1998-02-03 Regular MeetingCALL TO ORDER: - Mayor:
February 3,1998, City Council Regular Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
II. OPENING CEREMONIES:
Invocation offered by Reverend John Paul Ziegler,
Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor.
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION
Mayor Kirk called the February 3, 1998 Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Reverend John Paul Ziegler offered the invocation;
Mayor Kirk led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PAGE 1 OF 5
III. MAYOR, COUNCIL AND STAFF ATTENDANCE - City Clerk.
Clerk Thomas called the roll:
Mayor James E. Kirk
Present
Council Member Noel A. Chandler
Present
Council'MemberLowry Markham
Present
Council Member Robert Oliver
Present
Council Member Dowling R. Watford, Jr.
Present
City Attorney John R. Cook
Present
City Administrator Robert J. Bradshaw
Present
City Clerk Bonnie S. Thomas
Present
Deputy Clerk S. Lane Gamiotea
Present
IV. MINUTES - City Clerk.
A. Motion to dispense with the reading and approve the
Council Member Chandler moved to dispense with the reading and approve the Summary of Council Action for the Regular
Summary of Council Action for the Regular Meeting of
Meeting of January 20, 1998; seconded by Council Member Markham. There being no discussion on this item, vote was as
January 20,1998.
follows:
KIRK - YES
CHANDLER -YES
MARKHAM - YES
OLIVER - YES
WATFORD - YES
MOTION CARRIED.
Y95
W14
FEBRUARY 3,1998 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 2 OF 5
V. AGENDA -Mayor.
— A. Requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items
on today's agenda.
VI. NEW BUSINESS.
A. Discuss the City's Beautification Ordinance (City Code
Book Chapter 8) - Council Member Oliver/Attorney Cook.
i
Mayor Kirk asked whether there were any requests for addition's, deferral's or withdrawal's of items on today's agenda. None
were stated.
Council Member Oliver stated that since the City is spending a substantial amount of money on the downtown area, he had
asked Administrator Bradshaw to research with the City Attomey what kind of ordinances were available to clean up and beautify
the City that would go along with our downtown renovation program. Attomey Cook advised this is something that the City should
do in conjunction with the renovation program. Since he discussed it with the administrator he has not been able to get very far
with it However, on the one issue, Brantley's Marine on South Parrott Avenue, our existing ordinance sets out that certain types
of equipment, tools, vehicles, etc., may not be displayed in a commercial setting. It was tied into having those types of items that
are significant or of value other than salvage value.
Attorney Cook continued that, according to business owner Marvin Brantley, a lot of the stuff on his property is not salvage value,
it's worth a lot of money. If the Council wants to address that kind of a situation, not just Brantley's, but any commercial area in
town then the Council certainly has the ability to adopt an ordinance that would provide for fencing or screening. He will get with
Fire Chief Tomey to make sure that any commercial enterprise has sufficient room or lanes to get the fire equipment in and out
As far as that type of business, probably the most effective and cost efficient ordinance is one that would involve fencing to screen
the items from the general public. An out right ban at this point, (he has not explored that), might be feasible in the City.
Concerning the downtown part. He was asked, as soon as the City gets done with the beautification what is going to happen
when people start painting signs on the side of the buildings, etc. If Council would like staff can explore the ordinance as being
City wide or designate certain parts of the City and address commercial beautification and we can make specific ordinances for
that part of town that would govern how the building owners can paint their property in the future, signs, etc. That type of
ordinance should be added in conjunction with the other beautification as far as the commercial properties. Whatever the Council
would like to see in the ordinance staff can draft and it can be upheld, short of closing somebody's business down. Those are
the two areas he felt are the most pressing for the Council. Any additional ideas as far as downtown or the commercial areas staff
can also include them.
Council Member Watford asked who or what would determine that fencing is necessary? Attorney Cook responded, that was
the mistake made when the current ordinance was adopted in 1990, staff tied fencing/screening requirements more or less into
property having little or no value and just because a piece of equipment, etc. is not running does not mean it is not of value.
Mayor Kirk asked if the newly adopted ordinance would be retroactive? Attorney Cook advised once it is adopted it is effective.
However, a moratorium period could be implemented and the screening implemented over a time period so it is not such a burden
on the land owner.
FEBRUARY 3,1998 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 3 OF 5
HEIS
VI. NEW BUSINESS CONTINUED.
FIN
B.
Discuss the City's Beautification Ordinance (City Code
Book Chapter 8) continued.
Discuss Request For Proposals for Joint Solid Waste
Collection, City and County - Mayor Kirk.
Council Member Markham commented that there are already certain zoning areas that require certain fencing and asked if that
would fall under what the City could require if somebody is opening a business now? Attorney Cook responded, yes, in a sense.
Unfortunately the old zoning district regulations are still in effect One of the top priorities the City needs to accomplish this year
is getting the Land Development Regulations (LDR's) adopted and that conflict will go away. Council Member Watford cautioned
that when the LDR's are adopted that any ordinance's we adopt now be implemented in them so that we aren't changing the rules
now and in six months changing them again.
Attorney Cook suggested that the administrator check with everyone's schedule and have a workshop in March on the LDR's
and get back on track with them.
The theyCouncil
i this cte a of problem, tre1 are adraft fonm ordinance and bring it back to the Council to discuss. Council
Member Oliver questioned the feasibility of reviewing what the County had. Attorney Cook responded that the location and nature
of the businesses in the city limits are quite different to what they are in the County, they may be compatible but the City has more
issues to address.
Mayor Kirk began the discussion by commenting, "so that there is no misunderstanding there has been no meeting or discussion
on solid waste since the administrator and myself met with the County Administrator and Mr. Betts. During the discussion at that
time, I informed the group, the four of us, that I felt the only way the City would consider, even though I was speaking for myself,
a joint venture would be if the County had mandatory county wide pick up. I said if this took place and it was financially better for
the City to join the County in their venture, that I felt the Council would seriously consider it If we discussed it with this in place,
the City would be willing to look at the RFP's that the County would be requesting.
The following Cauncif Meeting on November 4,1997, we (the Council) discussed the proposal and .after the discussion the
als and both
Council agreed to support the County on this issue. I took this to mean that afterthe County reeeivTheed heir �P isundera time
parities looked at them we would, at that time consider a joint venture if beneficial to both parties County
restraint deadline and they have been forced to set a workshop for February 4, on this item.
As a Council we need to decide tonight if we need to be at that workshop. Unfortunately I need to tell you that I am going to be
out of town on business for the school system. If you have any concerns we can discuss them now and you can bring them up
at the workshop."
J-lqW
FEBRUARY 3,1998 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 4 OF 5
VI. NEW BUSINESS CONTINUED.
L
Discuss Request For Proposals for Joint Solid Waste
Collection, City and County - Mayor Kirk.
Council briefly discussed what would be discussed at the workshop. County Administrator Long explained, "the purpose of the
workshop is to review the Request For Proposal as a whole with the City and County to make sure that it accurately represents
or reflects the levels of service that we are each providing within our respective areas. As you know we've worked with a
consultant on this RFP, we provided the consultant with the ordinances that apply to the services provided within the City as well
as the contract you presently have, again to try to make sure the Request For Proposal reflects the level of service without
change, but there are a number of things that you will see that do not appear in either of the contracts or in your local ordinance
that obviously happens in your City with regards to solid waste, for example, roll off containers.
You will see the way the Request For Proposal is structured there are two primary sections. One would eventually result in a
contract for service for the unincorporated County areas. The other is a contract for the service that would be restricted to the
incorporated areas, a draft contract if you will. The idea is to design and issue the Request For Proposal in such a way that when
the proposals come in awards can be made and the contracts already there and it only requires execution. It is not something
we are going to have to go back over after the fact and do.
The strength in the proposal is that because of the broader customer base that we would have with the unincorporated areas
and incorporated combined we should see a much better rate than what is being enjoyed be either party now. We both know
what rates are being charged to the customer, commercial and residential so we have a bench mark that can be used for
comparison. We feel that with requesting a singe rate schedule based on the customer base that both together represents that
we are going to get an overall price for all customers. That is the philosophy.
With the workshop it was intended that, if the City is in agreement with us, that we will jointly pursue issuance of the proposal and
ultimately issue contracts based on the results of that issuance then at the workshop(s) we would simply make sure that the
proposal actually represents what we both expect in our respective areas thats all. The proposal is structured to require one rate
structure from each party and it is anticipated that both City and County would enter into their own separate contracts with a single
vendor based on that proposal to provide the service'.
Council discussed specifics of the proposal at length being very concerned that the County had not adopted a mandatory
collection ordinance. Council Member Markham, Oliver and Watford along with City Administrator and City Attorney will be
attending the workshop. The workshop will be held in the State Health and Rehabilitative Services Building, Conference Room
located on Northwest 9th Avenue at 7:00 p.m.
497
FEBRUARY 3,1998 - REGULAR MEETING - PAGE 5 OF 5
VI. NEW BUSINESS CONTINUED.
B. Discuss Request For Proposals for Joint Solid Waste
Collection, City and County - Mayor Kirk.
VII. ADJOURN REGULAR MEETING - Mayor.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by
the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, he/she may need to insure that
a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record include estimony and evidence upon
which the appeal is to be based.
1
ATTEST: JAMEs E. KIRK, MAYOR
BONNIE S. THOMAS, CMC, CITY CLERK
Mr. Craig Adam of Nichols Sanitation, the City's current solid waste collector was present and commented that his company is
also looking forward to an opportunity to renegotiate a contract and asked that the Council take into consideration the level of
service his company has provided the City over the years.
There being no further items on the agenda, Mayor Kirk adjourned the February 3, 1998 Regular Meeting at 7:09 p.m.