1982-06-08 Regular Meeting3070
82 -1
82 -54
82 -40
REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 8th, 1982
The City Council of the City of Okeechobee, met in regular session at 7:00 P.M.; Tuesday,
June 8, 1982, in the City Council Chambers at 55 South East 3rd Avenue, Okeechobee, Florida.
Chairman /Mayor, Edward W. Douglas, called the meeting to order with the following Council -
members present:
Edward W. Douglas, Chairman /Mayor
Donald Burk, Vice Chairman /Mayor
Dowling Watford
Oakland Chapman
James H. Knight was absent
Others present were:
Bonnie S. Thomas, City Clerk
David Conlon, City Attorney
Richard C. Fellows, City Administrator
AGENDA ITEM #I - INVOCATION AND PLEDGE
The invocation was offered by Councilman Burk, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ITEM #II - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Douglas called for correction, additions or deletions, if any, to the minutes
of either the Recessed Meeting of May 20, or the Regular Meeting of May 25th. There being none,
Councilman Burk moved that the minutes of the Recessed Meeting of May 20th and the Regular Meeting
of May 25th be approved as presented. Seconded by Councilman Chapman. Motion passed.
AGENDA ITEM #III - FIRST READING - COP ORDINANCE
Chairman Douglas presented to the Council a proposed Ordinance creating a new Commercial
Zoning District category called C.P.O. (Commercial /Professional /Office). The Chairman informed
the Council the Planning and Zoning Board had recommended approval of the Ordinance.
Councilman Burk moved to have the CPO Ordinance read by title only. Seconded by Council-
man Watford. Motion passed.
Councilman Douglas read the Ordinance by title as herein set out:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
FOR THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS TO CREATE THE NEW ZONING DISTRICT - COMMERCIAL, PROFESSIONAL/
OFFICE (CPO); PROVIDING PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES; PRO-
VIDING PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES; PROVIDING PROHIBITED USES
AND STRUCTURES; PROVIDING SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND REQUIRED SETBACKS; PRO-
VIDING LIMITATIONS ON SIGNS WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND MINIMUM OFFSTREET PARKING
REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Motion was made by Councilman Chapman to set the date for second reading and public hearing
of the Ordinance for the meeting of July 13, 1982. Motion seconded by Councilman Burk. Motion
passed.
AGENDA ITEM #IV - CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Chairman Douglas informed the Council that members of the Chamber of Commerce were pre-
sent in regards to the use of the parks during the annual Speckled Perch Festival and Labor
Day Celebration. The Chairman called for a spokesman and was informed by Mr. Al Stokes that
the Chamber wanted to know what the Council's decision was on the matter.
City Attorney, David Conlon, stated that he and City Administrator Fellows had studied the
matter and concluded that it just falls into the normal procedure that a master license can
be given for the one event. Also, the sidewalk problem (peddling of wares thereon during the
event), anybody doing that would have to have special permission.
Chairman Douglas inquired from the Attorney whether the sidewalk vendors would have to
come before the Council for permission. Attorney Conlon stated that, yes, they would, and the
Council could grant discretionary permission as it sees fit, depending on what the circumstances
are.
Councilman Watford asked the Attorney if he was saying that Section 11:20 (Code) which
states that people can't sell on sidewalks, streets, or parks without the permission of the
City covers the peddlers, then - -- they can't pull their carts down the sidewalks and sell?
Attorney Conlon replied that was right, they absolutely could not.
T T1
3071
82 -55
The Attorney further stated the term "peddlers license" encompasses the door to door
solicitations. And, this part of the code overrides any other interpretations of "peddlers
license" because it's specific. The City could give a license for one day to a group that
has a lot of members that are all coming under that umbrella and the City could give the per-
mission for the use of the park for the one day to the exclusion of anyone else.
Councilman Watford inquired whether the Chamber would have to buy an Occupational License.
Attorney Conlon informed him that, yes, they would but the fee will be waived. The conduct of
everybody will come under that one license because it is all part of the Chamber's event.
Chairman Douglas asked for any further comments or questions.
Councilman Watford asked if we needed to grant the Chamber of Commerce authority to use
the parks for the Speckled Perch Festival and Labor Day Celebration now or wait until just before
the event? Attorney Conlon stated it says with a request for permission and since the Chamber
representatives were present now, they could make the request at this time and the City could
grant it for those two days and we'd be through with it.
Administrator Fellows stated that since it was getting close to the 4th of July event,
the Council may want to take that item into consideration at the same time.
Councilman Watford asked Mr. Stokes if there was anything else the Chamber wanted to
request besides the taking care of the peddler problem on the streets.
