1992-03-17 Regular Meeting11//i OKEEC
do
U ' �►+ �. m
R 10 P11 1'
C I T Y O F 0 K E E C H 0 B E E
C I T Y C 0 U N C I L M E E T I N G
MARCH 17, 1992 - 7:00 P.M.
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION
Paae 1 of 13
COUNCILMFMBFRS ACTION
VOTE
YES
NO
Nf
A. Call meeting to order.
Mayor Kirk called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
B. Invocation offered by Rev. John Hirst;
Invocation offered by Councilmember Dowling Watford, Jr.;
Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Kirk.
Mayor Kirk led the Pledge of Allegiance.
C. Mayor and Council attendance:
Mayor James "Jim" Kirk
Present
X
X
Councilmember R.R. "Nick" Collins
Present
X
Councilmember Danny Entry
Present
X
Councilmember Jerry E. Walker
Present
Councilman Dowling R. Watford, Jr.
Present
X
ib
Staff attendance:
Attorney John R. Cook
Present
X
X
Administrator John J. Drago
Present
X
Clerk Bonnie S. Thomas
Present
X
Deputy Clerk S. Lane Earnest
Present
D. Motion to dispense with reading and
Councilmember Collins made a motion to dispense with reading and
approve the Summary of Council
approve the Summary of Council Action for the regular meeting of
Action for the regular meeting of
March 3, 1992; seconded by Councilmember Entry.
February 18, 1992.
KIRK
X
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
A
WALKER
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
MArrh 17 1QQ7 Dn-l- M--+;-- D,-- D -4 10
COUNCILMBMBERS ACTION
VOTE
YES
NO
Nr
E. Motion to approve warrant registers
for February, '1992:
Councilmember Watford made a motion to approve the Warrant
Registers for the month of February, '1992, General Fund
General Fund $195,576.80
$195,576.80 and Public Utilities $368,663.34; seconded by
.......
Public Utilities ... $368,663.34
Councilmembers Entry and Collins.
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST FOR THE ADDITION, DEFERRAL OR
WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
None.
F. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONTRACT
� APPROVAL WITH DCA
Mayor Kirk opened the
y p public hearing for the contract approval
e
with the Department of Community Affairs at 7:03 P.M.
1 a. Motion to approve a Stipulated
Settlement Agreement between
Councilmember Collins made a motion to approve a Stipulated
the
City and the Department of Community
Settlement Agreement with amendments between the City and the
Department of Community Affairs and authorize the Mayor to
Affairs and authorize the Mayor to
execute
the Agreement; seconded by Councilmember Watford.
execute the Agreement - City
Administrator (Exhibit 1).
1 b. Discussion of the Agreement -
Attorney Mike Morell appeared before the Council giving a
Mr. Mike Morell, Special Counsel
for the City.
summarization of the processes that have taken place since DCA
(Department of Community Affairs) found the City's Comprehensive
Plan not in compliance in April '1991. Further explaining the
proposed Settlement Agreement is an agreement that allows the
Council to go back and amend the Comprehensive Plan as set out
in Exhibit "B" of the Agreement. Lengthy discussions were held
among Council and Attorney Morell with the following subjects
discussed in detail:
March 17 1Ag7 - Ranular Mpptina - Pace 3 of 13
C OUNC I L ME MBE RS ACTION
VOTE
VES
NO
kB-TNr
F. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONTRACT
APPROVAL WITH DCA
1 b. Continued . . .
1) Two groups of citizens filed petitions to intervene in
defense of the City and went with the City to Tallahassee
to defend its Comprehensive Plan. Those citizens were
represented by Mr. Lester Jennings who represented himself
and his wife as a landowner and also Mr. Frank Altobello
and other members of the Altobello/Cantrell Partnership and
their consultant Robbie Hoover. Their presence assisted
the City in successfully explaining to the DCA just why it
made the decisions it did when it adopted its Comprehensive
Plan. This Agreement now accurately reflects the DCA
coming to better understand the City's actions regarding
its Comprehensive Plan.
