Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2020-01-21 Handwritten Minutes
� \�•OF•OKFFCyOA z CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA o JANUARY 21, 2020, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 9 « d HANDWRITTEN MINUTES BY BOBBIE JENKINS I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Watford called the regular session of the City Council for the City of Okeechobee to order on Tuesday, January 21, 2020, at 6:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 55 Southeast 3rd Avenue, Room 200, Okeechobee, Florida. A. The invocation was offered by Pastor Jim Dawson of the First United Methodist Church. B. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Watford. II. ATTENDANCE City Clerk Lane Gamiotea called the roll. Mayor Dowling R. Watford, Jr., Council Members Wes ,Abney, Monica Clark, Bob Jarriel, and Bobby Keefe were present. CITY STAFF: City Attorney John Fumero, City Administrator Marcos MontesDeOca, Police Chief Bob Peterson, Fire Chief Herb Smith, Public Works Director David Allen, and Deputy City Clerk Bobbie Jenkins were present. III. AGENDA AND PUBLIC COMMENTS A. There were no requests for the addition, deferral, or withdrawal of agenda items. B. There were no agenda item forms or comment cards submitted for public participation for any issues not on the agenda. IV. CONSENT AGENDA A motion was made by Council Member _WA to approve the consent agenda items A through F [approve the January 7, 2020, Regular meeting minutes; approve the December 2019 Warrant Register in the amounts: General Fund $691,100.62, Public Facilities Improvement Fund $24,838.80, Capital Improvement Projects Fund $6,454.16, Law Enforcement Special Fund $75.00; approve the temporary street closing of Southeast 2nd Avenue from Southeast 6t" to 7t" Street on February 15, 2020, from 8:00 A.M. to 2:30 P.M. for the Okeechobee Christian Academy Field Day; approve the temporary street closing of Southwest 3rd and 4t" Avenues and the 300 Block of West South Park Street from 6:00 P.M. February 7 through 5:00 P.M. on February 9, 2020, for the Top of the Lake Art Festival; approve the purchase of a 2020 Ford F-250 XL pickup truck from Bozard Ford Lincoln in the amount of $23,511.00 through the Florida Sheriff's Association Cooperative Purchasing Program for the Public Works Department; appoint the Grievance Committee for a term of January 22, 2020 to January 31, 2022, or until their successor is appointed, regular members being: David Cortez, Savanna Smith, Kade Smith, Melissa Henry, and Bobbie Jenkins; alternate members are Joshua Sanders, Brandon Griesemer, Willie Hall, India Riedel, and Robin Brock]. seconded by Council Member BJ Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. V. MAYOR WATFORD OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE ADOPTION AT 6:02 P.M. A. A motion was made by Council Member _BJ to read proposed Ordinance No. 1200 by title only, regarding Comprehensive Plan Small Scale Future Land Use (FLU) Map Amendment Application No. 19 -005 -SSA, submitted by Mr. Omar Abuaita reclassifying Lots 1 through 10, and 17 through 26 of Block 39, CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, Plat Book 5, Page 5, Okeechobee County Public Records, from Industrial (IND) to Multi Family Residential (MFIR); seconded by Council Member MC_. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1200 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 635 AS AMENDED, BY REVISING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP ON A CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND MORE January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 14 PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN FROM INDUSTRIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (APPLICATION NO. 19 -005 -SSA); PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION OF ORDINANCE AND REVISED FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." A motion was made by Council Member _BJ_ to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 1200; seconded by Council Member _BK_ Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to City Planning Consultant Mr. Ben Smith of LaRue Planning and Management Services, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Application No. 19 -005 -SSA on December 19, 2019, and recommends approval. The Planning Staff's findings are as follows: the Amendment was found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, specifically Policy 2.2 and Objective 12 of the FLU Element. While industrial land uses exist to the South and West, there is an existing multi -family development to the East and multi -family zoning to the North and in the surrounding areas. The Applicant's plans to build a multi -family project on the vacant land furthers FLU Objective '12 with infill development. Regarding adequacy of public facilities, the Applicant has received letters from the Okeechobee Utility Authority indicating that service is available and that there is adequate excess capacity to accommodate the demand for potable water and wastewater treatment that would be associated with the proposed development. Though the United States Fish and Wildlife Service identifies wetlands on the site, the Applicant points out that this is only the remnant mining pit. The site has no significant or unique characteristics regarding environmental sensitivity, wildlife habitat, soil conditions or susceptibility to flooding. The Applicant has further stated that the subject property is not within flood prone area. The Applicant has submitted a traffic impact statement that was prepared by MacKenzie Engineering & Planning, Inc. Based on the 9th Edition Trip Generation published by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), one acre of heavy industrial is estimated to generate 2.16 pm peak hour vehicle trips. For 3.26 acres, that translates to about seven pm peak hour vehicle trips. The ITE estimate for multi -family is, 0.58 pm peak hour vehicle trips per dwelling units. With a maximum potential of 35 units, the allowable density for this site would generate about 20 pm peak hour trips. The Applicant's traffic study estimates that 22 pm peak hour trips will be generated by the 33 multi -family dwelling units. WA -Agent is also a business partner of mine and confirmed with Attorney Fumero that I will not need to abstain. Attorney Fumero confirmed. BS -proposing to construct an apartment complex with adjoining property to the North. Mining pit to be used to mitigate storm water retention and storage. If you look at the map on page 6 of the staff report, you can get a better idea of the area involved. The subject property entirely taken up by this old mining pit. If approved, vacation of right-of-way will be applied for to utilize the property for the development. This is just the first step. We looked at the impacts, we don't believe the impacts will be significant in terms of traffic. These vehicles will most likely be personal, not commercial. Letters from utility agencies have been provided as adequate. DW -density twice of what is usually be. Ben -create a storage area for drainage and retention, this is already there may have to make some modifications. DW -this is huge. Ben -may want to ask more specific questions to the engineer as he is present. Steve Dobbs -yes it is that would be probably a lot larger than what we would probably require. This one will be quite a bit larger. One of the partners in the project were one of the original applicants to the project to the north in20006. Want to add more density to make it more desirable. Yes, this is going to be a lot larger and deep and it doesn't make since to fill it in to gain more land. We will be coming back again for the abandonment of alley and right of way. DW -even though we're basically doubling the density on the remaining two parcels, you still have to meet set backs height requirements all of those type things so do you gain that much? Steve -I believe you do. Existing site plan and dry retention but we're going to gain some of that land back with the closure of that right of way and they are planning on going two story possibly three. DW -three is our limit correct? Steve -yes DW -this property then becomes one parcel. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 14 Steve -two different properties and the owners will determine the unity of title. There is still a lot of work to be done on this. DW -you can't change it 2 years down the road. Steve -1 understand MDO-you asked about the alley, when we change the zoning they are doing just the parcels not the alley. WA -this was my grandfathers property back in the 60s. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING 6:16 VI. NEW BUSINESS A. A motion was made by Council Member _wa to read proposed Ordinance No. 1201 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Rezoning Petition No. 19-006-R, submitted by Mr. Omar Abuaita to rezone Lots 1 through 10, and 17 through 26 of Block 39, CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, Plat Book 5, Page 5, Okeechobee County Public Records, from Industrial to Residential Multiple Family; seconded by Council Member _BJ_ Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1201 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE BY REZONING A CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, FROM INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE -FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT (PETITION NO. 19-006-R); AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ACCORDINGLY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Council Member _BK_ moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1201; seconded by Council Member _MC Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Mr. Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Petition No. 19-006-R on December 19, 2019, and recommends approval. Ben -accompanies Ord. 1200 (19 -005 -SSA). Staff also recommends approval. Staff comments have been provided in conjunction with the applicants comments. We find they generally do meet those criteria. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. B. A motion was made by Council Member _bj_ to read proposed Ordinance No. 1203 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Land Development Regulations Text Amendment No. 19 -002 -TA, amending Code Sections 90-78 to 90-83, 90-105, 90-135, 90-165, 90-167 to 90-172, and 90-196; seconded by Council Member —mc–. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1203 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; AMENDING SECTION 90-105, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY -ONE ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 90-1:35, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 900 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY -TWO ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 90-165, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 800 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 3 of 14 DWELLING U14ITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SE=CTION 90-196, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 800 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE -FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT; RELOCATING HOUSING STANDARDS BY DELETING SECTIONS 90-167 THROUGH 90-172 FROM DIVISION 4 AND CREATING NEW SECTIONS 90-78 THROUGH 90-83 IN DIVISION 1; REVISING THE DEFINITION OF MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE IN SECTION 90-81); PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member _bk_ moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1203; seconded by Council Member _mc_ Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Mr. Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Land Development Regulation Text Amendment No. 19 -002 -TA on December 19, 2019, and recommends approval. Ben -this particular amendment original direction was to look at potentially increasing the min square footage of residential homes. The code has an existing min square footage of 800 sq ft. As you look at this it became one of those balls of twine that continued to unravel. Is increasing the min. sq ft a good idea across the board as there are smaller lots within the municipal boundaries. So we thought we'd delete the existing section. One of the things we discovered is the division that you have the mobile home standards, a lot of them applied to more than just mobiles homes. Not only are we moving all of those codes, we are moving to specified zones. WE are creating a definition of the minimum dwelling unit. 90-80 appearance and design standards -we applied a new definition to calculate what the new definition is. MC -i thought the min floor area for a HUD home is 1,080 feet. Ben -HUD can set their own standards. This is for the City. Of course if there was a HUD project here, they could set their own standards, but the City can set their own. MC -i thought they used HUD standards for ship housing. I thought we should set our min sq ft to that. I would rather see the same standard for sq ft in that section and request a reduction. Ben -in the RSF2 district there are lots that are smaller size. It was suggested that we be reluctant to the lot size. NIC -i think the city should meet the minimum HUD standards. BJ -basically that would only apply to MH. Ben -there is a small house movement where people are designing smaller homes. NIC-im just curious how many lots are smaller in the City? MDO do you know. MDO-no, I'd have to look it up. Ben -we can do more research. DW -we can amend that at the final public hearing. Ben -HUD standards and number of lots that are smaller. WA -90-179 1 a — the foundation must be approved by the City building official and the Technical Review Committee. Why TRC review? Ben -just want to point out that there a lot of things that need to be changed and addressed at a future time. WA -too technical for TRC to review. MDO-I would say and/or WA -page 5 of 23 (90-8(4)) siding materials. The last sentence — exterior siding can not have a high gloss finish and must be residential in appearance. Some of these new homes have am etal appearance. DW -suggest deleting the words high gloss finish and DW -is there a reason why you want a high gloss finish. WA -metal siding has been known to have a high gloss finish so if it's metal with a high gloss its not approved. BK-whats the purpose of having "no high gloss" -airplanes fly over and get blinded? WA -nobody can tell me.. WA -minimum square footage — the county is 1,000 minimum and includes garages. Ben -its much more feasible to include "under air" footage. For example realtors only count the area under air when listing a house. Most codes ask what is under air. WA -I think we should have 1,000 sq ft living to include the garage. BJ -does the HUD 1,080 include the garage? January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 4 of 14 MC -lets find out but I think it does. DW -we have some questions for you at the Final Public Hearing. I think we are all in agreeance to take out the high gloss. Its just a matter if we want square footage under air or total. WA -did the planning board review this? Ben -presented at a workshop then at a meeting. They eventually recommended approval on this d raft. No public comments. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. C. A motion was made by Council Member _bj_ to read proposed Ordinance No. 1204 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Land Development Regulations Text Amendment No. 19 -003 -TA, amending Off -Street Parking and Loading, Code Section 90-512; seconded by Council Member _mc Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1204 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE:; AMENDING SECTION 90-512, CREATING A NEW MINIMUM RESTAURANT PARKING STANDARD BASED ON CUSTOMER SERVICE AREA; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member_bk_ moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1204; seconded by Council Member _mc_ Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Mr. Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Land Development Regulation Text Amendment No. 19 -003 -TA on December 19, 2019, and recommends approval. Ben -actually we visited this with the planning board quite a bit with a few worksohps then meeting. We showed the PB past projects to show them how this would have changed the parking on the past projects. The standard of 1 per 75 sq ft of floor area was interpreted to mean floor area including customer service areas outside. Floor area is what's inside. We just looked at where the customers are served, inside or outside. It also allows for small restaurants to come in and occupy commercial space when it would be difficult otherwise. No matter the customer service area with a min of 3 spaces per restaurant. DW -when you looked at all 3 of those, did it result in an increase or decrease. Ben -interesting it didn't change it that much and arrived at what was already existing. DW -I just want to know if it increased or decreased the parking by the next meeting. MDO-based on actual as approved or if there was a parking reduction applied. DW -but to your recollection it wasn't a huge difference. Do you we have a definition of defined customer service area? Ben -no but we need to have one. MDO=if your customer service area is a restaurant, you won't include the closet. WA -dining area Ben -some areas just do take out. John -an area where the: customers would not have access to. For example the bathroom is the only thing to question. DW -the bathrooms are already there. WA -in the building code,, bathrooms closets are not classified as occupant counts. No public comment. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 5 of 14 D. A motion was made by Council Member bj_ to read proposed Ordinance No. 1205 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Land Development Regulations Text Amendment No. 19 -004 -TA, amending Special Exception and Supplemental Use Regulations, Code Section 90-692; seconded by Council Member me . Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1205 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; AMENDING SECTION 90-692, REVISING REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR SERVICE STATIONS AND UNDERGROUND FUEL TANKS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member _mc_ moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1205; seconded by Council Member —bk. Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Mr. Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Land Development Regulation Text Amendment No. 19 -004 -TA on December 19, 2019, and recommends approval. Ben -here we are looking at how the definition of auto service station is applied when reviewing a site plan for a service station and how the supllemental use regualations applied. It ap pears that when they were originally written, it was tpical to have above ground tanks. Not typical anymore. Not require such stringent setbacks to fuel tanks if they were underground. The changes that you see in the code here starting with the min yards, those are inline with the CHV district and then you'll see that there are new standareds for underground fuel tanks, which are the same, and below that you will see that there are the old standards. This is just to allow more flexibility for service stationst o come in with smaller lots. WA -the above ground setbacks were made the same as a structure? Ben -no the underground. WA -side setback is 8' for structure, tank has 20' setback for above ground. It seems like there might be an issue if you can have a Ben -we are not changing the above ground tank setbacks, but changing the structure setbacks. MC -i used to be in the gas business. The guidelines do not meet NFPA 5458 for above ground or underground. Theres a different set of standards for both. Ben -what you're telling me the City has not been in compliance. Would it be appropriate to say that we put in the code to follow NFPA standards? MDO-im just looking at NFPA and it seems that 10' setbacks for underground. Ben -is that property lines, streets? MC -there's definitions that go into it. I think we would be safer to adopt what NFPA says. HS -its already adopted with the uniform fire code. MC -but there is a conflict. HS -we always go with the strictest and I used the NFPA codes. MC -my question goes back to the setbacks for the station from going from 20 to 8 and 25 to 20. 1 really want to know the reasoning behind that. We are going less than what we require for single family homes. Ben -we made them consistent with the CHV district so if a convenience located in a service station could be there. You still have to have a 50' setback next to a residential neighborhood. MC -why would we go from 20' to 8'? Ben -mirroring the CHV MC -is the reason why we have those setbacks is because they are smaller. 8' may be appropriate for a side setback in the CHV district. The reason why we have the CHV, they did have those setbacks in 1915. 70 has widened and is now 4 lanes and they don't have the land to meet the setbacks. DW -we have some that are very large Ben -Some are large, some are small. The redevelopment of a gas station on 441 N had a problem meeting the setbacks. MC -the reason why we have CHV setbacks is from the past, ongoing need to be different. WA -does this meet the same as commercial district January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 6 of 14 Ben -yes that's what we are doing. Each district has different setbacks. MDO-when you redevelop there are new requirements to meet. MC -the biggest concern is the side and rear setbacks. DW -residential you are worrying about yard, commercial you aren't. You have to have green space. Ben -landscape, impervious requirements. DW -what do we want to do? Make adjustments, leave as is, Ben -Planning Board did recommend approval. MC -i would recommend we use the NFPA pamphlet as a reference instead of the setbacks. WA-im good with that too, if the structures meet the CHV district im ok. DW -tanks should be per NFPA. Ben -we don't put into the code that you have to meet the building code, DW -you've got your direction Ben -yes going to put in something pertaining to NFPA. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Mayor Watford recessed the meeting at 7:06 p.m. for a minimum of 5 minute. Reconvened at 7:16 pm E. Discuss City Fire Department contract options as presented by Fire Captain Lalo Rodriguez. Lalo-Hope this will be an alternative to save the fire department. At any point in time, please stop me if you have questions. History Slide • City of Okeechobee incorporated in June 1915. • In 1926 City Hall was built which housed the City of Okeechobee Fire Department. • Currently there are 13 employees of the fire department (1 chief, 1 admin secretary, 11 firefighters) with a combined service experience of 147 years. Of those 13 employees 7 have a service history to the City of Okeechobee of 10 years or more. • Okeechobee City Council is considering dissolving the fire department in order to lower millage rates and balance the budget. • Present options for City Council to consider which will allow the city fire department to remain in operation while still lowering the millage rate. City of Okeechobee Millage Rates 2004-2019 slide • Current 2019 millage rate of 7.6018 is 5% lower than the previous four years. • Millage funds 29% of the City 2019/20 operating budget bringing in $2.2M to the City's total budget of $7.5M. • Lowest millage rate since 2004 occurred in 2007 when millage was 6.5010 • Average 2004-2009 6.926 • 2010 7.2432 • 2011 7.743 • 2012 7.7432 • 2013 7.7432 • 2014 7.7432 • 2015 7.9932 • 2016 7.9932 • 2017 7.9932 • 2018 7.9932 • 2019 7.6018 City Fire Department Expenditures 2004-2019 slide • 2014 $1,068,979.00 • 2015 $1,122,821.00 • 2016 $1,189,713.00 • 2017 $1,245,531.00 • 2018 $1,320,775.00 January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 7 of 14 0 2019 $1,261,893.00 Okeechobee County BCC proposed cost to provide fire services in the City slide In the January 8, 2020 Okeechobee Board of County Commissioners meeting the proposal to provide Fire Services in the City was discussed. The BCC was presented with an approximate proposal of $700,000 for the first year and hinged upon Union negotiations which would increase the cost after the first year. The Union increases are unknown. This proposal would provide 6 personnel to provide coverage for the City, 2 personnel per shift. Current City coverage is 3-4 personnel per shift. City Council is considering entering into a contract with County for fire services. Im hoping that these options will help save our department City of Okeechobee Animal Control Contract with Okeechobee County slide SHOWS THE CONTRACT COST IN CHART FORMAT FROM 2008 TO 2019 Last Monday, myself and FF Weeks spoke with Bob Jones in Glades County. I asked him does the County Fire Dept still provide EMS services to Buckhead, the answer was yes. Glades County EMS costs with Okeechobee County slide • Glades County contracts with Okeechobee County for EMS Assistance in the Buckhead Ridge community. • Since 2016/2017 the contract with Okeechobee County has risen 30% from $90,000 to $117,000. • Expenses for the 2019120 contract year are estimated to be $123,000 an increase of 36% since 2016. • Glades County has recently established their own fire services and has plans to expand to full county coverage. His suggestion was once we become medics, Mr. Jones is willing to help set us up so that we can do our own EMS Service> He's willing to write and send in our grant. He's willing to donate the two med units and the life packs. Then once we receive the new equipment form the grant, then we can give back his equipment. DW-whats a life pack Lalo-AED with monitor and rythyms-piece of equipment Option in Lieu of Okeechobee County Contract slide Expand EMS Services to offer Advance Life Support (ALS) Startup Costs Equipment: 2 ALS vehicles, 2 life packs 15, meds and other equip $ 750,000.00 Payroll: $7,000.00 increase per 10 personnel for 10 years $ 700,000.00 Other: Medical Director, $15,000.00 for 10 years $ 150,000.00 $1,600,00.00 10 year life span of equipment ($1.6 million/10 years) $ 160,000.00 Current Fire Department Budclet $1,200,000.00 Estimated new Fire Budget $1,360,000.00 Funding for expanded services EMS tax: County currently collects from City residents and businesses $344,000.00 Transport Revenue: Based on both County experience and average medical call volume (1,200 @ $400) $480,000.00 Fire Assessment: City is already funding a study to determine possible Fire Assessment rates $460,000.00 Total: $1,284,000.00 Remaining cost before applying possible grant funding $76,000.00 Grant Funding slide FEMA offers two grants to assist with fire services. SAFER Grant — Provides fundling to help with increasing or maintaining trained firefighters. Grant can fund up to 75% of staff cost to include benefits for two years with a City cost of only 25%. Assistance to Firefighter Grant (AFG) — Provides funding for equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training and other resources necessary for protecting the public and emergency personnel from fire and related hazards. Fire and EMS Rates slide January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 8 of 14 Currently, Okeechobee County assesses and receives $344,000 in EMS tax from City residents and businesses. This is tax income that the City could be receiving. Steps are already under way by the City to fund a Fire and EMS Assessment study to be conducted in conjunction with the County's study. This topic was discussed at the Okeechobee BCC meeting on January 8, 2020. The City will be paying approximately $10,000 to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc to determine possible Fire and EMS rates within the City. County's current Fire Assessment Rate is $108 Estimated Fire Assessment in the City could bring in at least $460,528.15 using the County's current rate. Could possibly be more depending on the recommendations from the consulting firm. WA -am I the only one who wasn't aware of the study. MDO-we had the discussion at the last BOCC meeting that we could piggyback on the County's contract. BK -could we table this until after the presentation. Lalo-is the county willing to participate in the community events in the park with the golf cart giving out waters and gatorades? Are they willing to build the float taking santa around to the parks, the puppet show for the kids, teaching them fire safety. These are some of the things we enjoy to do for our community. Millage Calculation example slide What is a Millage Rate'? • Millage rate represents the tax rate used to calculate property taxes per every $1,000 of the property's taxable value. • EXAMPLE: For a property in the City of Okeechobee with a taxable value of $50,000. The millage paid would be $380.09 at the current millage rate of 7.6018. • $50,000 / $1,000 = $50 owed for every $1,000 in value. • $50 x 7.6018 = $380.09 millage paid to City Portion of Millage Paid for Fire Services slide The City of Okeechobee has four main departments within its budget — General Admin/Services, Police, Fire and Public Works. Using the previous millage example of a home in the City with a $50,000 taxable value. The homeowner of the property is paying $380.09 in millage to the City. Divide the $380.09 among the four City departments and each will receive $95.02 per year from that homeowner or $7.91 per month. So for $7.91 per month that City homeowner is able to have a dedicated City fire service. Lalo-some of the other things we need to talk about, Jan 2nd at 6:01 am a structure fire came in in the County -3 of my guys went to that call, I stayed back, all of station one and station two went to cover that fire. The med unit left station 4 to cover the city, then engine stayed to cover the zone. At the time they were fighting the fire, a rollover call came in on 98, station one med unit responded, per protocol the engine had to roll on that call. As soon as they left the station, another call came in rollover on 441, county called and said there was no coverage. I would be able to cover that call if it came in with the City. I feel that if we lose that its going to be harder to get that back. Jan. 16th at 0840hrs, structure Fire, quick response time with LT. Crums shift, with that quick response time the other two structures were saved, if not, the other two families would be displaced. Same day 3 personnel assist with a county call, while they were on that call another structure fire came in to the city, LT. Hodges responds to that call in the City, luckily the home owner was able to put the fire out. Once LT Hodges arrived on the scene, established through his investigation it was under control. A delayed response time from the County of 7 minutes, the home could have been lost. The citizens are going to suffer the most. Also through newspaper clippings, Ive read some of the statements. He quoted that from a number of years we have drawn from our reserves. Are we drawing from it for the fire department. Lalo then distributed copies of budget summaries showing the amount of reserves used in the last four years. 2017 "none of the budgeted reserves of $751,000.00 were utilized for the operational expenditures in the GF. 2018 non e of the budgeted reserves of $573,000.00 were utilized for the operational expenditures in the GF. 2019 None of the budgeted reserves of $845,215.00 were utilized for the operational expenditures in the GF. We haven't been going into reserves, and we are also not going into reserves to fund the fire department. IN the same article of Nov. 15th, Commissioner Culpepper wondered why the City didn't train their employees to be medics, and provide their own service. Two January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 9 of 14 of the County Commissioners have stated similar answers to that. Again, we are going in the right direction, and we do appreciate it. We have an outside source willing to help us with this. I will find grants, I will find the money. What Im worried about today is my guys behind me and their families because this is not a merger, because a merger is the coming together of two things. I'm willing to help out any way possible so that we can save our fire department. I'm up for constructive criticism. DW -thank you lalo for the very nice presentation. If anyone has any particular questions from Lalo, other than that there is a lot of information to read and study. MC -taking money out of funds, we didn't use it for operational expenditures but for capital items. So what happens in a business budget, you have depreciation, you know you have to replace that vehicle in so many years. So you would budget that money, it comes out of capital expenditures. The only reason im pointing this out is because we purchase equipment from those funds. We currently have approximately $10 million in reserves. She clarified why he only used $108. Because I know what happens you're going to take this information to the press and say that we didn't use any reserves. BJ -this whole issue we needed the details to make an informed decision. I resent that a County Commissioner would make a comment on City business because they are short on staff. WA -thank you for the presentation and it's a lot of information to absorb. There is still quite a bit of information to absorb. I appreciate the option. BK-theres a lot of information and numbers and dollar amounts that we have been going thru for the past few months regarding this. Now you throw even more at us. In our one-on-one discussion, numbers are data are presented to show the recipient what you want them to see. Your numbers present one thing, the County shows another, and they're probably different. You talked about payroll, medical director. The County pays 24,000 why would we pay $15,000. Its more of a liability for their medical director due to the size and numbers. Lalo-they have roughly 36 medics on staff, and we will have 10 approximately. WE have already emailed Dr. Adelberg to get a direct cost. BK -how many more employees are we going to hire to staff the busses. Lalo-two more and will get numbers to you at the next