Mr. Stokes informed the Council the Chamber was requesting the use of the parks for those
two days and control of the peddlers in some way to keep them out of the way. Mr. Stokes further
stated a problem was created by hawkers walking in front of the color guard of our parade and
would like to have this stopped if possible.
Mr. Stokes stated the Chief said he didn't have the authority to move the peddlers and we
were trying to have some system worked out where we could have them moved.
Attorney Conlon stated the City did have the authority all of the time, we just overlooked
it.
The Chamber representative stated the Chief said nobody had told him so he really didn't
know what to do. At this time, Mr. Stokes requested permission for the Chmaber of Commerce to
use the parks for Labor Day and the Speckled Perch Festival.
Chairman Douglas asked the pleasure of the Council concerning the request.
Councilman Burk stated to the Chairman that since 1978 we have granted exclusive rights to
the Chamber of Commerce for the use of the parks for the two days and it always seems to work
out fine. It's unfortunate that some vendors have so little class that they would proceed the
color guard of a parade and sell balloons and bubble gum. So if we can restrict that, I would
move that we grant, once again, the Chamber of Commerce exclusive rights to the parks for those
two days that they are requesting for this year and apply the restrictions that we legally can
to those who violate those exclusive rights.
Motion was seconded by Councilman Chapman. Chairman Douglas called for further discussion,
if any. Citizen A. Rubin asked the City Attorney if the City had authority over peddlers on
state highways in the City. The Attorney assured him that the City did have that authority.
With no further discussion a vote was called for. Motion passed.
Councilman Watford made a motion to grant to the Volumteer Firemen exclusive use of the
park for the 4th of July activities. Motion seconded by Councilman Burk. No discussion. Motion
passed.
AGENDA ITEM #IV (b) OKEAIRCO RATES
Mr. James Morris, Assistant Manager of Okeairco, appeared before the Council requesting they
consider setting a public hearing for a proposed rate increase for Cable Television.
Discussion ensued by Council with Mr. Morris concerning the request by Council of a
financial statement from Okeairco. It was the consensus of the Council that a financial
statement must now be received and reviewed before considering the new application from Okeairco.
3072
82 -14
Also discussed were expenses incurred by Okeairco, the number of channels presently avail-
able to customers in this area and what Okeairco's future projections and /or capabilities were
along that line. Mr. Morris explained the Company now carries 12 channels and could carry up
to 20 channels. He also stated there were plans to expand the service somewhat in the future.
Mr. Morris advised the Council they would receive the Financial Statement requested, if
possible, before the next meeting. He would have to check with the home office first. He
further asked the Council if a public hearing could be held by the next regular meeting.
Councilman Burk stated he wanted the staff to check other cities in the area for a com-
parison of rates -- lower, higher, etc.
Chairman Douglas informed Mr. Morris to get the financial statements to us for study and
a proposed Ordinance would be presented at the meeting of June 22, 1982, with a public hearing
date set for July.13, concerning his request.
AGENDA ITEM #V - FINAL READING OF ORDINANCE ON WATER DEPOSIT SCHEDULE
A Public Hearing and final reading of an Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances to provide
a new water deposit schedule for Commercial and Industrial accounts was presented by Chair-
man Douglas and read in its entirety by him:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING SECTION 18 -20; THE DEPOSIT PRE-
REQUISITE TO SERVICE SECTION WHICH AMENDMENT STATES THE AMOUNT
OF DEPOSIT REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
WATER AND SEWER SERVICE; AMENDING SECTION 8 -34 PAYMENT REQUIRED
FOR COLLECTION OF GARBAGE AND TRASH TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPOSIT
PAID PURSUANT TO SECTION 18 -20 MAY BE USED TO SATISFY PAST DUE
CHARGES FOR SAID COLLECTION; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I: Chpater 18, Section 18 -20 is hereby amended to read as follows:
CHAPTER 18
WATER, SEWERS, AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL
ARTICLE II. WATER
Section 18 -20. Deposit prerequisite to service.
All new water consumer accounts shall be required to make the following water service
deposits with the City before water service is provided:
(a) Residential srt4- eemmere4a + -eee.
(1) 5/8 x 3/4 inch meter $ 50.00
(2) 1 inch meter 65.00
(3) 1 -1 inch meter 100.00
(4) 2 inch meter 200.00
(b) Deposits for commercial accounts:
All Commercial accounts including coin laundry and industrial consumers shall be
required to make a service deposit with the city before water service is extended
and shall amount to no less than the average of two month's bill computed from
past historical information or on the basis of negotiations between the Director
of Public Works and the particular commercial accounts involved but in no event
shall the deposit be less than Fifty dollars ($50.00).
SECTION II: Chapter 8, Atricle II, City Collection Service, Division 2 Fees
Section 8 -34. Payment required.
