Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutDraft Project Notice Renee Basel From:Susan Schoettle-Gumm <spgumm@mailmt.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 9, 2010 1:31 PM To:Bill Thrasher; 'Danny Brannon'; 'rwganger'; 'Habib Isaac'; 'Lee Evett' Subject:Draft Project Notice Attachments:Purpose of this Notice -dpb (4) SPS COMMENTS.doc To All – I ended up making more comments/edits than I expected. I really thought it was good – so my edits are related to avoiding misunderstandings (how voting works) and clarifying some legal issues. Since I am coming in on this a bit later than the rest of you, I may not know what you have previously discussed/decided. Please read my comments to see questions where I did not make an edit. I felt that the language on voting could be clearer so I made edits in several places. I know you probably don’t want to call attention to possible non-payment of the assessments, but I think it is important to mention that the assessments will be collected in the same manner as property taxes. So, I inserted a sentence on this. The issue of financing costs needs to be discussed because it can have a significant effect on the final assessment rates as well as the legal notification process. If the current project cost estimate does not include financing costs, then that needs to be clearly stated to avoid accusations later of “You told me it was only going to cost ___.” Any increase in the assessments due to financing costs will be apparent when property owners are noticed of the final assessment rate. If the estimated assessments included in the ballot notices are less than the assessments ultimately noticed and imposed, the Commission could be placed in a politically difficult position. (I assume that the ballot notices are not intended to serve as the first class mail notices under Sec. 197.3632, F.S.) I understand that you are going to have a prepayment option, but I would recommend that, if possible, all cost and assessment numbers presented at this point include estimated financing costs. If you have already done this, great. If not, let’s discuss it. I hope my comments/questions/edits are helpful. I will be available at 941-377-4948 most of the afternoon. If I don’t answer, I may be on another call, so leave a message and I will call you back as soon as I can. Thanks, Susan Susan Schoettle, PLLC Phone 941-377-4948 Cell phone 941-320-3054 Fax 941-371-8317 E-mail spgumm@mailmt.com This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the addressee. It may contain information which is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, use, or any action or reliance on this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone (941- 377-4948) or by return e-mail and delete the message, along with any attachments. 1 Formatted: Justified Purpose of this Notice: (Version 3) Formatted: Left: 0.7", Right: 0.7", Top: 0.98", Bottom: - To provide reliableactionable information to affected property owners within the Town of Gulf Underground Utilities Project. Stream regarding the proposed 0.98" - To outline the method by which existing utility lines will be buried throughout the entire east of the Intracoastal Waterway, the proposed use of a boundaries of the Town located and Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5" Special Assessment to finance the project. To submit the proposed plan to a vote - by all affected property owners, by means of a ballot Formatted: Justified enclosed with this mailing. The Town Commission has determined that the Underground Utilities Project will be constructed only if a majority of the votes submitted are in favor of the project. Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5" - If the Underground Utilities Project is implemented, the Town will pay for the project by imposing special assessments on the annual property tax bill for every property. Background: Universal burial of overhead utility wiring has been considered by the Town of Gulf Stream for many years. The subject overhead utilities primarily include those owned by Florida Power & Light Company, Comcast Communications, and AT&T. Several developments led to renewed interest in the project. Formatted: Justified They include: (1) the cost and time involved in recovery from hurricanes Jeanne, Dennis, and Wilma; (2) recent improvements in undergrounding technology; (3) current availability of substantial FP&L credits for local governmenttown-wide undergrounding projects; and (4) the favorable impact of a weak Commented \[SPS1\]: Delete “town-wide” since project does not Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5" include entire town? economy on financing and construction costs. Based upon the foregoing, the Town has carefully studied the cost and feasibility of undergrounding its utilities. A plan has been developed. The Town Commission believes that residents and property owners should have the opportunity to implement the plan if a majority of qualified voters affected property owners choose to proceed. The Benefits of Undergrounding : Formatted: Justified Proponents of undergrounding claim that the project will likely more than pay for itself in increased property values. While hopeful of this outcome, the Town justifies the project on known and Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5" demonstrated benefits: Improved Safety - through elimination of potential for downed power and communication lines. Improved Reliability - through a significant reduction in irritating and often costly power outages Formatted: Justified or island-related power surges. Commented \[SPS2\]: Will undergrounding really help w/ power surges? If so, great – if not, should delete. Faster Storm Recovery - provided by enhanced switching capabilities and absence of downed linesassociated with underground facilities. Improved Neighborhood Aesthetics - through the elimination of poles, overhead wires, and excessive tree trimming necessary to “harden”for existing overhead systems. (more information on reverse page) Formatted: Justified, Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5" Formatted: Justified, Indent: Hanging: 0.5" Formatted: Justified Scope of the Project: The project, if approved by a majority of affected and voting property owners, would involve burial of power lines, telephone lines, and television/computer cables on all public rights of way, Commented \[SPS3\]: Are fiber optics included in the term “cable”? and from street-to-meter connections servicing all residential and non-residential customers. The project is expected to cost up to $4,650,000. This cost includes, but is not limited to, Commented \[SPS4\]: I recommend using the word “estimated” here to build in a little flexibility expenses for cost apportionment analysis the development and imposition of special assessments, long-term financing, planning and engineering; obtaining permits; trenching, horizontal directional Commented \[SPS5\]: Need to make sure financing costs are included in the assessment calculations also drilling, installing new utility vaults, conduits and transformers, laying conduit lines into trenches, switching services to underground systems; removing overhead poles and wires; and restoring landscaping where necessary. The overall cost also includes required property-specific improvements such as replacing service laterals and overhead type meters. Not all properties will need such upgrades. Certain properties have already undertaken the undergrounding of one or more of the utilities from the front-yard right of way. As such, the cost for each property will be calculated on specific characteristics and needs, and the assessment will be based upon both common and specific costs. Engineering for each individual property installation will be conducted by a professional third-party consultant, and assessments will follow objective criteria as required by Florida Statutes established Florida legal requirements. Assessment Proposed to be Levied on your Property: The amount of the Assessment that is proposed to be levied for your property is specified on the green Individual Assessment Ballot Base that is included with this notice. Your property’s Assessment Amount represents your property’s specific share of common project costs for the entire Gulf Stream barrier island and represents the cost of based on the specific special benefits your property will receive in the areas of improved reliability, improved safety, and improved Individual Assessment Amounts aAesthetics.. The , if any, represent an engineering estimate for the unique requirements to complete the underground service connections to your home in a safe and satisfactory manner. The Town intends to collect the assessments on the annual property tax bill and may enforce payment the same way as for property taxes. Please note that these proposed Commented \[LRE6\]: This vote is not required by statutes. The assessments have been determined estimated prior to final bidding on all cost elements of the Town can make a policy commitment that the assessment will not exceed these stated costs. The only assessment variations will project. Some minor deviations adjustments to the assessment imposed on your property may be therefore be down and not up. Any increased costs will, however, expected occur between the ballot vote and actual implementation. have to be absorbed by the Town’s general revenue stream under such a policy commitment. Commented \[SPS7\]: I agree w/ Lee’s comment. At this stage, Timing and Duration: it is a policy decision by the Town. The project should commence within 6-12 months of voter property owner approval. The Individual Property Assessment can be paid in part or in full without interest prior to financing the project with a third party loan. Thereafter, assessments will be paid in ten annual installments commencing November 2011. Annual assessments will appear as a non-ad valorem item on Palm Beach County tax bills.