2) The City was a landowner in this case as well as a
governing body. There are only three pieces of property of
any significant size that remain available to be developed
in the City. One is owned by the City. All three parcels
front on Taylor Creek. The major objection which the DCA
had to the Comprehensive Plan dealt with whether or not the
Comprehensive Plan was adequately protecting Taylor Creek
and how the development of these three remaining pieces of
property might impact the natural resources. The mission
accomplished in the Agreement, was to explain to the DCA
that most of the environmental degradation which has
occurred to Taylor Creek was degradation which was a result
of Federal, State and Regional Policy that proceeded this
modern era. The Policy with regard to Taylor Creek, its
channel izat ion and dredge was a Policy that is almost f if ty
years old in this community. After explaining to the DCA
the history of how Taylor Creek got to its present
condition the case was made that the City ought to be
responsible for only its fair share of any restoration, any
further degradation of Taylor Creek and that it would be
unfair for the State to attempt to shift to this community
the cost of a restoration of Taylor Creek including the
shifting of the cost to the landowners who would choose to
develop the three remaining parcels.
March 17. 1992 - Regular Meeting - Page 4 of 13
COUNCILMEMBERS ACTION
VOTE
YES
NO
VTNT
F. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONTRACT
APPROVAL WITH DCA
1 b. Continued
3) The Agreement has been Noticed (Published) and has been on
file here for citizens to look at. There is a minor
technical addition which is an amendment to the Agreement.
It is a technical revision to the definition of "In
compliance" which appears on page one of the Agreement and
all the amendment does is amend that definition on
paragraph one "E" which is at the bottom of page one to
more accurately reflect what the Statutory Law says. The
Statutory Law says that when a City enters into one of
these proceedings its Comprehensive Plan only has to be in
compliance with those department rules which are themselves
not inconsistent with the Statute. When the Department's
lawyers drafted this amendment off of their word processor
they left off the portion of the clause that said as long
as the rule is not inconsistent with the law.
4) "Remedial Actions to be Considered for Adoption. The City
agrees to consider..." What this is saying is the Council
still has to hold the public hearings and then if they fail
for whatever reason to do that, then the Comprehensive Plan
is still not in compliance.
5) Two Hearings. There are two hearings required under the
Growth Management Act. The first hearing, Transmittal
Hearing, is when the Council drafts the set of amendments
to the Comprehensive Plan but has not adopted them yet.
This draft must be sent off to Tallahassee to receive both
the DCA and State agencies review before adopting them and
they have a period of sixty days to do this. Then there
will be a second hearing, which is the Adoption Hearing
where the Council legally amends the Comprehensive Plan.
6) A $7500.00 Grant from DCA. Deliverables is the way the
contract for the grant is set up. The State will send the
City two checks of $3750.00 each. The first one will come
after the Transmittal Hearing when the proposed amendments
are sent, that is the first deliverable. The second check
will come after the Adoption Hearing when the City sends
the actual amendments, that is the second deliverable.
March 17. 1992 - Reaular Meeting - Page 5 of 13
VOTE
COUNCILMFMBFRS ACTION
VES
NO
NT
F. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONTRACT
APPROVAL WITH DCA
1 b. Continued
7) By 1996 the City will initiate an Inventory Study of the
function and capacity of the City's existing stormwater
drainage facilities and system.
8) Kissimmiee River Resource Management Plan. The Taylor
Creek portion of the Kissimmiee River Plan was not as
balanced as the Kissimmiee River portion and was pointed
out. The City needs to proceed cautiously in developing
regulations on the Creek.
9) Page six of Exhibit "B", first paragraph, last sentence,
The residents of Okeechobee can remember no time when
Taylor Creek flooded. Amend that to say since these
actions by the State or Federal government were taken,
because there are residents that can remember when Taylor
Creek flooded.
10) Page nine of Exhibit "B", the revisions to Future Land Use
Element. Requiring the landowner to do a study of some
description, wetlands, unique habitats, flooding.
11) Page ten, Exhibit "B", Commercial and Industrial
development shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 3.00 and
a maximum... Deals with the intensity of development
that can occur on the lot. Not the density, the number of
units per acre but the intensity. And change the ratio
(3.00) which means a three story building to a two story
building.
1 c. Comments from the Public.