No person shall fail to refuse to pay the garbage and trash collection fee pro-
vided for in this division and further, the deposit paid pursuant to Section 18 -20
of this Code may be used to satisfy past due charges for collection of garbage and
trash.
SECTION III: This Ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption.
Intorduced on first reading and set for public hearing this 25th day of May, 1982.
EDWARD W.'DOUGLAS
MAYOR
T
3073
82 -38
ATTEST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS
City Clerk
Introduced and passed on second and final reading this 8th day of June, 1982.
ATTEST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS
EDWARD W. DOUGLAS
Z1�
Mayor
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAVID CONLON
CITY ATTRONEY
The Chairman called for comments on the Ordinance. Citizen Wheeler discussed the rate
increases expressing his concerns to the Council.
Councilman Watford discussed with Director of Public Works Fortner the impact this
Ordinance would have on small businesses. Watford then made a motion to amend sub paragraph
(b) under Deposits for Commercial Accounts to read "no less than the average of a two months
bill" and "in no event shall the deposit be less than fifty (50) dollars ". Motion seconded
by Councilman Burk. Motion passed.
After a call for comments on the Ordinance, as amended, and receiving none, Chairman
Douglas asked for a motion.
Motion was made by Councilman Burk to adopt the Ordinance as amended. Seconded by
Councilman Chapman. Motion passed.
AGENDA ITEM #VI - CLOSING RIGHT -OF -WAY - S.W. 16TH ST. WEST OF 3RD AVENUE.
Chairman Douglas presented to the Council a request for the closing of the right -of -way
of Southwest 16th Street West of 3rd Avenue. The Chairman called Councils attention to a
letter before them concerning an appraisal on the property, and after asking Mr. Markham
if he knew what the appraised value was, he read from the letter "In my opinion the market
value of the property on June 7, 1982 is $3500.00 ".
Chairman Douglas asked Mr. Markham if he had any comments on the appraisal. Mr. Markham
stated he hadn't seen the appraisal and it was a little higher than he would have thought,
due to the fact that it is zoned residential and on the next block there are two commercial
businesses. The property being 1221 feet long, 40 feet wide is not a city lot in any respect
but I'm not saying the appraisal isn't right. I'd have liked to have had two appraisals,
but that's okay. However, if I don't buy the property, I believe the appraisal cost was to
have been added to the selling price so that I would be able to recover my costs.
Councilman Watford asked what our procedure would be if the City wanted to sell the
property.
3074
82 -52
City Attorney Conlon explained we need a quit claim deed, notify surrounding property
owners of our intent to sell and advertise it for sale. We would state a minimum bid of $3,635.
The minimum bid would include cost already incurred for the appraisal and First Addition
search to verify no revisionary interests. These costs would be assumed by the successful
bidder.
Other discussion included comparison of this property and other similar requests the
Council has received in the past. Councilman Burk stated it was only fair that Mr. Markham
recover his expenses if he is not the successful bidder.
With no further discussion, Councilman Chapman made a motion to set the property "Right
of Way at Southwest 16th Street West of 3rd Avenue" up for bids and send letters to the
adjoining property owners, minimum bid to be 3,636.00 and a 5% bid bond must accompany the
sealed bid; also, we are selling by quit claim deed. Motion seconded by Councilman Burk.
Councilman Watford asked for further clarification between this request and the Lanier
request. Councilman Burk explained we now have a new policy that we didn't have when Lanier
made their request, and if Lanier should renew their request and follow the same procedures
as Mr. Markham the Council could consider that request anew.
Chairman Douglas called for a vote on the motion. Motion passed.
The Clerk was instructed to notify Mr. Markham when the date is set for bids on the
property.
AGENDA ITEM / /VII - FINAL READING - CURFEW
Chairman Douglas presented for public hearing and final reading an Ordinance amending
the Code of Ordinances to repeal a provision establishing a curfew for children. The
Ordinance was read in its entirety by Chairman Douglas as follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 11, SECTION 11 -3 TO
REPEAL A PROVISION ESTABLISHING A CURFEW FOR CHILDREN UNDER
THE AGE OF SIXTEEN; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I: Chapter 11, Section 11 -3 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Okeechobee,
Florida is hereby amended to repeal the entire contents of Section 11 -3 and after adoption of
this Ordinance shall appear as follows:
Section 11 -3, 8ttrEew- fern -Gh I4rea
a) E s$aiAlshe4 :-- I;=- Is- hale*aittl- fee - any - person- unde -t ►e- ege- ei- simteea -{}(}
yeera- te- be -ea- tiro- steeis- ea- eldewelke- er- in- patoks -ee- ether- pleees- between
tlie- bettre -ef - l-tOG -g :P4: -and- 6t8A- ATM v- uftless- eeeempaa#ed- by- ea -eduIt -ever
e#g tteea- { }8 }- yeers -e4 -ege.
b) fit- shad- be- t:aletsft:l- for -nay- pat= eat; - guardian; -er- ether- pet°sea- im- leee- pat'entis
te-baeWi}agly- petm lt- e- ehi ld- la- b#s- ettetedy- er- eeatrel -te- violate - the -pre-
v +siea- e4 - *hle- see * #ea.
