and have
questions. She noted that they do not
normally take public comment, but he had asked her several months ago, and she
informed him that this would be an agenda item at a workshop.
Ms. Foley clarified that there
absolutely has not been any political pressure from any Commissioner, and they
are feeling, from public comment at their meetings, the very thing that the
Board has expressed today, that interest rates going up and property prices are
going up. She noted that there is a very
desirable property, Castle Hill on Highway 50, that various environmental
organizations have tried to purchase for many years, and it has doubled in
price since 2000. She further noted that
the Board went ahead with the Ferndale Reserve at their recommendation before
the referendum even passed but it is a fit in so many ways, and a partnership
deal.
Commr. Stivender wanted to clarify
that Mr. LaRoe had called her and knowing what he wanted, she did not bother
calling him back because she did not want to put any pressure on anybody else;
she does not know when the committee meets; and once the requests come to the
Board, that is when she hears them.
Mr. Ken LaRoe addressed the Board
and stated that he was the Chair for the Political Action Committee on the bond
referendum; he is the CEO for Florida Choice; and he has been trying to get a
forum in front of the Commission for a long time. He cannot figure out why this never got on
the trim notice this year; they are now a year behind in collecting the approved
tax; and he wanted to know why they cannot issue the bonds. He has started attending the PLAAC meetings,
which is a citizen’s advisory committee directed by the County Commission, and
he thought they would be much further along than they are now, and he did not
feel they can effectuate any kind of change meeting only once a month. He has with him today a list of five projects
that total between $44 million and $47 million that they can buy today, and
property owners are in total agreement with him. He and Mr. Rich Dunkel have talked to Trust
for Public Land (TPL), and their bond counsel, and they have talked to Volusia County
about their program. Mr. LaRoe stressed
the point that they cannot issue the bonds without having the property under
contract and that it was his understanding that the County did not do the trim
notice because it was going to cost $25,000 or $50,000; to do multiple bond
issues, it is going to cost significantly more than what it would have cost to
do the trim notice. With every one
percent, it is $3.6 million in additional cost to the taxpayer; this means that
they can issue $36 million and buy $36 million of land but, if they wait, the
cost is going to double. The Dora Canal
piece, which he has been trying to get them to buy for the last three years,
was $160,000 and is now $350,000 because they waited; raw land without develop
rights was selling for $87,000 per acre last week. He stated that they have to issue those
bonds, and they have to issue them now.
They have the land, and the green printing should have been done before
the referendum was even passed, or immediately thereafter, and it is almost too
late for green printing. He noted that
Mr. Dunkel has done a lot of research on the bond issue, and he would encourage
the Board to not make decisions without adequate information and having it
properly researched.
Mr. Dunkel addressed the Board and
noted that he has done a lot of research and has found out from Volusia County,
TPL and Orange County that, if you get accused of arbitrage after having the
money for three years, you have to give the IRS the net difference between the
interest on the bonds and what you had in the savings account, so nobody is
going to prison.
Mr. Minkoff interjected that this
was not true, because the Chairman is required to sign that affidavit at
closing and, if she signs it knowing that it is untrue, she can go to jail, and
the County can be liable for damages.
Commr. Cadwell pointed out that the
County has some expensive bond attorneys that he is going to listen to; they
are in good financial shape because they have been prudent and listened to
their advisors; but certainly a citizen can give their opinion although he does
not think they need to respond.
Mr. Dunkel stated that they need to
move forward on this and they can do this by working with the TPL or Nature
Conservancy. He has a lot of experience
with the TPL because of the State trails issue.
The TPL and Nature Conservancy, as well as other groups, are in
Tallahassee to protect that money, and they want to get a portion of it. Mr. Glen Burns addressed the Board several
years ago about this issue. The programs
and partners that they want are funded with documentary stamps. The County’s land values and property
transactions have increased tremendously over the last couple of years, and
their portion of that money has not been buying public lands in Lake County; it
has been going to other counties all over the State. Mr. Dunkel explained that the TPL is working on
projects all over the State, and it could be a partner with Lake County. He presented the Board with information and
explained in more detail about their projects, particularly one in Naples, and
noted that something like that could be done with Castle Hill. The Lake County School Board is looking for
land; there could be partnerships through the TPL or the Nature Conservancy;
and there are a lot of opportunities here.