presentation. BK -if we chose to increase our fire department to include ALS and we have to bring in two bussess, increase staff numbers, and we didn't get grant dollars, we would be dipping into some major reserves. Lalo-right now it is too late to apply for the grant. I will let the Council know when the grant opens. We won't be graduating from paramedic school until November and probably won't be certified to January 2021 at the latest. BK -when is the next round open for the Grant? Lalo-I will get with Mr. Jones tomorrow and research online and get back to you. WA -has the city ever had ambulance DW -no WA -have we ever looked at it DW -no not that I can recall. MDO-2016 fire assessment did include EMS MC -what was the point of the calls Lalo-explained that we no longer just respond to the two mile radius, now we have to go county to county. DW- he's explaining the level of service Lalo-this just took place in January 4 times. We have responded to them 10 times in a little over a month. ON record it looks like we are going to go into the county over a 100 times, now that we are on the automatic aid, we will respond more. MC -what would happen to the ISO rating in the City? Lalo-with the 10 of us going, therefore if we hire the next two, they could be paramedics, we could roughly have 4 on shifts. MC -changes in the city? Lalo-no ma'am because of the shift level, and also if we go ALS, if we transport for the County, we could recoup the funds for that. BK -what's not being disussed here is the large amount of underlying issues, union contracts, staffing, that's something the county would have to deal with. What would that look like, salary and work and how many paramedics are on shift. Lalo-our last contract was 20019 MDO-they are subject either way, regardess we will be held to the same amount. The county could not guarantee that when they presented the dollars, they will have to renegotiate in year two. DW -thank you Im sure that this is something that will be discussed when its back on the agenda. MDO-the county is discussing this at their upcoming meeting this week. I will find out from Robbie Chariter on Thursday. BK -I spoke with Chief Franklin this morning, although staff have been engaged in data processing or fact finding, he eluded to an official request from the City of what we wanted to do. Contract or complete merger. Mayor you mentioned contracting the services. We're talking about it but the county isn't aware January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 10 of 14 of anything. We need to make a decision so that real negotiations can start so the county can know for certain what we are asking from them. DW-I don't understand what Chief Franklin is telling you because he's the one who made the presentation to the County from our consensus at a previous meeting. The BOCC instructed their Administrator to get with our Administrator to work out the details. I assume at some point it will come back to us. We are waiting and I guess it will be presented to us at an agenda item. BK-I understand what you are saying, I would like to make a motion. DW-motion is not in order John-clarified BK-I would like to make a motion that we begin contract negotiations with the County so that there is a clear and concise direction of where we are going. Once the contract is finalized, then we can approve. During that time, any other options can be formulated and presented. Nonetheless, I would like to make that formal motion. DW-chair is not accepting that motion. Council Member Keefe I would suggest during Council Member Comments that we put this item on the agenda. BJ-a motion is never out of order, we are not voting on it and I second it for discussion. John-if there is a motion to instruct the administrator to bring items to you, then it is in order. If it is a motion that requires a decision, then I would suggest that it be added to the next agenda for proper public notification. Fact finding is one thing, but council is going from door a to door b, then that's a public notice issue. BJ-we are not DW-would you request that it be on the agenda during council member comments. DW-Attorney is the motion in order. We can do this in a business type manner. BK-im not here to make any enemies DW-whatever the attorney says we will go with it. John-at this time if there is a decision to go with one approach or the other, then there is a public notice issue. If its fact finding, then there is no issue. BK-what would the proper motion be. John-what exactly? BK-we have been going back and forth for the request for information. So the public has been on notice for 4 or 5 months, so here's another agenda item again. John-I know that this has been going on for a while, but what I do understand is there is more than one contract option. If you said to Marcos, bring me a contract, inbedded in that there are more options. BK-mayor I will withdraw my motion MC-can I make a motion to direct Marcos to bring back to us factual information based on the information Capt. Rodriguez has provided us. DW-would you mind making that in the comments MC-i withdraw my motion VII. COUNCIL COMMENT;3 WA-at the December 3rd meeting, we requested that paving updates be provided. MDO-Nre are waiting on FDOT WA-what about Cl items MDO-ill get that WA-I believe that we are trying to get information from the County and agree we BJ-we should be able to have a meeting without getting so frustrated. Im disgusted that we keep kicking this can. At the last BOCC meeting, Burroughs requested Robbie and MDO get together to generate a 3 year contract and present it to the City/BOCC. How long are we going to put this off? We don't meet for two more weeks. This will go on for the rest of the year. If we don't want to do this, then vote it down. This is disgusting, we don't need the public to come to the meeting for that. Im totally against all of this garbage. I'm tired of reading it in the paper, on the radio, I appreciate all of the effort he did in his presentation, but he didn't have to do that. BK-I would like to comment about the parks conceptual plan that Economic Council put together. It was a beautiful presentation. I would like to put on the next agenda to support the conceptual plan. Ord. 1204 regarding parking. Parking is an issue in town yet we do nothing about it. When are we going to build a pakring garage or parking lot because there are some available vacant lots downtown. It will help out with the upcoming events. Street closures downtown always have parking problems. I would like to look into improving our pakring situation. I would also like to put on the very next agenda. I would like to propose a creation of a contract with the County for fire services and lets engage in no kidding distinct negotiations which will include hiring-of our FF's, salary, rank, and the_ n obviously_ severance packages, but at least we have a__solid d_istinct clear direction. DW-CM Keefe put on the next agenda to review the park plan, consensus YES; consider a parking plan for the downtown area on the next agenda; consensus next available agenda; put fire contract on the next agenda; consensus one way or the other on the agenda. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 11 of 14 >-l',l, ayu- U -n1 v�k j 4 h ung HIGHLIGHTED PORTION IS VERBATIM MC- The only comment I wanna make is I would like um to direct the administrator to review the � numbers and information provided and I would like someimore accurate well I shouldn't say more Jaccurate,/accurate numbers in providing EMS services including the reimbursement for that service.'' have that on the next agenda. DW- agreeable with the Council. I think that will help us make a decision. MC -yes DW -We might want that on the agenda before we discuss the fire contract probably? That may have a bearing on the contract. 'MC- yes, I think we are pushing to have that back, I hate to say this, back in two weeks, I think its, I hate to say that, but I think its kind of undue pressure on um Robbie, um to say its gonna be in two weeks, I just want it done in the next 30 days and um it's a lot of information and its gonna tie up personnel you know to get, again Capt Rodriguez has already spent a ton of time putting this information together. Id like to verify information um because I you know I talked to Capt Rodriguez also and I pulled out the study that was done by a consultant. I wanted a consultant on this from the very beginning. And they paid for a consultant and I think this thing was about $40,000 the study, and they're saying our fire capital cost, operating costs, personnel services were going to be about $2.3 million dollars if you add it all in, and then you have to send assessment notices and pay percentages. I just think there is a lot of times that need to go into this study and um I also think that part of those directions, I guess I better stop talking about what I waut the direction at the county has to include where our FF's are going to be hired in. um again I had a discussion today that um you know I think the biggest problem that our FF" s have is they're not even sure they're going to have a job and.they're not sure and they're gonna be brought in at base pay And so I wanna know what those figures presented on Jan. 8th I guess in the meeting. I tried to pu 1 their agenda up, and I can't pull it up, I didn'tt ,� attend the meeting and id like those figures also presented at the next meeting. 1 DW -thank you, put it on the next agenda MC -no sir preferably within 30 days„ BK -if I may, uhh Councilman Abney questioned the $10,000 cost and I ask him to save this until after the presentation. I didn't want him to be pissed at me that I didn't remember. MDO-Mayor if I may, ok the county meeting they did have that $10k additional to go along with the report to give us the true cost of fire and ems um they were gonna do rather than us fund the separate report of $40k to do $10k. Robbie and I had the discussion that was to verify basically what the contractual services would be to the County, um again, that's within we have budget, we do have a budget for professional services that and would be able to sign an agreement from me. WA -will that assessment study prove that before the time crunch. MDO-it would but by the time that study is gonna come out, um from what im hearing, I don't know if we'll have that report out, so that's why if we haven't done it at this point, it will not be done within the next 30 days I can assure you. So I don't. 1 `. WA-heres my recommendation, find out when that study will be presented, and if its not 3 years from now, maybe we should wait because that may be kind of a good idea of how that contract should be MDO-ill find out but my understanding is it was going to be done hear in the next couple of months. �= LWA -id hate to write the contract, and then pay $10grand for a study that won't have any bearing on the contract and if we decide so we're putting the cart before the horse. MC -my question is if we decide to go to EMS, we would have to do another assessment study? We would right, the $10k is encompassing the entire county, not just the city, so it wouldn't even pertain to this if we went to ems service. WA -is there any way that they can break that out. MC -well you can, well I understand when they do assessment studies, they're encompassing the entire county and all we're doing is kind of carving out what portion of that county is in the city. Its