Section 11 -3, Reserved
SECTION II: This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Introduced on first reading and set for public hearing this 25th day of May, 1982.
EDWARD W. DOUGLAS
Mayor
ATTEST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS
City Clerk
3075
1
82 -51.
Introduced and passed on second and final reading this 8th day June, 1982.
EDWARD W. DOUGLAS
Mayor
ATTEST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAVID CONLON
City Attorney
For the benefit of the Public, Chairman Douglas stated this was an Ordinance to repeal
the entire section which has to do with a curfew which had been set for children under the
age of 16 within the City of Okeechobee.
The Chairman called for discussion of the Ordinance.
Councilman Burk commented that he could not vote for the repeal of the curfew since he
felt children up to a certain age group need a curfew and they need to be at home where they
can be supervised. Consequently, when this comes up for a vote I don't think I could vote to
repeal it. I think the curfew ought to stand.
Attorney Conlon stated that some cities are repealing (these curfews) and some are just
leaving them on the books.
Chairman Douglas called for further discussion. There was none. Therefore Councilman
Watford made a motion the Ordinance be adopted. Seconded by Councilman Chapman. No further
discussion. Vote: Watford, Aye; Chapman, Aye; Burk, No; Douglas, Aye. Motion passed.
AGENDA ITEM #VIII - HIGHWAY SAFETY ( SIGNS)
Discussion was held by Council relative to making application to the Governor's Highway
Safety Committee for a $12,200 grant for updating the City's signs and authority for the Mayor
and the Clerk to execute the application.
After discussion Councilman Chapman made a motion to grant the authority for the Mayor
and the Clerk to execute the application for this grant of $12,200. Motion seconded by
Councilman Burk. Motion passed.
AGENDA ITEM #IX - SURPLUS FUNDS TRUST
Chairman Douglas presented to the Council for discussion a resolution authorizing the City
of Okeechobee to participate in the deposit of funds into the Local Government Surplus Funds
Trust Fund through the State Board of Administration in Tallahassee. Chairman Douglas asked
Administrator Fellows to give a short preview of what this item concerned. Fellows referred
to the data explaining how the Local Surplus Funds Trust Fund is structured and the purpose
of it. He further stated that tonight the resolution was being presented for Council's
adoption so we may participate in the system which will enable us to utilize the trust fund as
the Citys financial surpluses and interest rates dictate.
Fellows further stated that the Council, at the last meeting, authorized us to negotiate
with the banks for banking services. We've held off on that to see that the other bank in
town; (Commercial), got certified by the State and thay have. So what we will have to negot-
iate with will be the Flagship Bank, First Saving of Okeechobee, Sunbank and we would also
have this vehicle in the event that we wish to use it. The interest rate with the State is
always 1 to 11 percent higher than the local banks allow us.
Councilman Burk asked whether there was a membership fee involved here and was told by
Administrator Fellows there was 14 of 1% on the amount of interest that you earn, as the
Administrative fees. You can contrast this with a proposal of a local bank which charge
would be 2 %. The reason interest rates are so much higher is because of the tremendous
I
3076
amount of funds that are available for people to bid on. But this does not commit the City
to doing anything. It simply gives us the authority to utilize the State if in our opinion
we deem it to be the best financial situation for the City.
Councilman Watford stated this means we would be giving the authority to use the trust fund
then. Fellows agreed the resolution will give us that authority to use the trust fund.
Councilman Burk asked Attorney Conlon, if this were to prove to be the best method of
having our funds invested, and we chose to use a local bank simply because if was a local
bank even though it would pay the best rate of interest among the local banks, but this (Trust
Fund) would pay more, how does this effect the Anti -Trust business, or would it effect that
at all?
Attorney Conlon stated no, he did not think it would effect that. While they might pay
more, sometimes the Council may feel that the difference is not worth the paper work or the
distance of having the money away. The access to it. It may be worth 1 point less to have
it local and have the access to it, if you need the money immediately.
Administrator Fellows explained you can have the funds the same afternoon if you notify
them by 10:30 that morning. They wire it back to your bank. There is no charge for the wiring
service.
Councilman Watford stated,but there might be other services that they can't provide.