Every adjoining County except for Marion County has projects going with
the TPL right now. The City of Mount
Dora could have avoided a problem with their grant writing if they had used a
professional such as the TPL or Nature Conservancy, and he would encourage the
Board to work on this as soon as possible.
In terms of the Wekiva Protection Act, he would prefer that the State
pay for those special parcels of land so that South Lake County and other
portions of the County can get their share of funding. He also noted other issues experienced by
Volusia County, which is acting on land opportunities.
PRESENTATION: LEASED FACILITIES BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
Ms. Quinnette Durkin, Property
Manager, presented the Board with an update on County-owned properties and
County leases noting that her complete report was in the backup. Ms. Durkin noted that this report was
prepared to provide information and that, prior to January 2004, this
information had been kept on several lists by several different
departments. The information was
collected and a database was developed identifying the properties by Alternate
Key, Property Type, Property Description, Legal Description, Property Acreage,
and Department Assignment, which has been verified by the various
departments. As noted, there are
approximately 250 properties listed in the database. She explained that meetings were held with
staff at GIS to develop a layer on the GIS system that would identify all
county-owned property, as she explained in more detail noting examples that had
been included in the backup. She also
explained that specific documents are included in the files for each
property. The database is continually
updated as the County acquires properties either through purchase, escheatment
of tax deeds, or code enforcement foreclosures.
As noted, during the past year, 16 properties have either been sold
($128,206) or donated ($32,852) for a total of $161,058, thereby placing these
properties back on the tax roll. At the
Lake County Central Park (Commerce Park), seven lots were sold generating
approximately $1,957,090 in sales and a contract is pending on Lot 37, which is
approximately 112 acres and will generate approximately another $3,360,000 if
the closing is completed. There is also
a contract on Lot 3 and a portion of Lot 4, which is close to 27 acres and will
generate approximately $2,025,000.
In regard to the discussion about
money being generated from the Commerce Park and going back into the General
Fund, Mr. Minkoff explained that, on the other properties, in his discussion
with Ms. Hall, they are planning on bringing to the Board some kind of system
where, if it was purchased with funds, for example, from the fire department,
and it is a significant amount of money, then they can allocate those moneys
back to the department; currently there is not a system in place because they
were never selling anything. They have
not sold any large Public Works or fire sites, so all of the property that has
been sold has been General Fund property.
Ms. Durkin stated that, in addition
to selling or disposing of property, they provide assistance in the acquisition
of property, with several park properties being purchased this past year
including PEAR Park, Northeast Community Park, and Ferndale Preserve.
Commr. Stivender referred to Example
A, Page 5 of 6, and noted that Summerall Park has been deeded to the City of
Tavares, and it was noted that staff will confirm this item.
Ms. Durkin noted that other
acquisitions include property for a fire station on CR 448 and flood prone
property in the Lake Mack area. The
Furniture Country warehouse property on CR 473 is scheduled to close November
4, 2005. She explained that staff
attends the meetings of the Public Lands Acquisition Advisory Council to
provide support to them in their acquisitions.
Ms. Durkin explained that staff also
manages leases; they currently have 17 properties owned by the County leased to
organizations as shown in the backup, Example C; and Example D shows that they
have approximately 50 leases where the County is the tenant. Several of these leases include space for
county departments, constitutional officers, the Health Department, and storage
facilities. The information reflects further
details pertaining to the Citrus Ridge Library, MPO, Court Smart program, and
Health Departments.