not going to be a study for us to say this is how much we're going to need to charge for assessments if we're going to do assessments, its not, its not, its gotta be separate I would assume. MDO-my understanding is verification of the data, of the data I think that looking at assessments, looking at millage, that's not what im looking at right now to present back to council. It would be a straight line verification of the numbers and see what the dollars are in comparison to the county for the council to make the decision. How we fund those is gonna be up to council when we come to budget so its just if the idea is to verify the ems dollars what it would be or fire assessment or the contractual services with the county how we fund it is going to be a discussion later. `MC -So why do we need to be a participant of this study? MDO-it was to verify, we were talking, the discussion I had was to verify the dollars they were gonna charge us just to see the verification of the fire and ems dollars they would charge us. DW -Chief smith you have a comment on that --HS-may I get clarification that on the next meeting coming up will you be voting on the contract? BK -1 think there is some misunderstanding and I've just been waiting for people to stop commenting, it lJ was not, a the next meeting the agenda item I was requesting was just to say publicly at this public January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 12 of 14 meeting officially by a motion and voted by the Council that we in turn to negotiations of a contract with the county for fire services. That's it. Just to say officially on record in a public meeting that we would like to contract fire services that being said now we can its more than just fact finding that they're doing, it is negotiating. HS -so that tells me that you are not looking at other alternatives. DW -depends on how we vote on that motion, if we vote no that we don't want to continue with contracting then we will look at other options. I assume BK -that's how the voting goes. That's why theres 5 of us up here. DW -I have to decide do we want to continue on, kick the can further down the road. BK -chief from the bottom of my heart I just want to provide you all with what is gonna, whats going on, __whats our direction, so you all know what's going on. HS -1 appreciate it. At this point, I felt like its rushed. This is very important so please make sure you have all your facts and what you need to do but if you have no intentions , im kind of confused on really, monica's the only one who's kind of really said about the other alternatives, but Wes has kind of eluded to as well, and I know where dowling stands, so but im kind of confused on you two, youre not even going to consider other alternatives it looks like. We're just asking because... BJ -that's why ive been so discouraged about the whole thing. You know all we hear we hear ex councilman talking what we shouldn't do, you cant do, we haven't made a decision. We have to have- the_facts and hopefully Marcors and Robbie come back next meeting, I hope I would like them to come aback with a contract, that would be great, we don't have to vote for it, we look at it. You know, we Ihaven't made any decisions , only decisions we made is the last meeting to have your guys paid to go to school. You know that's the only decisions that's been made about the fire department. I don't know, lEverybodys just getting too upset over it, lets discuss it, and lets get the facts and figures before we start kicking it around. 3.4 HS -what is your potential probably date of making that decision. © BJ -I don't know. (qx BK -next meeting we're not going to have a_contract next meeting, they at all, it was a motion to say ..... the motion would be which I tried to make tonight Chief which will be on the next council agenda is I would like to make a motion to direct or to give notice to the county that we are in interested and we OH want to have a contract for fire services. And to begin negotiations. And as I eluded to half an hour ago or so, that includes hiring of our FF's, salaries, etc., etc., those are negotiating points, we haven't even started negotiating yet because they haven't received an official request we've just we've had a __workshop on different options. HS -they have made that clear that they have not intentions of hiring or review our rank or seniority. That's been clearly stated by Franklin and the administration. I mean that's.... DW -this will be on our agenda for next meeting. �—WA-BK you're just wanting to see a contract, you're not ready to vote, youre not ready to move into one, you just want to see a Contract —BK -complete transparency UA Abney, I spoke to Chief Ralph franklin today and he eluded to having not even received an official request for contracted services. So in light of that from them, I and obviously its not the commission, but although at none of our meetings, our meeting or the workshop, have we publicly announced by motion and votes that we are, we are wanting, we are deciding to go with a contract, we have not made that, I haven't voted for anything, we're just still fact finding, so that's all that motion was for, was just to say hey publicly and then when, if, however long. DW -we are getting, as they say, we're getting into the weeds here, I think we are discussing things that we need to discuss at the next meeting. I know several times we've said we want more information, I've heard that several times, we want more information, and I think, I disagree with what Chief Franklin said, I think we clearly told the county we want a contract, we clearly told them, we clearly answered I think every question that they had asked by consensus, we clearly answered every question that they have asked of us so I don't understand how he can say, well I'm waiting on, because he made a presentation to the County with figures, so he must have had some idea of what we were requesting, so I think at our next meeting _we will officially see those figures and then we can decide ugh if we have other items that aren't answered in there, CM Clark brings up a very good point about our employees and Chief brings up a good point about the employees and if that's not answered in what we receive next meeting, then we will go back and we will say yeah we want, or we say we're done with it, or wee say yes we want to continue to negotiate and here's what we want and then we can put those items in there. I certainly agree with what CM Jarriel says, we keep kicking this down the road and so I think in good suggestion you have that we put that on our agenda and we will get the figures that the county presentation they had, and then we can make a motion to either continue on negotiating or whatever that looks like at that point. Is that agreeable with everybody so we know where we stand. That was the final item on the agenda, —Lalo-will the proposed agreement for a contract be of like services or has that going DW -we will see when we get it v WA -we will negotiate it January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 13 of 14 DW -that's the final item, we stand adjourned. VIII. There being no further items on the agenda, Mayor Watford adjourned the meeting at 8:47 P.M. The next regular meeting is scheduled for February 4, 2020, at 6:00 P.M. Dowling R. Watford, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Lane Gamiotea, CMC, City Clerk Please take notice and be advised that when 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 ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. City Clerk media are for the sole purpose of backup for official records of the Clerk. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 14 of 14 JANUARY 21, 2020, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HANDWRITTEN MINUTES TAKEN BY LANE GAMIOTEA CALL TO ORDER (Mayor Watford called the regular session of the City Council for the City of Okeechobee to order on Tuesday, January 21, 2020, at 6:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 55 Southeast 3rd ,Avenue, Room 200, Okeechobee, Florida. A. The invocation was offered by IB. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Watford. II. ATTENDANCE City Clerk Lane Gamiot:ea called the roll. Mayor Dowling R. Watford, Jr., Council Members Wes Abney, Monica Clark, Bob Jarriel, and Bobby Keefe were present. CITY STAFF: City Attorney John Fumero, City Administrator Marcos MontesDeOca, Police Chief Bob Peterson, Fire Chief Herb Smith, Public Works Director David Allen, and Deputy City Clerk Bobbie Jenkins were present. III. AGENDA AND PUBLIC COMMENTS A. There were no requests for the addition, deferral, or withdrawal of agenda iterns. IB. There were no agenda item forms or comment cards submitted for public participation for any issues not on the agenda. IV. CONSENT AGENDA A motion was made by Council Member Abney to approve the consent agenda items A through F [the January 7, 2020, regular meeting minutes; the December 2019 Warrant Register in the amounts: General Fund $691,100.62, Public Facilities Improvement Fund $24,838.80, Capital Improvement Projects Fund $6,454.16, Law Enforcement Special Fund $75.00; temporarily close a portion of Southeast 2"d Avenue between Southeast 6th to 7th Streets on February 15, 2020, from 8:00 A.M. to 2:30 P.M., requested by Okeechobee Christian Academy for their annual Field Day; temporarily close a portion of Southwest 3rd and 4th Avenues between North and South Park Streets, and the 300 block of West South Park Street between Southwest 3rd and 4th Avenues, from 6:00 P.M. February 7 through 5:00 P.M. on February 9, 2020, requested by Okeechobee Main Street for the Top of the Lake Art Festival; purchase a 2020 Ford F-250 ;XL pickup truck from Bozard Ford Lincoln, in the amount of $23,511.00 through the Florida Sheriff's Association Cooperative Purchasing Program for the Public Works Department; the Grievance Committee for a term of January 22, 2020 to January 31, 2022, or until their successor is appointed, regular members: David Cortez, Savanna Smith, Kade Smith, Melissa Henry, and Bobbie Jenkins; alternate members: Joshua Sanders, Brandon Griesemer, Willie Hall, India Riedel, and Robin Brock]; seconded by Council Member Jarriel. „„ �P� Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted:FE,)Nays:0 Motion V. MAYOR WATFORD OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE ADOPTION AT 6:02 P.M. A. A motion was made by Council Member Abney to read proposed Ordinance No. 1200 by title only, regarding Comprehensive Plan Small Scale Future Land Use (FLU) Map Amendment Application No. 19 -005 -SSA, submitted by Mr. Omar Abuaita reclassifying Lots 1 through 10, and 17 through 26 of Block 39, CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, Plat Book 5, Page 5 Okeechobee County Public Records, from Industrial (IND) to Multi Family Residential (MFR); seconded by Council Member Clark Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1200 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 635 AS AMENDED, BY REVISING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP ON A CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN FROM INDUSTRIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (APPLICATION NO. 19 -005 -SSA); January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 11 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION OF ORDINANCE AND REVISED FUTURE LAND USE MAP /N THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." A motion was made by Council Member Jarriel to adopt proposed Ordinance No. 1200; seconded by Council Member Keefe. Council Member Abney noted for the record that the agent for this Application is also one of his business associates, and he verified with Attorney Fumero that he would not need to abstain from voting on this matter as there is not a conflict of interest. Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to City Planning Consultant Mr. Ben Smith of LaRue Planning and Management Services, who explained the Planning Board reviewed the on December 19, 2019. Both Planning Staff and Planning Board recommends approval. The Planning Staff's findings are as follows: the Amendment was found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, specifically Policy 2.2 and Objective 12 of the FLU Element. While industrial land uses exist to the South and West, there is an existing multi -family development to the East and multi -family zoning to the North and in the surrounding areas. The Applicant's plans to build a multi -family project on the vacant land furthers FLU Objective 12 with infill development. Regarding adequacy of public facilities, the Applicant has received letters from the Okeechobee Utility Authority indicating that service is available and that there is adequate excess capacity to accommodate the demand for potable water and wastewater treatment that would be associated with the proposed development. Though the United States Fish and Wildlife Service identifies wetlands on the site, the Applicant points out that this is only the remnant mining pit. The site has no significant or unique characteristics regarding environmental sensitivity, wildlife habitat, soil conditions or susceptibility to flooding. The Applicant has further stated that the subject property is not within flood prone area. The Applicant has submitted a traffic impact statement that was prepared by MacKenzie Engineering & Planning, Inc. Based on the 9th Edition Trip Generation published by the Institute of Traffic; Engineers (ITE), one acre of heavy industrial is estimated to generate 2.16 pm peak hour vehicle trips. For 3.26 acres, that translates to about seven pm peak hour vehicle trips. The ITE estimate for multi -family is, 0.58 pm peak hour vehicle trips per dwelling units. With a maximum potential of 35 units, the allowable density for this site would generate about 20 pm peak hour trips. The Applicant's traffic study estimates that 22 pm peak hour trips will be generated by the 33 multi -family dwelling units. Watford, density question.... Ben no mining and have to create storm water for drainage. Will have to do some modification to make it work. Watford but its huge. Ben yes sir and their engineer can answer specific questions. Mayor Watford asked whether there were any questions or comments from the public? Steve Dobbs of 209 NE 2nd Street on behalf of the applicant in attendance. Will start with the Mayors, yes this is probably larger than what we would normally be required, the client was one original applicant to the North in 2006, make project more viable get rezoned, add density to the parcel to the north. Larger and deep, doesn't make sense to have to fill in. Will be coming back for the alley and street right of way. Watford help me, basically doubling the density there 2 parcels there, still have to meet set backs, height requirements, all those types things, so do you gain that much? Steve yes, site plan last time included dry retention, wont have any this project because the pond is so large, will gain some property with the alleys and streets and can go up to 3 stories. Once alley abandoned their will be one parcel. Watford, Once approved, no way to separate it? Steve, Yes sir with a unity of title. Watford, Couldn't 2 years from now try to do something else with pieces of property. Steve, No sir we cannot, like they do in Miami. MDO — alley will be completed after rezoning. Watford, alley takes on zoning/land use? MDO yes. Abney, was property of my grandfathers, it was shell pit. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. The Public Hearing ended at 6:16 PM January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 11 VI. NEW BUSINESS A. A motion was made by Council Member Abney to read proposed Ordinance No. 1201 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Rezoning Petition No. 19-006-R, submitted by Mr. Omar Abuaita to rezone Lots 1 through 10, and 17 through 26 of Block 39, CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, Plat Book 5, Page 5, Okeechobee County Public Records, from Industrial to Residential Multiple Family; seconded by Council Member Jarriel. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1201 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE BY REZONING A CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, FROM INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE -FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT (PETITION NO. 19-006-R); AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ACCORDINGLY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member Keefe moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1201; seconded by Council Member Clark Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Planner Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Petition No. 19-006-R on December 19, 2019 and recommends approval. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. B. A motion was made by Council Member to read proposed Ordinance No. 1203 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Land Development Regulations Text Amendment No. 19 -002 -TA, amending Code Sections 90-78 to 90-83, 90-105, 90-135, 90-165, 90-167 to 90-172, and 90-196; seconded by Council Member. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: Aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1203 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATJONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; AMENDING SECTION 90- 105, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY -ONE ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 90-135, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 900 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY -TWO ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 90-165, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 800 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 90-196, ADDING A MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 800 SQUARE FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE -FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT; RELOCATING HOUSING STANDARDS BY DELETING SECTIONS 90-167 THROUGH 90-172 FROM DIVISION 4 AND CREATING NEW SECTIONS 90-78 THROUGH 90-83 IN DIVISION 1; REVISING THE DEFINITION OF MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE IN SECTION 90-80; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member Keefe moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1203; seconded by Council Member Clark. Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Planner Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Land Development Regulation Text Amendment on December 19, 2019 and recommends approval. One of those issues where you get into trying to make a single amendment and find that its connected to several others and impacts multiple areas. Noted section 90-80 (1). January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 3 of 11 Clark thought min for HUD was 1080 sf? Ben, HUD can set their own standards, this is for city-wide, if it was a HUD project they can set the standard to what they want. Clark I thought our minimum sf should be reflective to be the same as HUD SFH #2 for 900 sf, rather have them come in. RSF2 district has lots that are smaller in size, should be sensitive to those, but they could go for a variance and obtain an hardship for approving that. Clark - Abney - but if it meets ours, automatically meets theres. Clark - Watford - not that much Clark - don't care know its only 80 sf difference. Ben, smaller homes in several cities now. It will make it more difficult for them. Clark - how many lots in the city that couldn't allow a 1000 sf home on Watford - can amend at the final reading. /I\ HUD standard and how many lots couldn't meet that minimum s.f. F�C'k1 _� �0 U 0a °o� Abney, pg 3, section 90-79 (1) a. why would the TRC need to approve. That was language already in the code, just moving to another section and changin the definition. Think several and/or ? rte ('tt t�v� ? �-- (�c S t��%��� �c��Ct� f tvi e N4 Abney - Pg 5 of 23, ext siding cannot have high gloss finish. Some homes have a metal type finish3 county having problem 90-80 (4) delete "siding cannot have a high gloss finish and" I-- Keefe, why was it put in to begin with? No one knows. Abney - Min S.F. county's is 1,000 includes garages, we want to exclude garages. Ben that's typical to calculate it. Realtors are required to count just whats under air. If you want to be in sinc with the county. Abney I think it should be included. Jarrial to Monica, I think it does include it. 4 p 's-coQ - Ci!'tt �i l oOjA O X 0� 4-0 1 C" e with garage and the s.f. are the two issues. Abney - Planning board discussed this? Ben, Yes once during a workshop and again in ordinance form. Public comments? None. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. C. A motion was made by Council Member Jarriel to read proposed Ordinance No. 1204 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Land Development Regulations Text Amendment No. 19 -003 -TA, amending Off -Street Parking and Loading, Code Section 90-512; seconded by Council Member Clark. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1204 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; AMENDING SECTION 90- 512, CREATING A NEW MINIMUM RESTAURANT PARKING STANDARD BASED ON CUSTOMER SERVICE ,AREA; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member Keefe moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1204; seconded by Council Member Clark. Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Planner Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Land Development Regulation Text Amendment on December 19, 2019 and recommends approval. Reviewed at a couple of workshops and then the final wording. Showed them from past projects and how this would have impacted those projects„ Lightseys, ??? and Wawa. Standard and interpretation, floor area customer service outside, which really means.... Instead of counting floor area of restaurant, we talk about just the area where customers can be served. What several other communities have adopted. Allows commercial uses to occupy a space that wouldn't have been allowed previously. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 4 of 11 Watford, increase or decrease in parking requirements? Ben, very close to what they had to meet, only impacted smaller areas. Lightseys would have had to provide *** can know by the next meeting, bring those examples used from the other meeting/workshops ow/ MDO and *** Based on actual as approved and if there were parking reductions approved. Watford do we define customer service area? Ben no. we can add.a Ca r �jJ MDO — would be a TRC call? Watford just where the sit? �. J Y Abney — where they dine? Ben, take out only have to be considered. P�jSStk Fumero - an area where a customer would not have access to. Ben — not serving the customer, Fumero correct. Abney and bathrooms and closets are not part of the count already. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. D. A motion was made by Council Member Jarriel to read proposed Ordinance No. 1205 by title only and set the Final Public Hearing date for February 4, 2020, regarding Land Development Regulations Text Amendment No. 19 -004 -TA, amending Special Exception and Supplemental Use Regulations, Code Section 90-692; seconded by Council Member Clark. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Attorney Fumero read proposed Ordinance No. 1205 by title only as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE, FLORIDA; AMENDING CHAPTER 90 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE; AMENDING SECTION 90- 692, REVISING REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR SERVICE STATIONS AND UNDERGROUND FUEL TANKS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE." Council Member Clark moved to approve the first reading of proposed Ordinance No. 1205; seconded by Council Member Keefe. Mayor Watford yielded to the floor to Planner Smith, who explained the Planning Board reviewed Land Development Regulation Text. Amendment No. 19 -004 -TA on December 19, 2019 and recommends approval. Looking at how the definition of an auto service station is applied when reviewing and supplemental regulations. Appeared when originally written with above ground tanks, no longer typlical. Makes sense to not require such stringent fuel tanks if they are in the ground. Changes you see min yard in line with the CHV district and new standards for underground fuel tanks are the same, below that are the standards applying to all fuel tanks, gives them more flexibility. Abney above ground more striigent? If you can have 8 ft off property line, but Ben important to remember the above ground tanks are remaining the same but changed the structure set backs (3). Ben keep in mind your not going to have many Clark these guidelines don't meet the NFPA 58 standards, above or under. There are a different set of standards. Clark many ordinances don't meet the requirements because they are so old. Ben would it be appropriate to, since they change often, about every 2 years, following the NFPA standards. Clark and gasoline may be different than LP tanks, don't know,- MDO now;MDO — looking at,.... Clark definitions into property lines, adjacent, adjoining. Think we'd be safe with saying we following the NFPA. Herb — we already have that adopted, we use the most stringent of the two. Monica — going from 20 to 8 feet, going less than what we require on single family homes, why are we decreasing? Ben made consistent with CHV district. 50 ft abutting residential district. Next door to home have the greater set back. Clark why go from 20 to 8 sidE! set backs? Ben that's what is in the CHV district. Clark aren't they smaller and why we have them? (think shes confused CHV with CBD) When 70 widened caused issues with the set backs. Ben — redevelopment of a gas station on Parrott Avenue. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 5 of 11 Clark but they can apply for a sp exception? Ben no a variance. Clark smaller lots, commercial properites need to meet. Abney meet the commercial set backs? Ben yes. For the CHV district. MDO — you want the min divelopemtns on the CHV because those are your main commercial areas and you want them filled. Clark — biggest is side and rear set backs. Watford — commercial not worried about a yard like residential. Ben — landscaping requirements, and other. Watford — adjustments now, leave as is, Ben they made changes and approved this recommendations. ,,j S�N� Clark instead of set backs it read per NFPA 54/58 whatever we use be referenced here. Abney good with that and if the set backs are in line with what the commercial structure is. a Ben, rely on fire official to meet the NFPA requirements. Clark should have a conflict. Public — none. Mayor Watford, Council Members Abney, Clark, Jarriel, and Keefe voted: aye. Nays: none. Motion Carried. Mayor Watford recessed the meeting at 7:06 p.m. and reconvened at 7:16 p.m. E. Discuss City Fire Department contract options as presented by Fire Captain Lalo Rodriguez. Capt Rodriguez, want to go over what I think can be the saving of our Fire Department. Stop me at any point in the presentation to ask questions. Most recent fire engine 9 slide. History Slide • City of Okeechobee incorporated in June 1915. • In 1926 City Hall was built which housed the City of Okeechobee Fire Department. • Currently there are 13 employees of the fire department (1 chief, 1 admin secretary, 11 firefighters) with a combined service experience of 147 years. Of those 13 employees 7 have a service history to the City of Okeechobee of 10 years or more. • Okeechobee City Council is considering dissolving the fire department in order to lower millage rates and balance the budget. • Present options for City Council to consider which will allow the city fire department to remain in operation while still lowering the millage rate. City of Okeechobee Millage Rates 2004-2019 slide • Current 2019 millage rate of 7.6018 is 5% lower than the previous four years • Millage funds 29 percent of the City FY 2019-20 operating budget bringing in $2.2 million to the City's total budget of $7.5 million • Lowest millage rate since 2004 occurred in 2007 when millage was 6.5010 • 2004-2009 average millage rate: 6.926 • 2010 7.2432 • 2011 7.743 • 2012 7.7432 • 2013 7.7432 • 2014 7.7432 • 2015 7.9932 • 2016 7.9932 • 2017 7.9932 • 2018 7.9932 • 2019 7.6018 City Fire Department Expenditures 2004-2019 slide • 2014: $1,068,979.00 • 2015: $1,122,821.00 January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 6 of 11 • 2016 $1,189,713.00 • 2017 $1,245,531.00 2018 $1,320,775.00 • 2019 $1,261,893.00 Okeechobee County Board of County Commission (BOCC) proposed cost to provide fire services in the City slide In the January 8, 2020 Okeechobee BOCC meeting the proposal to provide Fire Services in the City was discussed. The BOCC was presented with an approximate proposal of $700,000.00 for the first year and hinged upon Union negotiations which would increase the cost after the first year. The Union increases are unkriown. This proposal would provide 6 personnel to provide coverage for the City, 2 personnel per shift. Current City coverage is 3 to 4 personnel per shift. City Council is considering entering into a contract with County for fire services. Hope to give you options to reconsider doing tNls. City of Okeechobee Animal Control Contract with Okeechobee County slide SHOWS THE CONTRACT COST IN CHART FORMAT FROM 2008 TO 2019 Glades County EMS costs with Okeechobee County slide Rodriguez and Weeks visited with Bob Jones with Glades County Fire Rescue. Information he provided shows: • Glades County contracts with Okeechobee County for EMS Assistance in the Buckhead Ridge community. • Since 2016-17 the contract with Okeechobee County has risen 30% from $90,000 to $117,000. • Expenses for the 2019-20 contract year are estimated to be $123,000 an increase of 36% since 2016. • Glades County has recently established their own fire services and has plans to expand to full county coverage. I asked how he could help. Sending all of us to medic school. He is will to help the City get started to do our own transports in the city. He's done grants to fund his department. He's willing to help out by writing our grant for us (since already done this). Willing to donate med units and life paks required. We could then return his equipment when we obtained ours.. Option in Lieu of Okeechobee County Contract slide Expand EMS Services to offer Advance Life Support (ALS) Startup Costs Equipment: 2 ALS vehicles, 2 life packs, meds and other equip $ 750,000.00 Payroll: $7,000.00 increase per 10 personnel for 10 years $ 700,000.00 Other: Medical Director, $15,000.00 for 10 years $ 150,000.00 (Dr. Adelburg, overshot should be $12,000 $1,600,00.00 10 -year life span of equipment ($1.6 million/10 years) $ 160,000.00 Current: Fire Department Budget $1,200,000.00 Estimated new Fire Budget $1,360,000.00 Funding for expanded services EMS tax: County currently collects from City residents and businesses $344,000.00 Transport Revenue: Based on both County experience and average medical call volume (1,200 @ $400) quoted from Franklin $480,000.00 Fire Assessment: City is already funding a study to determine possible Fire Assessment rates $460,000.00 *additional handout, of his study information* Total: $1,284,000.00 Remaining cost before applyirg possible grant funding $76,000.00 Grant Funding slide FEMA offers two grants to assist with fire services. SAFER Grant — Provides funding to help with increasing or maintaining trained firefighters. Grant can fund up to 75% of staff cost to include benefits for two years with a City cost of only 25%. January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 7 of 11 Assistance to Firefighter Grant (AFG) — Provides funding for equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training and other resources necessary for protecting the public and emergency personnel from fire and related hazards. Fire and EMS Rates slide Currently, Okeechobee Country assesses and receives $344,000.00 in EMS tax from City residents and businesses. This is tax income that the City could be receiving. Steps are already under way Iby the City to fund a Fire and EMS Assessment study to be conducted in conjunction with the County's study. This topic was discussed at the Okeechobee BCC meeting on January 8, 2020. The City will be paying approxiimately $10,000 to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc to determine possible Fire and EMS rates within the City. County's current Fire Assessment Rate is $108.00 per resident. Estimated Fire Assessment in the City could bring in at least $460,528.15 using the County's current rate. Could possibly be more depending on the recommendations from the consulting firm. Millage Calculation example slide What is a Millage Rate? • Millage rate represents the tax rate used to calculate property taxes per every $1,000.00 of the property's taxable value. • EXAMPLE: For a property in the City of Okeechobee with a taxable value of $50,000. The millage paid would be $380.09 at the current millage rate of 7.6018. • $50,000 / $1,000 = $50.00 owed for every $1,000.00 in value. • $50 x 7.6018 = $380.09 millage paid to City Abney — am I the only one who didn't know we were doing this $10,000.00 with the County. REVISIT THIS DISCUSSION. Will the county be at events like the city does, such as: Golf cart going throughout the festivals handing out water, checking on the health condition of spectators. Santa throughout the City. Puppet shows for the elementary students. Portion of Millage Paid for FirE� Services slide The City of Okeechobee has four main departments within its budget — General Admin/Services, Police, Fire and Public Works. Using the previous millage example of a home in the City with a $50,000 taxable value. The homeowner of the property is paying $380.09 in millage to the City. Divide the $380.09 among the four City departments and each will receive $95.02 per year from that homeowner or $7.91 per month. So for $7.91 per month that City homeowner is able to have a dedicated City fire service. Some of the other things we need to talk about. Structure fire on Jan 7, treasure island, 3 city firefighters. County Station 