Administrator Fellows stated that was correct. This will just be a fourth entity that we'll
come back and present to the Council when we get through talking with the other three banks.
Attorney Conlon stated then the rate is not the total determining factor. Fellows agreed
it was not.
Councilman Burk stated to Administrator Fellows that so I understand by what you just said,
that you would not use this then unless you come back and cleared it with the Council? Fellows
stated that was correct. We just want to get it set for use so we could have that as another
alternative.
Councilman Burk further stated to Mr. Fellows, that was the assurance he needed - --
for one reason. I have a tendency to believe that we should award as much business as we can
in our local community. I know the anti -trust law governs us to a certain degree, but that
answers my question.
Councilman Watford stated this might be the way we'd want to go, but I think we should
wait until we complete this whole negotiation business. We can do this (execute resolution)
at anytime. I'd rather wait and see what we do with the local banks first.
Councilman Burk stated he didn't have any problems with it as long as we have all those
safeguards in there we have discussed - -if we can have some of our money drawing a higher rate
of interest, just as long as we have full control over it. And we wouldn't have to wait a
long time to recover it.
Councilman Watford stated the Central Florida Regional Planning Council has its funds
deposited with the State.
Chairman Douglas asked Council whether they wanted to adopt the resolution to give the
Administrator and Clerk authority to utilize this service if they feel it necessary until the
negotiations take place with the local banks or do you want to hold off on it until the negot-
iations have been made.
Councilman Burk stated since it's going to be a second, third or fourth consideration,
I move that we approve a resolution to consider executing the necessary documents to enable
us to participate in the Surplus Funds Trust Fund. Motion seconded by Councilman Chapman.
Councilman Watford stated that he would like to ask, since I haven't heard the Clerk say
anything, does she have any comments.
Clerk Thomas commented she hadn't read the Anti -Trust Laws that have been discussed. I
don't understand just how that effects us.
T
it
3077
3
Attorney Conlon stated it dosen't affect the bidding out of the money, he didn't
see that there would be a problem.
Clerk Thomas further stated there were two real strong ways of looking at this as far
as I can determine. It sure is nice to be able to make more money for the City when we can by
getting these higher interest rates, but, still, at the same time, you hate to send the funds
out of town. I think we should find out what the City banks can do for us in these bids first,
then we will have a truer picture and can be more sure how to proceed.
After further discussion, Attorney Conlon, stated he would like to suggest a change in the
resolution. That is removing the last "Whereas" on the States form. Administrator Fellows
stated he didn't have a problem with that and didn't think the State would have either. Council
agreed.
Attorney Conlon asked who was the official to do this, the Clerk? Administrator Fellows
stated he would like that to read the City Administrator and Finance Officer. In other words,
that gives us the same checks and balances we have with our checks. Two people have to agree
to invest and to withdraw. If the Council has no objections to that wording Fellows stated.
The Clerk stated she would prefer it to remain the Clerk.
Attorney Conlon stated the form states "to be confirmed by letter ". "By giving timely
notice, confirmed by letter." And the letter is to be signed by both parties stated Fellows:
Chairman Douglas stated there was still a motion on the floor and he would read the resolution
at this time.
WHEREAS, the City of Okeechobee from time to time has funds on hand in excess
of current needs,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the City Administrator and Finance Officer be, and they are hereby
authorized to transmit such funds to the State Board of Administration to be invested
according to applicable laws of the State of Florida consistent with the needs of the
City of Okeechobee. Such authorization includes authority to withdraw funds from State
Board of Administration by giving timely notice and confirmation by letter which is to
be signed both by the City Administrator and the Finance Officer.
2. That this authorization shall be continuing in nature until revoked by the
City Council.
THIS RESOLUTION INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED by the City Council at its regular meeting
on June 8, 1982.
ATTEST:
BONNIE S. THOMAS
EDWARD W. DOUGLAS
Mayor
City Clerk
Councilman Watford asked if it was necessary to decide on the blanks at this time.
Chairman Douglas stated if there were any questions on the blanks they should be discussed.
Councilman Watford stated the first blank should be the Clerk. She handles the funds at
the present time and I think we'd be changing our policy there. Administrator Fellows stated,
not really, because there has to be two signatures on all the checks. Councilman Watford further
stated you can't handle the funds unless you can cash the chekcs. This way we'd still have a
handle on the funds. Or if the Mayor signed.
116 TT
3078
82 -13
82 -56
Chairman Douglas asked for further comments. Councilman Chapman stated he was satisfied
with the resolution. Councilman Burk stated he was satisfied with both of them handling it.
With no further discussion, a vote was called for on adopting the resolution. Vote: Chapman,
Aye; Burk, Aye; Watford, No; Douglas, Aye; motion carried.