Ms. Durkin explained that staff
wanted to bring some issues to the Board’s attention in the area of leased
space. The Health Department has
expressed the need for space in the South Lake area. In the Leesburg, Eustis, Tavares and Mt. Dora
areas, the Health Department has four leased spaces, and these are due to
expire in 2006 and 2007. They are
working with Facilities and Procurement to develop an RFP for responses to a
“build to suit” building to rent for a ten year period, with an option to buy
based on the Board’s direction that was given to staff on October 4, 2005.
Mr. Minkoff explained that the
County is currently leasing 20,000 square feet of space for the Health
Department in the north half of the County.
They have indicated a need for 40,000 square feet, so very soon staff
will need a decision from the Board as to whether they should write a lease for
the required 20,000 to 40,000 square feet, or build 20,000 to 40,000 square
feet, or to just try and renew these leases.
Commr. Pool suggested that staff analyze
what a lease would be for this type of building and if they own the building
and project it out 20 years, because the health clinics will always be needed
and, if it is prudent or more cost effective, he would like them to look at
what they can do and what they should do.
After some discussion, Mr. Minkoff
clarified that, if they build a 40,000 square foot building in Tavares, it
would eliminate all of these leases for the health clinics; the Umatilla Health
Department is not included in that square footage because it is actually a clinic.
Commr. Cadwell requested that Ms.
Hall provide him with information as to why the Umatilla clinic will not be
ready for another 24 months.
Ms. Durkin explained that the
Sheriff and Tax Collector have leases in Clermont, both to expire in a year,
and they have indicated that this space is no longer large enough to meet their
needs. The Clerk is currently leasing in
the Sunnyside Plaza in Clermont, and his lease is due to expire in a year. The Property Appraiser and the Supervisor of
Elections have offices located in Minneola City Hall with the lease expiring in
2009. In the next year decisions will
need to be made for location of new offices and space in this area.
Commr. Pool stated that this looks
like an opportunity, and they need to make sure that, as they go forward with
leases and with land that they may or may not own, they determine what is the
most cost effective and a long term benefit to the County and community.
Mr. Minkoff explained that staff met
with all of the constitutional officers and, just from the property management
side trying not to get involved in the policy with them, these are decisions
that are going to have to be made. The
space that they rent from the City of Clermont for the Sheriff is a very poor
facility; the Tax Collector indicates that he is under spaced there; so those
decisions are going to have to be made within a year, and the Board members
will have to make them in consultation with the constitutional officers.
Ms. Durkin noted that they also
provide space in the Altoona Fire Station for the Adopt a Child program; space
for the Forest Hills Association to meet in the Lake Mack Fire Station; and
space for the Friends of Ferndale to meet in the Ferndale Fire Station. They also assisted the Clerk in securing placement
of a drop box at the Center State Bank in Leesburg for the Recording Department
of the Clerk’s Office.
As they begin their second year of
this program, Ms. Durkin stated that their goal is to continue to assist the
Board, constitutional officers and county departments with locating, acquiring,
leasing and disposing of properties.
Commr. Pool stated that he
appreciated the work done by Ms. Durkin to bring all of this information
together, so that they are now able to make informative decisions.
Mr. Minkoff stated that, when staff
first started this process, they met with Seminole County and Orange County and
looked at their processes and really mirrored those two processes; they did not
really look at any other government in Lake County; he did read in the paper
that the School Board is undergoing a similar process and trying to identify
their properties and dispose of what they do not need but no one really had a
formal program.
Mr. Bob McKee, Tax Collector,
addressed the Board and explained that their leases are going to expire in
about 12 months, and they are at the point now that they have actually vacated
all of the ancillary spaces in their building in South Lake and have extended
their customer service area, so it completely fills the building. They are about two positions short in terms
of staffing and they have no place to put people. They are not going to revert back to the
dismal conditions that once existed down there at the detriment of their
customers. Mr. McKee explained that 12
months is not a long time, and it cost them about $65,000 for build out so
vacating lease space is extremely expensive.