1 all went to the call. During that time, rollover on Highway 98, station 1 for the city, engine rolled now the city has no coverage. Roll over 441 North, dispatch called back the county had no coverage. This happens more times than anyone realizes. Were dedicated to protect the life and property in the city. Think making adjust Structure fire, Lt Crum shift, mobile home fulling engulfed, kept two homes on each side from burning down. City another structure fire, Lt (Hodges responded, homeowner was able to go to that call. After a 5-7 minute delay the county responded. Here to protect our citizens property and life. City citizens will suffer the most. Has also come to my attentiori since this started, newspaper clippings stating. Once instance council member business decision, for a number of years we have drawn from our reserves. Are we drawing this specifically for the fire department? [distributed copies] Looked how much we have gone into our reserves 2016-17 FYE none sof the budgeted $751,000.00 were utilized for the operation expensdires in the General Fund. 2017-18 FYE none to the budgeted $573,000.00 January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 8 of 11 Totoal of 4 years with 3 not using any of the reserves. Saved. Not going into reserves every year, nor to fund just the fire department. Article Culpepper wondered why the city didn't just have their transport....." Two of the BOCC have stated similar answers to that. We are going in the right direction in getting our staff trained with the and we appreciate that. This is not a merger, that's two things coming together, that's not happening here. Willing to help any way to save our fire department. Open to crittism, change numbers. Watford think we should take this information, study it and get back with Capt. Clark just some clarification. Operational not used for that. MDO — we don't have appreciation line item so we use capital improvements fund. Clark — capital needs to buy engines, equipment, it comes from reserves. If we buy an arnbulance it comes out of reserves. The $119 used from the fire study, the study said it would be $174. Clarification on those points. Lalo — used apples to apples for the county's number to make them the same. Jarriel, I resent that a county commissioner would be talking about our problems over here when they have a shortage. Appreciate your reserch and information. Abney — thank you for the information, a lot to absorb. Appreciate you looking and coming up with this. Keefe — lot of information and dollar amoutns going over this. Great presentation, appreciate it. Shared numbers and data are presented to what you want your recippents to see. Looking at these numbers here they appear to be one thing, county's is another. Equipment costs, payroll, medical director $15,000 but commented the county pays $24,000, difference in what they pay. More of a liability because of the number of employees they have. They have more medics that equals $24,000. They have 36 roughly, we have 10, sent an email to obtain amore accurate number from him. Keefe what are the personnel increases going to be for the ALS. Going to have to hire more, made an assumption that we would not have to hire more, but we would, will get those numbers in the next presentation. A lot of assumptions built into these numbers because of the grants. If we choose to increase FD, increase staff, and didn't get grant dollars, we would be dipping into reserves for some major expenses. Lalo, late Nov, state certifications by Jan 2021, going to try to speed things up, but they are saying Dec or Jan that our certifications would be provided. Abney City ever had ambulance service? Looked at before? MDO 2016 looked at services at that time with that study. Clark explain the point making about going to the different fires and no one here. Auto A reason we went to Treasure Island, assumption we wouldn't have the automatic aide? Lalo to show how much they are using our services, at least the city had personnel coverages, level of services. If the city FD wasn't here there wouldn't' be anyone to provide services within the city. Responded 10 times since Jan 1. Going into the county roughly 100 times, used to be only 30 times with the 2 mile radius. ISO — what would happen to rating in the city if we only had two. 11 on duty, 1 not going to the class. On shift, medics aren't factored into the ISO rating. No changes if we do our own medical. The calls the county can't respond to and we can do county transports and recoup costs as well. Keefe whats not being discussed, union contracts, county would have to deal with that, what would that look like? Lalo last contract 2009, defer to MDO. Subject: either way, regardless we will be held to the same, union contract, the county couldn't guarantee the contracted rate to the city because they have to renegotiate. Keefe — spoke with Franklin, still waiting for an official request from the city. We're talking about it and they're talking about it. We need to make a decision so details and real negotiations can start so the county knows what we're asking of them. Watford — don't understand what he's saying because we had discussion and gave them. Two administrators to get together and work out some details, when that discussion is complete by the county, it will be given to us. We've let them know what we need. 4)(JcF( January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 9 of 11 Keefe moved to that we contract the fire services to the city so we can do real negotiations with details with a clear and concise direction is going, contract agreed upon by both Council and BOCC, if all ironed out and negotiated, final product could be approved or denied. To give a formal directive to the county. Jarriel, I'll second that. Watford motion not in order at this time. Watford under council comments you request to put on the agenda Jarriel a motion is never out of order. Fumero, voting on agenda direct fact finding don't see it being an issue. Nature is substantive decisions respectively suggest you place that item on the agenda, such an important decision, let the public know and what is potentially is going to happen. Fact finding is fine, we're going through door a to get through door b and that will be a problem. Jarriel Burroughs at last meeting told two administrators to get together. Watford would you do that during council member comments. Keefe if we are during council comments. Not here to make enemies. Watford not discussion Fumero — fact finding, bring you, decision to go one approach versus another, should not be made by motion. Keefe exact wording, what would the agenda item be for that? Fumero, future meeting, presentation Keefe — back and forth requesting information from the county, we haven't made a motion to do anything yet. Doing this for four or five months. Duly publized. Fumero, even looking at a contract there is more than one than one contract option, could be specific varied, nothing wrong to requesting. Watfordd... Keefe — I will withdraw my motion. (, � ,.) � L 1 ' 1 � r i I 1..�' `i V W �- lJ�v lJ�--� l �''Ci:J � �, VV.i• 1'1.� a, � 1. t � t l l,,L� �, t?l� d'Y �, 2� �i - Clark — can I make a motion direct admin to bring back to use factual information from Rodriguze, verified by Administrator. Watford would you mind asking that during council comments. VII. COUNCIL COMMENTS Abney — street paving and ??'? updates and we haven't recifeved anything, what about a.11 the other capital improvments. Wanting to get some official direction/answers from the county. Agree we need to look through all the information from Rodriguez. Jarrial should be able to have a meeting without getting so frustrating. Frustrated we are kicking this can down the road again. After the last BOCC meeting Burroughs directed Chartier to put the information and send it onto us. If we don't want to do it then lets vote it down and go on. This is discusting. I'm fed up. They need to give We don't need the public to come for the meeting for that. I'm totally against all this garbage, I appreciate all the effort he put therough, he shouldn't have had to do that. Keefe comment about the parks conceptual plan. Quite a beautiful presentation, like for next agenda we talk about the reception and acceptance of the plan. j) Ord 1204, parking for restaurants, parking is an issue in town, yet we do nothing about it. When are we going to build a parking garage or parking lot, like to look into those efforts. Help with the events, those always pose parking problems.. Look into improving our parking problems.., Keefe — like to propose the creation of a contract for fire service with the county and lets engage in no(,�) kidding distinct details, number of employees hired, union issues, severance packages, solvent clear directive given. Watford — consensus Park Conceptual Plan — all yes. Li. Parkingfor the downtown area — consensus? Next reasonable one/ next available��) Fire Contract next agenda give a clear direction/motion from the city council — consensus yes. Clark — I would like to direct admin to review the numbers and information provided and some accurate numbers to provide EMS service — next agenda consensus, before the fire contract item. Abney at the same time? Clark don't think we're going to get that back in two weeks. Direction at the county has to January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 10 of 11 include where our firefighters will be hired in. biggest problem is they wont even have a job or brought in at base pay. Supposed to be on their Jan 8 meeting, cant get and want to $10,000 to go along to get the fire study, contractorially services, prudident before the contract? MDO yes but don't know when it will be done. Abney find out when it will be done, if not 3 years from now, it may help with how our contract may decisde on, cart before the horse. Clark if we go to EMS would we have to do a study too. MDO -- verification of data, comparison against the county's numbers/dollars. How we fund it will be up to the council later. Clark — then why are we part of the study. Herb — are we voting on a contract at the next meeting? Keefe — no. it will provide on an agenda to let the public know we are officially requesting a contract of the fire services in the city from the county. Herb — then you're not looking at other options? Watford — depends on how we vote on that motion. Keefe —just want to give you guys some direction, Herb - if you have no intention of looking at other options? Jarriel — why I've been discouraged, we haven't been provided with anything concrete, the only decision that has actually been made is to let your guys go to medic school. Give notice to the county that we want to ...... [listen to exact motion wording] Herb — they have clearly said they will not I... Keefe — Franklin said they have not received a officially request from the city that was clear. Watford — disagree with what he said, if that's not answered we need to go back or continue to negotiate, agree with Jarriel said we keep kicking this down the road, good suggestion, get the figures from the county and make a motion to continue on, negotiate or another option. Rodriguez, like services? Have to beog - , _ KA I VIII. There being no further items on the agenda, Mayor Watford adjourned the meeting at/� P.M. The next regular meeting is scheduled for February 4, 2020, at 6:00 P.M. / \ January 21, 2020 Regular Meeting Page 11 of 11