AGENDA ITEM #XI - UTS AGREEMENT
Chairman Douglas presented Item XI for consideration at this time for further discussions
relative to requests of United Telephone Service to amend the proposed Franchise Agreement as
it relates to the wording of local service revenues and a requirement that all new telephone
wiring be underground unless otherwise approved by the Council.
Chairman Douglas asked Administrator Fellows to begin the discussion.
Administrator Fellows commented that there are only two requests for changes. One is in
Paragraph A, sub paragraph 2, the second line. The Telephone Company wants to change the word-
ing "local service revenues" to "resurring local exchange service revenues ". What the signif-
icance of recurring and exchange is I don't know, but, those are the two different words in
there from what we had.
After further discussion, Chairman Douglas asked the Council if they wanted to have Mr.
Fellows or the Attorney contact UTS for a definition of terms here, so we'll know what we are
dealing with.
Councilman Burk stated if he understood correctly, we've already adopted the Franchise.
Now they are wanting us to change the Franchise after we've adopted it, so the action that I
would want to take on it tonight would be, and I make it a motion, that we deny the changes they
want to make in this Franchise after we have adopted the Franchise. Now if they want to send
staff a letter in more detail ecplaining why they want to make the change then we may consider
that later. We may then want to go through an amendment procedure, but we've already adopted
the Franchise. Our Public was satisifed with it as it was, so I'm all for leaving it like it
is, especially the 15 year Franchise part.
Administrator Fellows stated the second request is in a letter, in regards to Paragraph
1, Grantee further agrees to install all new service underground after June 1, unless otherwise
approved by the City Council. If the Council wishes, I'd like to read the letter that addresses
that particular matter:
"In regard to our discussions concerning the underground installation on all
new telephone service within the City limits, our primary construction method
is underground, however, due to the nature of the telephone business, 100%
underground installation wc'ild not be feasible for the Telephone Company, the
City, or Customer. I assure you we will work with the City on any problem
areas involving above ground telephone facilities ".
Fellows further stated they feel that due to the nature of the business it would not be
economically feasible for them, if everytime they wanted to construct an overhead service some-
where they had to come before the Council each time to do it. Now, the Council needs to
determine whether they feel that way.
Fellows stated these are the two areas that they were not satisfied with and they could
not get their President to execute the Franchise Agreement.
Chairman Douglas stated there was a motion on the floor - -- is there a second.
Councilman Chapman seconded the motion. Discussion: Councilman Watford asked if the
motion was for item one or two. Burk stated his motion covered the whole thing since the Fran-
chise has been adopted already. Also, the reference to the underground installation, Burk
commented he felt this was for any new construction. The Franchise reads "the Grantee further
agrees to install all new service underground after June 1, 1982, unless otherwise approved by
the Council ", and that was the intent.
Chairman called for a vote on the motion. Motion passed. Franchise changes denied.
AGENDA ITEM #XII - RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
Discussion was begun by Chairman Douglas on a proposed meeting of the Recreation Advisory
Board and representatives of the Department of Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation Division
on the possible application for grant funds for the development of the recreation section of
Okee - Hahche Park.
Councilman Watford stated the Council has tried several times to decide how it wants to use
this property. If we decide to get a park set up, we must be prepared to maintain it. Further
discussion of that expense ensued. Administrator Fellows stated we need to put the Recreational
3079
_
82 -18
82 -29
Advisory Board on hold if the Council
Councilman Burk made a motion
called for a second -- there being
Councilman Watford stated he
should abolish the program but rather
Councilman Watford made a motion
to put all their plans on hold until
better shape. Motion seconded by
AGENDA ITEM #X - DUAL TAXATION
dosen't plan to fund it in this budget year.
that the Recreation Advisory Board be abolished. Chairman
none, motion dies for lack of second.
agreed somewhat with Councilman Burk, but didn't feel we
put it on hold.
to, at this time, request the Recreation Advisory Board
the economy picks up and our budget situation is in a little
Councilman Chapman. Motion passed.
discussion Councils consideration of the answer of Okeechobee
of Okeechobee asking for relief from taxation for services
benefit to the City taxpayers of Okeechobee City.