They would encourage the Board to decide on their next move in South
Lake County. He explained the wonderful
arrangement they had in Eustis where they had a building built to suit them and
where they paid $10 a square foot, had a 15 year lease, and perpetuity; and the
owner of the building receives nothing except the equity in the building. Mr. McKee stated that they are going to move
forward in South Lake County to make that same type of arrangement in order to
suit their needs. He asked the Board to
come to some conclusion and, even though he will pursue building something to
meet their needs, he is certainly not encouraging the Board to build something.
Sheriff Daniels explained that he is
facing the same issues as the Tax Collector, and he has talked to two property
developers and, even though he is not a fee office, both have said that there
are people in South Lake that will build long term or build to suit to lease
for a south substation. He explained
that the new sex offender registration requirements went into effect recently and doubled the amount of traffic at
the south substation, which is a terrible location, no parking, and he would
like to see if they can find something else.
Discussion occurred regarding a
possible timeline for staff to be able to present an analysis for the cost of
building versus lease costs and presenting scenarios for the Board’s review.
Mr. Minkoff noted that he had made a
suggestion to Mr. McKee that, if they could get everybody at one site, not
necessarily in the same office, then people can take care of all of their needs
at one time, and he thinks that all of the constitutional officers are willing
to consider something like that even though the Sheriff is a little different
in terms of needs.
PRESENTATION: DIRT ROAD ISSUE BY THE PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of
Public Works, stated that he first wanted to thank Mr. Kristian Swenson, Road
Operations Director, and Ms. Lori Conway, Capital Programs Manager, for putting
the information together that is contained in the book that has been provided
to the Board.
Mr. Stivender explained that staff
identified roads that were not maintained by the County and not in the city
that had 100% right-of-way; roads that had some right-of-way; and roads that
had no right-of-way. He stated that this
information was discussed with the Board a few months ago, and now he would
like to summarize the whole program. The
Board is now a part of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), so Public
Works is not involved with a lot of the processes associated with State roads
or expressways, but they are still pioneering four-lane roads in South Lake
County and still working on four-laning two-lane roads throughout the County
and using State funds, city funds, or impact fees; widening and resurfacing
roads using sales tax and impact fees; and paving clay roads using sales tax
and impact fees and gas tax. They do not
have funding for these projects and have faced many challenges with the special
assessment program and roads that they do not maintain.
Mr. Stivender stated that the
special assessment program was originally approved in 1982 and there has been
discussion about looking at this program and updating it at some point. A lot of the special assessments were done in
the 1980s and 1990s. There were a lot of
challenges with a couple of projects that are going on right now, not only from
an environmental standpoint, but also from right-of-way acquisition. Staff was asked to come back with inventory,
which they have done, and today he wanted the Board to look at Tab 6 – Roads
with 100% Right-of-Way, Expanded, a list of non-County maintained roads in
unincorporated Lake County that have 100% publicly dedicated right-of-way
sorted by number of addresses on the road along with the special assessment
inquiry date; the number of addresses along the road range from 79 to 0. There are non-County maintained roads and
private roads that are not paved and are not interested in the special
assessment program, but they do have 100% right-of-way, with one reason being
the cost; they do not want to pay one-half or two-thirds, with the County
picking up part of the cost. The other challenge is that there might be an
issue associated with participation in general.
He also pointed out that there are a lot of inquiries about the program,
but there is not a lot of interest or commitment in a lot of these projects through
funding or programming; a lot of them really expect the Board to take care of
the roads through some funding source.
He pointed out Tab 7 Roads with 100% Right-of-Way, Expanded by
Commissioner District; and Tab 8 Roads with 100% Right-of-Way, Expanded by
Special Assessment. Mr. Stivender stated
that he is concerned that they do not have a dedicated funding source, and they
have got a program that may have to change or be modified to meet the needs
that are out there today. He also
addressed Tab 9 Roads with Non 100% Right-of-Way where they have continued
requests to take these roads into the County maintenance system Tab 10 is
associated with costs and, as noted, a table depicting comparative initial
capital costs to bring non-County maintained roads, in unincorporated Lake
County without 100% publicly dedicated right-of-way, into the county road
maintenance system. They have done over
100 special assessments over the last 20 years.