Mr. Lester Jennings addressed the Council saying what a good job
he thought Attorney Morell had done, that he is very knowledgeable
about this issue and that with these amendments the Comprehensive
Plan was a fair Plan.
Mayor Kirk commented on the City's Comprehensive Plan by stating
that we made more progress on it at this time than he thought we
would and he is pleased that we are this far with it. We felt
like we would get it back and have a bigger mess than what we
started with.
March 17, 1992 - Reqular Meeting - Page 6 of 13
COCINCILMEMBERS ACTION
VOTE
YESNMO
NT
F. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONTRACT
APPROVAL WITH DCA
1 d. Vote on motion.
Mayor Kirk called for a vote on the motion to approve the
Agreement:
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
14ATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Mayor Kirk closed the public hearing at 7:42 P.M.
RECESS:
Mayor Kirk called for a recess at 8:43 P.M. and reconvened the
meeting at 8:48 P.M.
' ADDITIONAL ITEM DISCUSSED: Review
Mayor Kirk explained that before the Council goes further with
'r of Okeechobee County Proposed
the agenda item Old Business number one, Mike Morell has a short
Comprehensive Plan - Mr. Mike
presentation that he wants to make to the Council on information
Morell.
that relates to the public hearing that was just held.
Attorney Morell explained, now that you know what your
Comprehensive Plan is going to look like and you are ready to go
forward to amend it to comply with this Agreement to implement
the Comprehensive Plan, at the same time that you are doing
that, the County is also moving along a track to adopt its
Comprehensive Plan. That Comprehensive Plan contains
intergovernmental coordination language which is suppose to be
consistent to what the City is doing here. The City has
language in its Comprehensive Plan to coordinate with the
County.
The reason we asked for a further discussion is, the law
requires that if the County's Comprehensive Plan goes into a
proceeding similar to the one the City's went into. Anybody who
chooses to be a part of that proceeding has to participate with
the County prior to the time that it adopts its Comprehensive
Plan.
ADDITIONAL ITEM DISCUSSION:
March 17, 1992 - Regular Meeting - Page 7 fo 13
VOTE
COUNCILMEMBERS ACTION
VES
NO
k&RNT
The County has scheduled its Comprehensive Plan for adoption on
April 2, 1992. They have not Noticed it for adoption but there
was an article that appeared in the press that said they were
workshoping their Comprehensive Plan Thursday night and they are
going to adopt it finally and send it to Tallahassee.
The reason we are here is to seek the Council's approval, if you
would choose, for us to review that Comprehensive Plan in an
effort for the City to participate before the County, to leave
maximum flexibility to further participate much the way Mr.
Jennings and Altobello had, to protect their rights to
participate with the City when we went off to Tallahassee. So,
it would just be in the nature of seeking the Council's approval
to review the workshop draft and a final hearing draft of the
County's Comprehensive Plan to make sure that it is consistent
with the City's and provide any comments or recommendations to
the County to give them the City's thoughts on their
Comprehensive Plan and also to protect the City's rights in the
event the County finds themselves in the same position as the
City was found and should the City choose to want to intervene
on their behalf or on their own behalf to raise an issue which
the DCA makes. That has to be done by April 2, 1992 and that is
why we would seek the Council's approval at this time for that
limited authorization.
Following discussion among Council, Attorney Morell and staff
concerning fees at an hourly rate of $90.00 with an estimate of
seven to twelve hours and a trip back to Tallahassee of
approximately $200.00 in expenses, Councilmember Walker made a
motion to approve Mike Morell to represent the City in reviewing
the County s Comprehensive Plan for its consistency with the
City's Comprehensive Plan and his employment would also include
a possible appearance before the County Commission at their
Adoption Hearing as well as perhaps a written formal letter with
recommendations, comments and objections; seconded by
founcilmember Collins.
Councilmember Watford asked if this was not something that our
attorney could do?
March 17. 1992 - Re4ular Meetinq - Page 8 of 13
ADDI7
G.