Council he wished to bring this item to the floor for
possibly. If this is the will of the Council, also, on
the City Hall expansion, I feel that it was the wish of the
workshop. If so, we'll have the workshop set for both
some input from the Council at least briefly in this regard.
there were two items in the (tax issue) proposal that the
Watford commented that those two items were Road and Bridge
whether appro imately that 12% differentiation between
does that still hold true? Administrator Fellows said,
Fellows if the Kelton and Associates agredd that the County
were in agreement with most everything except the areas
did. Chapman asked if the Administrator felt the County
the County has indiacted that they will not, and that their
me is their response as to how far they are willing to go.
must weigh the court costs on these two items and that is the
says are the local Road System and what the City says it
Patrol. The 81% of the Sheriffs Road Patrol is a much
and Bridge situation in so far as money that could be
Council, Administrator Fellows and Attorney Conlon, con-
connector roads, paving activity, the time frame elements
review), it was agreed a settlement was near, the
would gain from a quick resolution of the problem.
recess this meeting, at its close, and set a meeting date
and the Building Expansion program for Tuesday, June
relative to authorizing audit services for the
and asked Administrator Fellows to explain.
that we could ask all three of the firms to have a represent-
themselves or we could set up a committee of the Admin-
and then come back to you with a recommendation to the
only received a response from 2 or 3. I want the Council to
is doing a completely satisfactory job. Sometimes, though,
year after year, they don't look as critically as they
they might if they were a brand new firm who hadn't had
Chairman Douglas presented for
County to the resolution of the City
that offer no real and substantial
Chairman Douglas informed the
discussion and setting for a workshop
-wi-I- 1--4€- t rl-r-
-Gotxte- a -l-scr, on
Council that we come back with another
of these items, but first I'd like
Chairman Douglas further stated
Council disagreed on. Councilman
and Sheriffs Road Patrol.
Councilman Burk asked Mr. Fellows
our Road and Bridge figure and theirs,
yes it did.
Councilman Chapman asked Mr.
and City worked out pretty close and
just mentioned. Fellows stated it
would bend any more.
Administrator Fellows stated
resolution they have submitted to
As Keltons letter says, "the City
descrepancy of 10 % ". What the County
is, and the 81/2% on the Sheriffs Road
more significant figure than-the Road
remitted back to the City.
After further discussion from
cerning the two aspects as well as
involved for checking status, (periodic
County had cooperated, both parties
It was decided by Council to
to discuss the-Dual Taxation settlement
15, 1982.
AGENDA ITEM #XIII - AUDIT SERVICES
Chairman Douglas presented discussion
fiscal year ending September 30, 1982,
Administrator Fellows stated
ative come to the Council and present
istrative staff to interview them
Council. We contacted 7 or 8 but
understand that McAlpin and Curtis
when a firm does this over and over,
should at the financial control as
exposure to the system.
3080
Councilman Burk stated that in goingover these proposals, he considered
the service that we receive from Mr. Thomas when we need his assistance, the
Clerk can call him and he is generally available, if I understood it, there
will be a local representative made available on the same basis. Administrator
Fellows said it would be the same way.
Burk further inquired whether the Clerk would still have available to her
an auditor anytime she needed him. Administrator Fellows assured him she
would.
Councilman Burk stated he would recommend the Administrative staff hold
the interviews on these firms and make a recommendation since they are the
ones most closely related to this particuls function. Council agreed.
AGENDA ITEM #XIV - CITIZENS
Citizen A.Rubin asked Administrator Fellows when the new code books
would arrive and was told it will be checked into tomorrow. We expect the
books any day. Mr. Rubin also discussed numerous other items of business con-
ducted during the meeting by Council.
Citizen Wheeler commented on his feelings in regards to certain City sewer
hook -ups.
AGENDA ITEM #XV - DEPARTMENT HEADS AND COUNCIL
Chairman Douglas called on the following officials for any reports or
requests:
City Clerk -
City Attorney -
City Administrator Fellows: He informed the Council of a D.O.T. hearing
in Tallahassee concerning the Highway 441 project to the Lake. He stated
the City needed representation at that hearing, either himself or the Dept.
of Public Works or both. After discussion, Councilman Burk recommended
Administrator Fellows attend the hearing in Tallahassee on June 18. Council
agreed.
Administrator Fellows informed the Council that if there were no object-
ions by Council, we would like to participate in the C.E.T.A. program this
year by using 4 or 5 young people working from the program. Council expressed
no objections.
Fellows further informed the Council of Apperson Chemical Company's
statement to Director of Public Works Fortner, that they would continue price
as is for chemicals as long as they can. Apperson was by far our best bidder
on chemicals last year.
Director of Public Works Fortner stated that last year when the bid
was submitted, the specifications stated the chemical company would hold the
price firm, if they had any price increase from their manufacturer they would
document that to the City and we would adjust the price accordingly. We
have not had any increase this year and Apperson has written a letter stating
they would be willing to continue the present chemical contract as is, as long
as they can. They indicated there may be some slight increase in the near
future but they are willing to continue the contract we've had with them for
the last twelve months.
