05-04-1993 Joint Workshop•F CSC
0.
;mss t'
1
PLOR1
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council DATE: May 4, 1993
THRU: SUBJECT: Joint Workshop
THRU:
FROM: John J. Drago, City Administrator
f*
Attached (which you need to bring on Thursday, May 6th) is the proposed
agenda for the Joint Workshop. I had a conversation with the County Administrator on
Friday, April 30th, in which he stated that the County wanted to stay focused on the
issues of the Authority and the Appraisal. I indicated that the City did not want any strings
attached to the appraisal by SFWMD. Furthermore, the City and County agreed to ask
SFWMD to cover the cost of both consultants to review the appraisal from an engineering
and financial standpoint. If SFWMD refuses to pay for the City and County consultants;
then both governments would have to absorb those costs.
Enclosed is a summary of the appraisal cost which includes the cost of the
City's consultant and the City's maintenance crew and supplies. This was prepared by
the Appraisers. The County needs to add their costs to the summary. The only other
piece of information that the City requested from the appraiser was the methodology or
example of how his engineer was going to determine the value of the pipe in the ground
and associated equipment.
Recently, the Mayor and I met with Commissioner Harvey, Dave Rivera and
Deighan Appraisal to receive an update on the appraisal because of some recent
newspaper articles. In that meeting the Mayor asked two important questions: First, did
the City change the scope of services of the appraisal? The answer from Deighan was
no. Second, did the City do anything to increase the cost of the appraisal? The answer
from Deighan was no.
City- County Joint Workshop
Countywide Utility System
May 6, 1993 7:30 p.m.
HRS Auditorium N.W. 9th Avenue
AGENDA
1. Do both parties still desire to form a County -wide utility
system?
2. Do both parties still desire
of the County -wide system?
3. Where do we go from here?
(5) Are
consultants for the
on the appraisal by
(6) Should
plan to do with the
4. Other points /concerns of both parties.
for the City's system to be a part
a. Do we proceed to have an appraisal performed of the City's
system funded with SFWMD monies via a cooperative agreement?
(1) Are we clear on the scope for the appraisal?
(2) Does the appraisal firm have a clear mandate by both
bodies to provide an impartial appraisal?
(3) Are City and County roles regarding the appraisal
clearly defined?
(4) Should the County proceed to have Deighan perform the
appraisal allowing for the first draft to be reviewed by the
consultants and staff, corrections made, staff meeting held to
secure proper document, then to Council and Commissioners, to be
followed by a joint workshop for Board of County Commissioners and
City Council action?
funds being provided to engage separate
City and for the County to review and comment
Deighan?
we decide at this juncture what both bodies
appraisal once it has been received?
i
than
zr
C.t4..!;%E.;
frld
_21