VOTE
COUNCILMEMBERS ACTION
VES
NO
kNT
Attorney Cook answered that yes, he could read the County's
'IONAL ITEM DISCUSSION:
Comprehensive Plan, and file comments and objections, but does
not have the expertise possibly to recognize conflicts between
the Comprehensive Plans that Attorney Morell could. He could
pick out a potential problem area much faster than we could
because as Lester said Mike knows this area of the law backwards
and forwards.
Discussion ensued regarding the protection of the City's
interest relative to the County's Comprehensive Plan. Then
Councilmember Collins withdrew his second to the motion,
whereby, Councilmember Walker amended his motion to include a
cap of $1500.00 (for cost of the review); seconded by
Councilmember Collins.
Vote on motion with amendment is as follows:
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION WITH AMENDMENT CARRIED.
OLD BUSINESS
1. Consider an alley closing behind
the Okeechobee Community Church
- City Clerk (Exhibit 2).
Mayor Kirk asked what the status was on the alley closing request
in Block 40 First Addition to South Okeechobee from the Okeechobee
Community Church. Councilmember Watford asked if the Clerk
advised Reverend McDuff of the Council's request at the last
meeting?
City Clerk Thomas explained to the Council that Reverend McDuff
came by her office today and he has not gotten one signature, he
has not had the time or has not gotten around to it. He and
Gary Frazier are suppose to go together and get the signatures
as soon as they get their schedules together. So, there is no
change. They are working on it and I feel they intend to pursue
it but at this point he has not done anything further.
March 17. 1992 - ReQuIar Meetin4 - Page 9 of 13
VOTE
G. OLD BUSINESS
COUNCILMEMBFRS ACTION
VES
NO
VnNT
1. Continued
Councilmember Collins made a motion to table the item until next
meeting; seconded by Councilmember Entry.
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
2. Southeast Canal clean up
Administrator Drago presented to the Council a video tape of the
project - City Administrator.
finished canals that the Sarasota Company completed.
Following discussion among Council and staff, Councilmember
Entry made a motion to authorize to spend $12, 000.00 to have the
company from Sarasota finish cleaning the canals in the
Southeast section; seconded by Councilmember Collins.
Discussion ensued among Council and staff, Mayor Kirk requested
that it be researched whether or not we could give the canals
back to the people or whomever. Vote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
14ATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
3. Motion to adopt Resolution
Councilmember Watford made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 92-9
92-9 - City Administrator
closing a portion of Northwest 5th Avenue; seconded by
Exhibit 3).
Councilmember Collins.
Attorney Cook commented that the nature of a resolution is that
it can be rescinded at any time, however, this particular
Resolution, what it in essence does is it says that the City
recognizes that the Department (South Florida Water Management
District) considers this area to be wetlands. This mitigates
the unauthorized road that Mr. Farmer put in.
March 17. 1992 - Regular Meetina - Paae 10 of 13
G. OLD BUSINESS
COUNCILMFMBFRS ACTION
VOTE
YES
NO
kBSEN7-
3. Continued . . .
Vote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
XX
WALKER
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Cook read Resolution No. 92-9 by title only as follows:
"A RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA,
CONCERNING DESIGNATION OF WETLANDS WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL
BOUNDARIES AS DEFINED IN FLORIDA STATUTES 403.91; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE."
H. NEW BUSINESS
C� 1. Motion to award a three year
Councilmember Entry made a motion to award a three year Street
Street Sweeping Service Contract
Sweeping Service Contract to P.F. Gomez Construction, Inc. in the
to P.F. Gomez Construction, Inc.
amount of $25,974.00; seconded by Councilmember Collins.
in the amount of $25,974.00 -
City Administrator (Exhibit 4).
There was a brief discussion among Council and staff.
Administrator Drago explained there was a termination section of
the contract which allows either party to terminate with a sixty
day notice. He further explained this was a three year contract
and Mr. Gomez understood there could be no rate increase within
that three year period. Vote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
March 17. 1992 - Reaular Meetinq - Page 11 of 13
VOTE
H. NEW BUSINESS
COUNCILM6MBFRS ACTION
VES
NO
VaNT
Councilmember Walker made a motion to award a contract to Florida
Silica Sand in the amount of $20,428.00 for Ground Filter Media;
seconded by Councilmember Collins.