Mr. Stivender stated that, since
this is a workshop, he would like the Board to consider revamping the special
assessment program in a way that they can get participation and find out who
really wants to participate in a program or really wants the County to maintain
that road for them, and to set up a funding source that would allow those roads
to become county maintained. Then they need to decide if it is a capital
program, or are they increasing the number of miles of clay roads by doing this
program.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, if the
Board includes more roads that are county maintained, even though they may be
clay, this would cut down on the desire for paving. There is a group out there now that are not
even on the maintenance system, and he knows that they said they were not going
to take anymore clay roads into the maintenance system purely because they did
not have the money, but they have got to develop a funding source now to do
that. He has many miles just in his
district that are not being maintained by the County at all; they do in an
emergency situation only because they are not in the system. He hopes that, after today, staff will look
at some alternatives to generate some revenue in the unincorporated area to
take care of these non-county maintained roads.
Commr. Pool explained that people
call and tell him that they pay taxes and buy gas, so their position is that
the County ought to be taking care of these roads because they are
taxpayers. In terms of impact fees, the
County has to spend those on new roads and, even though people request dirt to spread
themselves, they cannot help fix up private roads.
Commr. Cadwell stated that there are
901 roads that have 100% publicly dedicated right-of-way and are located in the
unincorporated area of the County, and they need to first look at those roads
and get those on some type of maintenance system.
Commr. Hanson stated that she
appreciates the work that has been done.
She does think the special assessment program works and modifying that
too much at this point might be a mistake.
She agrees that they need to make some provisions that those roads are
brought into the County maintenance system but make sure that they are not
allowed to immediately turn around and expect the County to pave them.
Mr. Stivender felt that they need to
have something where they have a mechanism that requires them to show their
commitment, a commitment from their neighbors, and that they have enough
participation for the special assessment program; in other words, a commitment
to use public funds on a public right-of-way in front of a house, to have some
kind of process in place.
Commr. Cadwell suggested that, if he
wants that kind of process, then staff can develop it and bring it back for
consideration, even if it some type of questionnaire. He noted that, in the past they have not had
a dedicated funding source, and they have never added a clay road to the list,
but they are at the point where they have to.
He suggested that staff look at options and bring them back to the
Board, maybe a Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) or something else, but for
staff to bring back some funding mechanisms that will allow them to generate
some dollars to put back into those roads.
Discussion occurred regarding the
possibility of having a MSTU, and Mr. Minkoff clarified that Commr. Cadwell was
speaking to the issue as being countywide; Commr. Pool was discussing site
specific. He stated that it would not
require the citizens to do anything; it is a Board decision; and they do that
now in some street lighting districts.
In the past, they have always said they wanted the citizens to come in
and approve it. Using special
assessments, as an example, is very inefficient and expensive and time
consuming; using ad valorem is a much easier way to do it; but to generate the
revenues it would be a significant ad valorem tax.
Commr. Stivender asked Commr.
Cadwell if there are other counties that have done some type of designated
funding to upgrade their dirt roads.
Commr. Cadwell noted that Polk
County was looking at some others types of funding sources, but some of the
others, because of where they are located with interstates, they have a lot
more gas tax, but he will find out; and he is not talking about a capital
revenue source; he is talking about a source that they will have to maintain some
clay roads.
Mr. Minkoff pointed out that they
have to be careful because a lot of the zoning approvals are keyed to county
maintained roads.
Ms. Hall reiterated what she had
heard from the Board today and, if that is correct, staff will move forward with
that direction. Of the list, 901 roads that the
County does have 100% of the ROW, staff can go back and prioritize which ones they
think would be their first choices to bring into a maintenance system; there
will be a price tag to that. Staff will
also come back with some recommendations for funding that and it could be a
combination of things having to do with the assessment program or other revenue
sources that they can discuss among themselves and bring back some
recommendations to the Board based on that.
Staff will also check with other counties; and to eventually build a
system where they can talk to those people where they do not have 100% ROW and
ask them to talk to their neighbors about donating ROW, so they can also add
them to the 901 road list. It was noted
that staff would also look at the possibility of a MSTU.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board had taken some action earlier
to do emergency work on roads that are not on the system yet, and he wanted to
know if the Board needed to approve that again so that staff can continue to do
because they still have water in some of those places and knowing that they are
cutting into some of the transportation dollars.
It
was the consensus of the Board that the Public Works staff will continue to do
emergency work on roads that are not in the system where there are problems
with water or other emergency issues.
Commr.
Cadwell suggested that they look at other areas where they are going to be
deficient like Parks and Recreation maintenance. That way if they decide on a MSTU or
something, maybe it could be used to maintain clay roads and the maintenance of
recreation facilities, which might be easier to sell countywide.
If
a group or homeowners association were to contact staff on a non-county maintained
road and were willing to pay for the work, Commr. Pool wanted to know if the
County has a rate that they charge for that work.
Mr.
Stivender stated that the County does have a rate and a limit on the amount of
money, $1,500 and the reason being that they do not want to cut into the
private sector. The County’s rate is competitive but they are not the only
source out there to do that kind of work.
Commr.
Cadwell wanted to know if staff has the manpower to take care of those
emergency situations or do they need to look at contracting to get some of that
done.
Mr.
Stivender noted that they do both and, in most of these cases, they do not get
a contractor involved; usually they haul a couple of loads and spread it
themselves. At this time, they only have
a few vacant positions in the maintenance area.
Mr.
Minkoff explained that, when the County addresses a one time emergency
situation, they do not have to worry about liability except with their work
but, if they assume maintenance of the road, then they would have to get the
road up to green book standing for clay, so they would have to deal with trees,
fences, and they would lose their choices.
Mr.
Stivender explained that staff has been working for years to get a special
projects crew just to maintain the County roads, and they may require a special
type of crew to take care of these certain needs associated with this program,
and a funding source to go with that.
Commr.
Cadwell wanted to make sure that staff moves forward with prioritizing these 901
roads that have 100% right-of-way and come back to the Board because, over the
years they have talked about dirt roads but then there is a time lapse. He wants to make sure they move forward and,
in regards to the emergency issues, Mr. Stivender has the Board’s support to go
and give those people help that call for help.
Commr.
Cadwell stated that he needs the information from staff on how the County does
their street lighting program including the associated costs and how they have
done this in the past for the village areas in the rural part of the County.
Commr.
Stivender noted that they have that information from last year, because she
asked for the same thing, in regards to SR 19 and Bruce Hunt Road, and the cost
was one of the issues when she brought it up last year.
Mr.
Stivender stated that two things happened, the hurricanes and this process, but
they have put a list of vendors together because they want to put together
information in terms of what is available and how to deal with it. Once again, there will be at a priority
system. He noted that staff is working
on a draft policy, so they will get that to the Board. Mr. Stivender explained how lighting
sometimes can be a negative at intersections.
Mr.
Stivender informed the Board that they have bidding dates and everything
scheduled for the southern connector in Clermont; the bids will be back in
December.
REPORTS – COUNTY MANAGER
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Ms.
Cindy Hall, County Manager, introduced Ms. Carol Strickland, Growth Management
Director who started with the County yesterday.
CORRESPONDENCE - RAINWATER CAPTURE PROGRAM
CITRUS RIDGE LIBRARY
Ms.
Cindy Hall, County Manager, stated that she has two letters that she would like
to hand out to the Board, one from Ms. Blanche Hardy, Director of Environmental
Services that describes the Rainwater Capture Program; and one that the
Chairman is sending to Polk County, at their request, to initiate some dialogue
on the partnership funding of the Citrus Ridge Library.
OTHER BUSINESS
COUNTY ROADS/CITY OF LEESBURG
Mr.
Jim Stivender, Director of Public Works, informed the Board that he has a
meeting this afternoon with the City Manager of Leesburg to talk about CR
470. The last time he talked to the
Board about this they definitely wanted to work with the City but wanted to
make sure that the City came forward with that right-of-way.
Commr.
Cadwell stated that, if the City of Leesburg who is going to benefit wholly for
the project is not willing to give them the right-of-way, then they need to
re-evaluate where that project is on their list. He noted that this whole road is for property
that they are going to develop there, and the initial request was that they
would sell the County the right-of-way or go through that process.
Mr.
Minkoff addressed the status of the right-of-way acquisition noting that the
engineer is working under the assumption that the City is going to be giving
the County the right-of-way.
It
was the understanding of the Board that Mr. Stock, City Manager, was going to
work with them, and it was also the direction that was given by the Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO).
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER POOL – DISTRICT #2
CONSERV II
Commr.
Pool informed the Board that on Thursday he will be meeting with Commr. Teresa
Jacobs in Orange County in reference to the Conserv II site, and he will try to
bring back information. He noted that,
in his conversation with her, she has tried to utilize some of the Conserv II
property herself for her own district and was not very successful.
REPORTS
– COMMISSIONER STIVENDER – DISTRICT #3
CITY
OF TAVARES/SOUTH LAKE COMPLEX
Commr.
Stivender referred back to the discussion of the buildings and stated that
there was one item that was not discussed, the Judicial Center building expansion,
and she wanted to know where that item will fit into the scheme of things
because all they talked about was the parking garage and the South Lake
Complex.
Ms.
Hall clarified that they may not have focused on that item but, as shown in the
backup, it notes that April 2006 they will have the cost estimates for the
downtown facilities, which includes everything.
Commr.
Stivender stated that, in their meeting the other day with the City of Tavares,
they did discuss the annexing of the South Lake Complex prior to the County
doing the development and working out an agreement with them where the County’s
Building Department may be able to do the inspecting, if that was their
concern. The City of Tavares requires that anybody developing will have to annex
into the City before they give them water and sewer, and this would be
forthcoming; and that staff would probably present information on this today to
the Board.
Mr.
Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, explained that he did not feel there was any
disagreement, from talking to the City Attorney that they would enter into some
kind of agreement that would call for development review, with their approval
and annexation of the property then.
Ms.
Hall noted that staff will work with the City and, as mentioned, they have
worked with Ms. Dottie Keedy, City Administrator, and talked about a solution
and an agreement that would work for all of them, and staff will be working on
that and bringing that forward to the Board.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER HILL –
CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT #1
CITRUS RIDGE
Commr.
Hill informed the Board that the paper had information that Polk County and
several other counties have noticed that the property is quite expensive in
that area, and they are looking for partnerships with Citrus Ridge Library. She wanted to know if maybe they could
co-locate the government facility within that library and whether that would be
an enticement for them to use for partnering.
Mr.
Minkoff explained that the Tax Collector has indicated that he has been talking
to the Tax Collector from Osceola County about having some kind of a joint
facility there.
Commr.
Stivender stated that Lake County is going forward and she did not want to
exclude anybody from that process even if they get involved a little bit later.
Commr.
Pools explained that Orange County’s position was that Lake County is already
utilizing their services in other areas, but Osceola and Polk, in his opinion,
need to definitely step up to the plate and help them out.
REPORTS
– COMMISSIONER CADWELL – DISTRICT #5
STATEWIDE
TASK FORCE/IMPACT FEE TASK FORCE
Commr.
Cadwell reminded the Board that next Tuesday he and Mr. Minkoff, County
Attorney, will be at the Statewide Task Force and Impact Fee Task Force
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There
being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the
meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m.
__________________________
JENNIFER HILL, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________
JAMES
C. WATKINS, CLERK