Fortner further stated that if the Council prefers, we can now re -bid
or continue with Apperson. We could always re -bid if the prices were to become
too high.
Council agreed to keep with the present contract for chemicals with
Apperson on a continuing basis.
3081
Administrator Fellows informed the Council of the neighboring shopping
center are willing to contribute $1,500 toward the paving of the area east
of the City Hall parking lot and west of the shopping center. They have a
non - conformity at present in that the roof of Votino's projects into the
street right -of -way. So to remove that non - conformity they are willing to
put in the $1,500 so they can get a 15' aerial easement. The easement would
be subject to the City utilities. Does the Council see any problem with that?
Chairman Douglas asked for discussion on the pavement.
Councilman Burk stated he did not want to give them an easement. The
City might could use that area.
Chairman Douglas asked Mr. Fellows to check out their definition of an
easement, or right - ofway.
Councilman Watford informed the Council of the Regional Planning Councils
A95 reviews. He stated that anyone who applies for a federal grant or loan
has to be reviewed by the Regional Planning Council for enviromental impacts
and if they conform to local plans, etc. I have one now on a FHA Housing
Project in the City of Okeechobee, a 21 unit multi- family project on a 2.1
acre site. It's on the corner of 6th Avenue and 6th Street. That's just
North of the old hospital. I know we had some discussion when we were talking
about our Comprehensive Plan on housing projects and the feeling I got then
was the Council was not overly enthused about these projects. My response
to this project would be somewhat negative in that it is a multi - family pro-
ject.
Discussion ensued and it was stated this company had requested a sewer
allocation in 1980 and had received, upon request, extensions of time. Their
last extension expired in September 1981. Taking this into consideration,
Councilman Watford informed the Council he would answer the request.
Councilman Watford also commended both the Fire Department and the Police
Department for their professional help in recent assistance at his home and
also at his place of business.
Councilman Watford stated he had occasions recently to use the services
of the Fire Department at home and the Police Department at my place of employ-
ment and would like to extend to them my appreciation for the professional
manner in which they perform their duties. They do a very good job. They
kept my house from burning down.
Chairman Douglas asked the Director Public Works if he had anything to
bring before the Council. With no further discussion, Chairman Douglas rec-
essed the meeting at 10:15 P.M. until June 14, 1982, at 7:00 P.M.
ATTEST:
/1,04":7
Bonnie S. homas,CMC
City Clerk
City of Okeechobee
THERE IS A TAPE OF THIS MEETING IN ITS ENTIRETY ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CITY .CLERK.
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 8, 1982
7:00 P.M.
1. Invocation
Approval of the minutes of the recessed meeting of May the 20th, 1982 and
the minutes of the regular meeting of May the 25th, 1982.
Introduction of an ordinance creating new commercial zoning district to be
called CPO (commercial/professional-office) and setting of a public hear-
ing for July 13th.
(Planning and Zoning Board recommends approval)
IV. Appearances:
a. Chamber of Commerce Officials in regards to activities at the Speckled
Perch Festival and Labor Day programs.
b. James Morris of OkeAirco requesting Council consider setting a public
hearing for a proposed rate increase for Cable Television.
V. Public hearing and final reading of an ordinance amending the Code of Ordinance
to provide a new water deposit schedule for commercial and industrial accounts.
VI. Action by the Council on a request for the closing of the right-of-way of
Southwest 16th Street west of 3rd Avenue.
VII. Public hearing and final reading of an ordinance amending the Code of Ordinance
to repeal a provision establishing a curfew for children.
VIII. Discussion relative to making application to the Governor's Highway Safety
Committee for a $12,200 grant for updating the city's sign shop and authority
for Mayor and Clerk to execute the application.
IX. Discussion on introduction and adoption of a resolution authorizing the City
of Okeechobee to participate in the deposit of funds into the Local Government
Surplus Funds Trust Fund through the State Board of Administration in
Tallahassee.
X. Consideration of the answer of Okeechobee County to the resolution of the
City of Okeechobee asking for relief from taxation for services that offer
no real and substantial benefit to the city taxpayers of Okeechobee City.
XI. Further discussions relative to requests of United Telephone to amend the
proposed Franchise Agreement as it relates to the wording of local service
revenues and a requirement that all new telephone wiring be underground un-
less otherwise approved by the Council.
XII. Discussion on proposed meeting of Recreation Advisory Board and representatives
of the Department of Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation Division on the
possible application for grant funds for the development of the recreation
section of Okee-Hahche Park.
XIII. Discussion relative to authorizing audit services for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1982.
XIV. Mayor to call on anyone in audience wishing to address the Council.
XV. Mayor to call on City Clerk, City Attorney, City Administrator and City Council
men for reports and/or requests.
XVI. Adjournment