2. Motion to award a contract to
Florida Silica Sand in the amount
of $20,428.00 for Ground Filter
Media - Director of Public
Utilities (Exhibit 5).
There was a lengthy discussion concerning why the lowest bidder
was not chosen. Reason being they did not conform to the bid
specifications. Vote on motion is as follows:
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
3. Consider an alley closing for
Gene and Peggy Fulford - City
Clerk (Exhibit 6).
Administrator Drago began discussion stating that Mr. Fulford has
an Agreement with the City to lease part of the alley in Block
214, City of Okeechobee, and the expiration of the Agreement is
May, 1992. He wrote a letter to Mr. Fulford asking if he would
like to renew the Agreement and Mr. Fulford requested that the
alley be closed.
Councilmember Watford made a motion to instruct Attorney Cook to
draft an ordinance closi-, lley in Block 214 City of
Okeechobee as requested in Alley Application No. 6 and have
it ready for first reading at the next regular meeting April 7,
1992); seconded by Councilmember Walker.
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
Myrrh 17. 1992 - RPaular Meeting - Paae 12 of 13
VOTE
H. NEW BUSINESS
C OUNCILMEMBERS ACTION
VES
NO
fERNT
Councilmember Watford asked for this item to be brought before
4. Discuss the Interlocal Agreement
for Solid Waste with the County -
the Council since there was an article in a recent Okeechobee News
Councilmember Watford
that indicated there was no interlocal agreement approved,
(Exhibit 7).
alluding to the fact that we never had approved the interlocal
agreement with the County. I do not even know if we need one or
not. Do we need even to consider one or does the County still
want or need one?
Councilmember Collins, directing his comments to Councilmember
Watford, stated he was under the impression from talking to
people from the County that they are not even in the garbage
business anymore. They originally wanted the agreement for a
revenue base.
Councilmember Watford asked if we could ask the County if they
still want or need a solid waste interlocal agreement?
Mayor Kirk commented that we did have one that we worked out and
they turned down after working it out. We backed it in good
faith and we attempted to do this once. One of the biggest
stumbling blocks was the fact that either party could end it in
thirty days. But, I am of the opinion that they are not in the
garbage business anymore so we really do not need an interlocal
agreement with them. And to be accurate as I can, at our
meeting, when we did have it, and we drew up one, that was said
in the discussion and we wrote an interlocal that was not real
strong because we said the County may not own the landfill very
long. And I think that the comment was made that that was true
and if the County does not own it they will not need an
interlocal and I think that is how we left the room that day.
Discussion ensued, Council instructed Administrator Dra o to ask
the County if they need or want a Solid Waste Interlocal
Agreement.
5. Discuss the L.P. Sanitation
Councilmember Collins made a motion that we proceed with the
Franchise Agreement - Council
assumption we have the right to reject any extension of the Waste
member Collins.
Pick -Up Contract (Franchise) with L.P. Sanitation and take the
necessary steps to go to bid right away on the Waste Pick -Up
Contract; seconded by Councilmember Walker for discussion.
March 17. 1992 - Regular Meeting - Page 13 of 13
v
VOTE
H. NEW BUSINESS
COUNCYLMEMBERS ACTION
YES
NO
NT
5. Continued . . .
Following lengthy discussion among Council and staff, Attorney
Cook recommended that the Council not take any action at the
meeting tonight but allow him enough time to research Florida
Statutes concerning a legal proceeding to have a Judge determine
the language in the contract without having to enter into a law
suit.
Motion by Councilmembers Collins and Walker was withdrawn.
Discussion ensued, then Councilmember Collins made a motion to
instruct Attorney Cook to research Florida Statutes on
Declaratory Judgements to see if it is feasible for the Citv to
consider that type of law suit and give an answer at the next
regular meeting; seconded by Councilmember Walker
KIRK
X
COLLINS
X
ENTRY
X
WALKER
X
WATFORD
X
MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Kirk:
Mayor Kirk adjourned the meeting at 9:03 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 PROCEEDING IS MADE WHICH IN-
CLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE AfPON'
THE APPEAL�J ASED.
es E. Kirk, Mayor
Attest -
Bonnie S. Thomas, CMC, City Clerk-.: