1993-05-06 Joint Workshopwo
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE/OKEECHOBEE COUNTY
JOINT WORKSHOP - CITY COUNCIL & BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL/BOARD DISCUSSION AT HRS AUDITORIUM
COUNTY -WIDE UTILITY SYSTEM
Page i of 4
AGENDA
COUNCIL/BOARD DISCUSSION
I
N
A
A. Call meeting to order on May 6, 7.30 P.M.
County Commission Chairman Harvey called the May 6, 1993 City/County Workshop to
order at 7:30 p.m. at the HRS Auditorium.
B. City Council Attendance:
Mayor James E. Kirk
Present
X
Councilmember Danny P. Entry
Present
X
Councilmember Michael G. O'Connor
Present
X
Councilmember Jerry E. Walker
Present
X
Councilmember Dowling R. Watford, Jr.
Present
X
City Staff Attendance:
Attorney John R. Cook
Present
X
Administrator John R. Drago
Present
X
Clerk Bonnie S. Thomas
Present
X
C. County Commissioners Attendance:
Chairman Charles W. Harvey
Present
X
Commissioner Cliff Betts, Jr.
Present
X
Commissioner Tommy Close
Present
X
Commissioner Susan Hughes
Present
X
Commissioner Stephen Porter
Present
X
County Staff Attendance:
Attorney John R. Cassels
Present
X
Administrator Christopher Chinault
Present
X
Finance Director Dave Rivero
Present
X
Deputy Clerk Sharon Massey
Present
X
Ma 6 1993 - JointW -
Workshop Pa of
Y P Page 4
AGENDA
COUNCIL/COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Y
N
A
D. COUNTY -WIDE UTILITY SYSTEM DISCUSSION:
Mayor Kirk began the discussion by explaining the meeting procedures to be followed
in order for the information to flow smoothly between the two bodies in order to
accomplish their objective.
1. Do both parties still desire to form a County -wide
1. Chairman Harvey asked for a show of hands from the Council/Commission
Utility System?
indicating their desire to form a County -wide Utility System.
Yes - All Council/Commission Board members agreed unanimously by raising
their hands.
2. Do both parties still desire for the City's system to
2. Yes - Mayor Kirk explained the same answer for item one above would also apply
be a part of the County -wide System?
to the question of item two - The two boards agreed unanimously.
3. Where do we go from here?
a. Do we proceed to have an appraisal done of
3.a. Both Boards expressed agreement to proceed with an appraisal of the City's
the city's system funded with SFWMD monies via a
Utility System. The appraisal is to be funded by South Florida Water Management
cooperative agreement:
District (SFWMD) through the County via a cooperative agreement.
(1) Are we (both boards) clear on the scope
3.a. (1) Yes - Both Boards affirmed that they now understood:
of the appraisal? EXHIBIT 1 (Summary
Outline of Okeechobee's Utility Appraisal Fee
The County was to have chosen three appraisal firms, from those three the
plus additional services).
City was to choose one; and that SFWMD was to fund the appraisal through
the County.
(2) Does the appraisal firm have a clear
3.a.(2) Yes - The City chose the firm of Dei han Appraisal at an increased cost as
mandate by both bodies to provide an
specified. _
impartial appraisal?
Both Boards agreed on the choice of the Deighan Appraisal Firm by mutual
consent, with SFWMD funding the study as specified.
77
F16
May 6 1993 - Joint Workshop - Page 3 of 4
Y P 9
AGENDA
COUNCIL/COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Y
N
A
D. COUNTY -WIDE UTILITY SYSTEM DISCUSSION:
3. a. (2) Continued.
3. a. (2) Attorney's for both Boards were asked what their opinions were on
acceptance of the appraisal. County Attorney Cassels stated he was
satisfied with the Deighan firms integrity. City Attorney Cook stated the
appraisal firm (Deighan) was okay with him; but the utility service areas will
continue to be a problem. If we get an authority, the problem will go
away. He further requested that Council and Commission instruct both he
and County Attorney Cassels to meet within the next fourteen (14) days
and talk about the issues of the Comprehensive Plan in conjunction with
the County -wide Utility Authority and service areas.
Chairman Harvey and Mayor Kirk instructed the two Attorneys - Cassels
and Cook to meet within the next fourteen days and discuss the issues as
requested by Attorney Cook. Both Boards and Attorney's agreed.
(3) Are the City and County roles regard the
3.a.(3) Yes.
appraisal clearly defined?
(4) Should the County proceed to have
3.a.(4) Both Boards agreed the County should proceed to have Deighan perform
Deighan perform the appraisal allowing for
the appraisal.
the first draft to be reviewed by the
consultants and staff, corrections made, staff
meeting held to secure proper document,
then Council and Commissioners, to be
followed by a joint workshop for Board of
County Commissioners and City Council
action?
(5) Are funds being provided to engage
3.a. (5) After round table discussion concerning having the appraisal reviewed,
separate consultants for the city and for the
both Boards, Staff, and SFWMD Representative Kim Love, were advised by
County to review the comment on the
County Administrator Chinault, that the Deighan Appraisal Firm stated they
appraisal by Deighan?
will provide opportunities to give explanations to either each Board
separately or both Boards together.
May 6 1993 - Joint Workshop - Page 4 of 4
AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER ACTION
Y
N
A
D. COUNTY -WIDE UTILITY SYSTEM DISCUSSION:
3. a. (6) Should we decide at this juncture what
3.a. (6) No - Both Boards agreed this would not be feasible.
both bodies plan to do with the appraisal
once it has been received?
4. Other points/concerns of both parties.
4. a) County Administrator Chinault advised that his office will prepare the
necessary documents and the City will need also to sign off on the
contract for SFWMD to pay for the appraisal as discussed.
b) County Attorney Cassels reaffirmed his intent to meet with City Attorney
Cook as instructed.
ADJOURNMENT
Joint Workshop was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT IF ANY PERSON SHOULD DECIDE TO
APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE AT THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL,
SUCH PERSON WILL NEED TO INSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF
THE PR NG IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EWPENCE PON WHICH THE P IS BASED.
Jam s E. Kirk, MAY R
ATTEST.
)
ram/
Bonnie S. Thomas, CMC, CITY CLERK
79
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMM191SIONERS MAY 6, 1993
The Board of County Commissioners and the City Council met for
a joint meeting regarding obtaining an appraisal of the City
water/sewer system at 7:30 PM on Thursday, May 6, 1993 in the
Auditorium of the HRS facility, 1728 NW 9th Avenue, Okeechobee,
Florida.
County Commissioner Charles W. Harvey and Mayor James Kirk
presided with the following members esent: County Commissioners
Hughes, Close, Betts,and Porter and City Councilmen Watford,
Walker, O'Connor and Entry. Also in attendance were County
Administrator Christopher Chinault, County Attorney John Cassels,
County Finance Director Dave Rivera, Deputy Clerk Sharon Massey,
City Administrator John Drago, City Attorney John Cook and City
Clerk Bonnie Thomas.
Commissioner Harvey called the meeting to order and indicated
Mayor Kirk would outline the rules for conducting the meeting.
Mayor Kirk indicated this meeting would be run like the City runs
their workshops, the only persons in' he audience allowed to speak
will be those the participants ask questions of. He indicated this
is not a public hearing and hopefully any questions will be
answered. He indicated a lot of things have been said and done,
there is a lot at stake. He indicated if things don't get started
here they will never get started.
Commissioner Harvey referred to he agenda items. There was
brief discussion and comments on whether both parties still desire
to form a county -wide utility system IT WAS THE CONSENSUS TO
DETERMINE THIS BY A SHOW OF HANDS. THIS HANDS OF ALL COMMISSIONERS
AND THEN ALL COUNCILMEN WERE RAISED. There was brief discussion
and comments on whether both parties still desire the City' s system
to be part of the county -wide system IT WAS THE CONSENSUS TO
DETERMINE THIS BY A SHOW OF HANDS. TO HANDS OF ALL COMMISSIONERS
AND THEN ALL COUNCILMEN WERE RAISED.
1
T T
There was discussion of obtaining an appraisal on the City's
system. Councilman Watford indicated he thought this is what the
two bodies had originally set out to do. He indicated it got off
track, the County was to pick three f"rms, the City was to pick one
of the three to do the appraisal. He indicated the County agreed
to pay for the appraisal. He stated now he hears indirectly SFWMD
is going to fund this. Commissioner Harvey indicated it has been
that way from day one.
Mayor Kirk indicated in the meetings Mr. Harvey and he had
with Mr. Coker that was discussed, he knew the appraisal would be
paid for by SFWMD. He indicated what is confusing is after the
last meeting everything was on track, it was decided before the
County could move in any direction they had to have an appraisal,
the City has not wavered from that. He indicated he had told the
City Administrator to pick one of the three and see if they could
understand what they were going to do He indicated he called Mr.
Harvey and told him. He mentioned the firm raised the fee and he
asked them if the City had caused the increase in the price. He
stated he was told no, the range of accuracy depends on the margin
of error you want.
Commissioner Harvey indicated he thought things would be fine
and he would encourage the BOCC to use the better one if possible
and left the meeting that way. Mayor Kirk indicated he was told
that as a result of a conversation with the ex Utility Director the
consultant didn't have as much inf otmation as they thought they
did. Mr. Watford indicated the County was going to check and see
if'SFWMD would pay for the extra cost and asked if that had been
done. Commissioner Harvey indicated SFWMD had stated they would
pay for the extended appraisal. He indicated it had been said that
SFWMD was not willing to pay for the ppraisal if it was going to
be thrown in the trash can. He indicated an appraisal is needed
before there can be any talk of putting something together. He
requested that Kim Love comment on the appraisal.
KA
Ms. Love indicated SFWMD had
to pay for the appraisal.
She indicated an amendment to the agreement is being prepared, it
has the appraisal included and will be submitted next week. She
indicated SFWMD hopes this appraisal Will be useful in the future.
Commissioner Harvey indicated an appraisal has to be done
before anything can be done, if it is put on the shelf and then the
issue comes back, there is still ant appraisal, it may have to be
updated, but it won't be money waste .
Commissioner Close indicated that one of his major concerns
was that the City 's three consultants had questions on the scope of
work. He indicated an RFP was prepared and the game plan was to
advertise, send out the RFP's, short list them and turn them over
to!.the Council for them to determine hich firm they were the most
comfortable with. He indicated it was understood none of the
respondents would have done prior work for the City or the County.
Mayor Kirk indicated he doesn' t care who does the appraisal as
long as they are qualified. He asked Commissioner Close if at any
time he had considered not coming to the meeting tonight and
letting Commissioner Porter make a Speech for him. Commissioner
Close clarified that he has said Mr. orter's comments would make
a good opening statement. Commissioner Porter indicated his
comments were made in a public meeting. There was discussion of
the advice given by the City consultants and that the County had
not obtained advise from their consultant. Councilman Watford
indicated one firm had said the scope was not defined enough.
Commissioner Betts indicated part of this problem is a
perception problem. He indicated there was a concern about what
the end product would be, that it might be one-sided. Mayor Kirk
indicated an appraisal has to be donee before this can move on. He
indicated he had been asked if the City, was willing to commit to an
authority based on the appraisal. He indicated nobody is
committing to anything, they will toe the numbers and look at
them.
3
Mayor Kirk indicated he didn't think they could go back to the
three of them meeting (Kirk, Harvey,, and Coker). Commissioner
Harvey concurred. He indicated if all, the other players had stayed
out of it what they wanted to accomplish would be done and they
could.be working on something else. commissioner Kirk indicated if
the County tells him "X number of dollars" is what you'll commit,
don't waste our time.
Commissioner Harvey indicated if a number had been offered by
the City at that meeting it might have brought both parties to the
table. He indicated if there was a two or three million dollar
difference, the appraisal could have been done and things worked
out. Mayor Kirk indicated only one'p erson at that meeting wanted
a minimum/maximum figure and he (Kirk) had said that was going to
get them in trouble. He indicated he told Mr. Rivera that if he
wanted to speak to raise his hand and he would yield to him and
protect him. He described the night of the meeting, although he is
usually early, he got there about 6:50 PM and was handed a piece of
paper with "two million dollars" on it, the maximum the County
would put in. At that time he indicated that must be a mistake and
was told no it was not, that was the figure Mr. Rivera offered. He
indicated at that point he didn't need to ask his people for a
figure, there was nothing to talk abo t.
Commissioner Harvey indicated there should have been a figure
on the table. He indicated he had instructed Mr. Rivera to give
that figure to John (Drago) . He indicated for example, if the City
figure was four (million) and the Coot ty figure was two (million)
they could go ahead with the apprai al. Mayor Kirk asked if
Commissioner Harvey had insisted on, this. Commissioner Harvey
indicated he did and asked Mr. Rivera about it. Mr. Rivera
responded that was correct.
Commissioner Harvey stated they had begun to hear SFWMD might
not fund the appraisal if it wasn't going to be used. He indicated
he agrees the appraisal should be done and then there should be
another meeting, maybe mediation, and go from there.
4
Councilman Watford asked if the
is in the scope, if they think it i
and IT WAS THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOCC
IS FAIR. Mr. Cassels indicated he
the integrity of all three firms.
there are other legal matters pend
area in dispute. He indicated if t
is comfortable with what
fair. There was discussion
THE COUNCIL THAT THE SCOPE
generally comfortable with
• Cook agreed and mentioned
. He mentioned the service
goes to a lawsuit it could
cost the taxpayers $100,000. He uggested that he and John
(Cassels) meet about these issues and if they don't, fire them. He
indicated this has to be done in conjul ction with continuing in the
direction of an authority. Mr. C ssels indicated he had no
objection. He indicated there are s�e eral layers of litigation.
He asked if the City is actively tryin to prevent Beach Water from
getting their permit. Mayor Kirk indicated the City had not done
anything and will not do anything to p event building of the plant.
Mr. Cassels indicated he did not come away from that meeting with
the feeling that the City was not opp sed to the plant. Mr. Cook
stated Beach Water was told to get th consent of the City before
entering into the franchise agreem nt and the City was not
contacted. Mr. Walker mentioned then has always been a question
about the service area.
Mayor Kirk indicated there is a c ncern the County is going to
choke the City off. He indicated the ity is not going to let the
County give away any area they feel they are entitled to. Mr.
I
Cassels indicated the service area in the franchise is identical to
the one in the City's contract wit Beach Water. Mr. Cook
indicated there is some confusion t ere. He indicated in the
franchise agreement Beach Water has t e ability to expand out of
that service area. Commissioner B0is asked if the City was
satisfied with the agreement except fo
of the franchise agreement. Mr. Wi
object to that service area, they obj
Mayor Kirk directed Mr. Cook to m
that. There was discussion,
ford indicated they don't
!t to the area beyond that.
every effort to meet with
Mr. Cassels within fourteen days or at�the next Council meeting
5
r
defend why it didn't happen. Mr. Harvey directed Mr. Cassels to do
likewise. Mr. Watford indicated there was some concern by the
County because the City floated another bond. He explained that
the City was in a fix and was under 'time constraints from DER. He
indicated the City's track record wit DER is somewhat suspect. He
stated down -sizing the plant had bie n discussed as a result of
Beach Water pulling out but it couldn't be stopped. He stated he
hoped the BOCC knew how the special meeting with Beach Water made
the Council feel. He indicated Mayor Kirk was very upset and he
told him you need to have a thick; skin. He indicated he was
shocked about the meeting and it was really a slap in the face.
Commissioner Harvey indicated from the word go two years ago
the City has said it didn't matter if Beach Water had their own
system, it might be to the City's advantage. He indicated Beach
Water has to have an area. Councilman Watford indicated it appears
the agreement was done in secret so the City wouldn't know about
it. Commissioner Porter stated 3100 people knew (Beach Water
customers) they were notified two weeks prior.
There was discussion of the firm doing the appraisal being
employed by the County. Mr. Cassels indicated he had stated he was
comfortable with the integrity of the I three firms, it is not going
to skew the results of the appraisal', ecause they are employed by
the County, the agreement with SF'WMD is with the County. Councilman
O'Connor asked if SF'WMD is going to pay for the review by the
consultants. Ms. Love indicated she didn't see why that was
necessary. Mr Watford indicated he wants to make sure the City's
concerns are protected, but he didn't think SFWMD should pay for
that. Mr. Chinault indicated the firm would supply an explanation
to both the City and the County.
Mr. Cassels asked for clarification on his meeting with Mr.
Cook. He indicated he hoped they could meet without outside
consultants and hash out the issues one on one. IT WAS THE
CONSENSUS FOR THE TWO ATTORNEYS TO ME$ .
6
T ..
Mayor Kirk indicated he had been quite worried that this would
be the last time this issue would ever be addressed, he thought
this was in trouble. Commissioner Ha vey indicated getting started
on the appraisal is a good step, a proper step. Commissioner
Harvey asked Mr. Drago if the appra; er is willing to continue on
with the appraisal. Mr. Drago indicated his understanding is yes,
he is waiting for the go-ahead from he County, specifically the
degree the County wants done, the $SS 0 or the $7400. Commissioner
Harvey indicated he thought the BOCC had agreed on the $7400.
Mr. Chinault indicated that Staff will go ahead as a result of
the discussions here tonight to prepare a contract for the
consultant and have it available to he Chairman and to the City,
they will have to sign off on their participation, as it is very
clear that they have to participate, we'd like that component in
the contract, that will have to happen and since SFWMD is paying
for it (appraisal) we want their cono rrence that is acceptable to
them so they will pay for it and the ounty is not on the hook.
There being no further business, th6 eeting was adjourned.
(Gloria J.Ford, Clerk
Board of County Commission rs
Okeechobee County, Florida
f-�XvIa
Arles W. HarveyIF1
rman
ird of County Cioners
aechobee Countyida
7