HomeMy Public PortalAbout04/28/2011 * Special MeetingMAYOR:
VICE MAYOR:
COMMISSIONER:
William F. Koch, Jr.
Joan K. Orthwein
Fred B. Devitt III
Muriel J. Anderson
Chris D. Wheeler
April 21, 2011
SPECIAL MEETING BEING HELD BY THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF GULF
STREAM ON THURSDAY, April 28, 2011 AT 1:P.M., IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS
OF THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA.
f�1
I. Call to Order.
II. Pledge of Allegiance.
III. Roll Call.
IV. Presentation of Utility Undergrounding Project Assessment
Methodology.
V. ORDINANCE NO. 011/2; AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM,
FLORIDA, REGARDING A UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT AND NON -AD
VALOREM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO FUND SUCH PROJECT; PROVIDING FOR
AUTHORITY; PROVIDING FOR LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR
DEVELOPMENT AND CONSIDERATION OF UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT
NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 170, FLORIDA
STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR AN ASSESSMENT ADOPTION PROCESS,
INCLUDING MAILING AND PUBLICATION OF NOTICES AND AN
EQUALIZATION HEARING; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCE AS AN ALTERNATIVE
METHOD; PROVIDING FOR LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION AND SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
VI. Engagement of Financial Advisor /Bond Council.
VII. Agreements.
a. Palm Beach County Property Appraiser Services in
accordance with F1. Statutes 197.3632(2) related to billing
non -ad valorem tax assessments.
b. Palm Beach County Tax Collector Services related to
collection of non -ad valorem tax assessments.
c. Palm Beach County Information System Services to provide
compatible electronic medium to Property Appraiser and Tax
Collector.
VIII. Adjournment.
SHOULD ANY INTERESTED PARTY SEEK TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE TOWN
COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, SAID
PARTY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE, MAY
NEED TO INSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH
RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO
BE BASED. F.S.S. 286.0105
C'
C�
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD BY THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN
OF GULF STREAM ON THURSDAY, April 28, 2011 AT 1:00 P.M., IN THE
COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM,
FLORIDA.
I. Call to Order. Mayor Koch called the meeting to order at 1:00 P.M.
II. Pledge of Allegiance. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by the
Mayor.
III. Roll Call.
Present and
Participating
Late w /Notice
Absent w /Notice
Also Present and
Participating
Speakers Present
William F. Koch, Jr.
Muriel J. Anderson
Fred B. Devitt, III
Joan K. Orthwein (1:50 PM)
Chris D. Wheeler
William H. Thrasher
Rita L. Taylor
John Randolph
Habib Isaac
Willdan Financial Services
Susan Schoettle -Gumm
Marcie Nolan Oppenheimer
Mayor
Commissioner
Commissioner
Vice -Mayor
Commissioner
Town Manager
Town Clerk
Town Attorney
Fin. Consult.
Special Counsel
for Project Team
Counsel, G.S.
Shores HOA
John Caldwell, President
Golfview Club HOA
Margo Gannon Stahl, Resident
Robert Ganger, President
Gulf Stream Civic Association
Van Loundsbury, Gulf Stream Resident
IV. Presentation of Utility Undergrounding Project Assessment
Methodology.
Mr. William Thrasher, Town Manager, said representatives of Willdan
Financial Services, the Town's consultants, were here to present the
Assessment Methodology for the Utility Undergrounding Project. A
resident asked if they would be given an opportunity to speak and what
the protocol would be. Mayor Koch said it would be best if residents
had a representative to speak on their behalf, but they would have an
opportunity to speak. Mr. Randolph said that, following the Assessment
Methodology presentation, residents would be called on individually to
comment.
Mr. Habib Isaac, of Willdan Financial Services (Willdan), introduced
himself and distributed copies of the Town of Gulf Stream Utility
Undergrounding Methodology which will be made a part of the records of
the Town. He introduced the members of the Project Team, including Lee
Evett, Vice - President of their Southeast Operations and Susan Schoettle-
Gumm, the Town's Special Counsel for the assessment program. Mr. Isaac
said Willdan is a consulting firm that works with city governments,
municipalities and special districts to assist them in researching
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011 Page 2
revenue streams such as assessments, tax or user fees to fund special
projects. He said he has been involved with a dozen such assessments in
the past 5 years and Willdan has developed many more. Mr. Isaac said
utility undergrounding is very common in beach communities and explained
that property owners will petition their governing entity to look into
it. He said his firm would then be engaged to look into appropriate
assessment methodologies for the purpose of allocating project costs for
O the proposed utility undergrounding based on special benefits received
by properties as a result of the project.
Mr. Isaac said that Florida Statutes Section 170 authorizes the use of
assessments for capital improvements, including utility undergrounding.
Non -ad valorem assessments must be based on special benefits properties
receive from the improvements, not on property value. Any benefits to
properties outside the Town are non - assessable and non - assessable costs
will be calculated and excluded from the assessments. Willdan was hired
to develop an assessment methodology which would be logical in relation
to improvements and benefits received by affected properties, and one
that is fair and reasonable in apportioning costs to different property
types in the Town. Mr. Isaac pointed out that Gulf Stream has just
completed annexation of several properties, primarily multi - family
residences, into the Town and Willdan has incorporated that into their
analysis. He also mentioned that government property is not exempt from
the assessment and, therefore, the Town's properties will be charged for
benefits received from this project. In addition, he said vacant
property will be charged as if they are developed. Mr. Isaac said
Willdan has done field work in Town to identify the overhead utility
network, properties within the Town and the special benefits each
property will receive. These special benefits, which include improved
safety, improved reliability and improved aesthetics, are used to
calculate the assessments, and when they look at apportioning costs for
benefits properties receive, they use Equivalent Benefit Unit
Methodology (EBU). EBUs are established for each special benefit
component based on property type, lot size and property use. Condos,
multi - family residences (MDR), and government properties are assigned
EBUs differently than non - residential properties and single family
residences (SFR). Non - assessable costs are also calculated based on EBU
methodology. Mr. Isaac said in this case they also used density factors
for the population generated from a SFR compared to an MFR.
Mr. Isaac said the cost of this project will be apportioned to the
properties based on the special benefits of improved safety, reliability
and aesthetics. Slide 7 of the power point presentation is a snapshot
of the cost estimate of the project in detail, which costs consist of
one -third improved safety, one -third improved reliability and one -third
improved aesthetics. Mr. Isaac said there are specific costs to some
properties which will be charged to the specific parcel and not shared
by all, such as service laterals or meter upgrades to accommodate the
new utility conversion. He summarized slides 7, 8 and 9 which indicate
how EBUs are assigned to each property type for each special benefit,
including a cost comparison of the EBU assignment between SFRs and
condo /MFRS. Mr. Isaac said there are 232 SFR parcels and 362 condo /MFR
units in the Town of Gulf Stream. He reviewed the total assessment
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011
Page 3
breakdown as it relates to SFRs compared to condos /MFRS saying,
although there are more condo /MFRS than SFRs in Gulf Stream, the
condo /MFRS are absorbing only 43% of the total project cost. Using Gulf
Stream Shores as an example, Mr. Isaac pointed out that the typical
condo /MFR assessment is $6,128, which is 59.73% of the typical SFR
assessment.
O Mr. Isaac said it has been suggested that MFRS with 20 units should be
viewed as one large SFR with 20 rooms. He said he did a calculation
using the example, placing 90% of the total cost on SFRs, making the
typical SFR assessment $18,000 rather than $10,000 and the typical
condo /MFR assessment $349, which would not be a fair and equitable
assessment methodology. Mr. Isaac said his firm is a third party entity
and is unbiased having no vested interest and, with regard to industry
standards and their experience with this type of project for
municipalities having a mix of SFRs and MFRs, Willdan Financial Services
believes that the assessment methodology they have used is a fair,
equitable and defensible approach for this project. It was noted that a
more - detailed Assessment Methodology Report is available identifying
specific assessments for individual parcels.
Susan Schoettle -Gumm, Esq., the Town's legal consultant for the
undergrounding project and a member of the Project Team, said that one
of the Agenda items for this meeting is to consider adoption of an
ordinance directing Staff and the Project Team to further develop the
undergrounding process and move forward. She said adoption of the
ordinance on first reading does not commit the Town to further action
and asked the Commission to adopt the ordinance on first reading,
stating that second reading of the ordinance is tentatively scheduled
for May 13, 2011 at the Regular Meeting of the Town Commission. Ms.
Schoettle said if the Commission adopts the ordinance, she will bring
back an initial resolution under Florida Statutes Chapter 170, which is
the process the ordinance recommends the consultants follow to move
forward. She explained that Florida Statutes requires two separate
resolutions be adopted. The first resolution is adopted when plans and
the assessment roll are available in the Town Clerk's office for
residents to inspect to see how it will affect their property. The
resolution provides for a mailing of notices to all affected properties
showing the assessment to be imposed on their parcel. There would be
publication of the resolution and notice of a future public hearing in
the newspaper. Florida Statute states that the mailing of the notice to
C� properties must occur at least 30 days prior to the date of the public
hearing, allowing residents time to inspect the assessment roll and
become fully informed. Ms. Schoettle said the assessments are not
adopted or levied by the Town until the Commission sits as an
equalization board at a public hearing where all interested parties may
appear and comment on the assessment roll. Adjustments to the
assessment roll may be made at that time or the roll may be adopted as
is. However, until then, the Commission has not moved forward with the
adoption or approval of the assessments.
Ms. Schoettle said that prior to proceeding with the resolutions, the
Project Team will work with Project Engineer to finalize the project
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011
cost and the Town must hire a bond
assist in obtaining the funding of
not yet been included in the propo
analysis must be done prior to the
The two resolutions and the public
the next several months if we move
Page 4
counsel as a financial consultant to
the project. Financing costs have
sed assessments and, therefore, an
mailing of notices to properties.
hearing will occur sometime within
forward in a normal process.
O In closing, Ms. Schoettle said that as non -ad valorem programs are
considered, people in municipalities in particular are accustomed to
seeing how things show up on their tax bill and, in this case, benefits
are used to allocate cost to each parcel in a fair and reasonable
manner. She said there may be other methods of allocating costs, but
the Town of Gulf Stream has hired a firm that is an expert in a unique
and narrow field of utility undergrounding assessments and they have
made their recommendation to the Town. Ms. Schoettle stated that she
would be available for questions.
Mr. Randolph said he realizes they have used this methodology before,
but each community is unique and, in this instance, they chose this
methodology based upon a study of the area. He asked the Project Team
if they have used this methodology in the past for similar
municipalities and have those municipalities been supportive? Mr. Isaac
said they have used the methodology, but with regards to benefits to
properties, the allocation of costs is always slightly different because
they customize benefits and assign them to properties based on the
characteristics of the community. Mr. Isaac said they have not been
challenged specifically on utility undergrounding assessments, in a case
where there were assessments for improvements to a business corridor,
the challenge was that they were only receiving general benefits, not
special benefits. It went through the court process and it was
determined that they were receiving special benefits, not general
benefits, and the judge ruled in favor of their methodology approach.
He said they were challenged before a grand jury on two other occasions
and they found nothing wrong with the methodology or their approach.
Mr. Randolph asked, if the work involved in connecting a lateral to an
SFR is the same as connecting it to an MFR, why are each entity assessed
differently? Mr. Isaac said, although the MFR is fed by one primary
network, the complex has many units utilizing those services, which is
the benefit to that parcel, and the balance is made by accounting for
how the parcel is utilized. If they treated a condominium building as
one parcel, the cost will be absorbed by the other properties within the
Town. He said he is using the industry standards and his experience to
come up with the best approach.
Commissioner Devitt complimented the Project Team for the work they have
done. Commissioner Anderson agreed. Mayor Koch asked if there was a
spokesperson for the group of residents present.
Marcie Oppenheimer Nolan introduced herself stating that she is an
Attorney and Land Use Planner with the Law Firm of Becker & Poliakoff
and is here to represent the Gulf Stream Shores Condominium Association
(G.S. Shores). Ms. Nolan is certified by the American Institute of
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011 Page 5
Certified Planners and has been practicing in municipal service work for
15 years, during which time she has reviewed and worked on many impact
fees and fire assessments. She noted that an enhanced report was
available from the Town Clerk and she distributed her power point
presentation, asking everyone to follow along. The power point
presentation will be made a part of the records of the Town.
O Ms. Nolan said that G.S. Shores is a 1.21 acre parcel with 54 units,
their special assessment for this project is $330,353.64, FP &L would
charge G.S. Shores $20,000 to bury their lines and, therefore, she
believes the methodology is unreasonable. She said Gulf Stream has many
unique factors, with beautiful and very large oceanfront properties and
a concentration of condominiums and historic golf courses along the
ocean. There are homes in Gulf Stream that are typically around 5,000
SF on 1 -acre lots and there are areas with larger homes on larger lots.
Ms. Nolan said that the G.S. Shores parcel is very small in comparison
to the overall Town, but their assessment is statistically significant
in the overall price.
Ms. Nolan said the Town is intending to bury overhead lines and believes
the project has nothing to do with safety and reliability, but is solely
for the purpose of aesthetics. In that case, there are other financing
options such as an ad valorem tax, which is tax deductible, and a
special assessment, which is not tax deductible. She explained saying
that when an entire community benefits from a project, the appropriate
funding is an ad valorem tax, which is based upon a percentage being
applied to the property value as determined by the property appraiser.
A non -ad valorem special assessment is created by statute which allows
local governments to pay for capital projects for one part of the
community when it does not benefit another part of the community, and
there must be a rational nexus between the improvement and the party
paying for the improvement. Ms. Nolan said Willdan was hired to
research, review and analyze the project and determine which funding
option would be best. There are several options that could have been
explored and developed to be reviewed by the Commission, but there is
only one proposal.
Ms. Nolan said the Town has a large percentage of private streets,
primarily on the south end, totaling 1.35 miles, and said 20% of the
project cost is being subsidized by the general public for private
benefit. She said their position is that costs for undergrounding on
private streets must be paid by people who own property on private
streets and, therefore, the assessment must be revised.
Ms. Nolan said Section 170.201 Florida Statutes addresses Special
Assessments and says, "The front or square footage of each parcel; or an
alternative methodology, so long as the amount of the assessment for
each parcel of land is not in excess of the proportional benefits as
compared to other assessments on other parcels of land." She said after
that it offers an alternative method called the Benefit Assessment, or
Benefit Methodology, which is generally used when it is difficult to
measure the direct costs per unit, such as a fire assessment or garbage
service. Ms. Nolan said the special assessment must be in proportion to
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011 Page 6
the special benefit and must be reasonable and apportioned fairly and
equitable. She said the most commonly used methods are based on front -
footage, property area, zone formula, fair market value after the
improvements, use of the improvements and block -by -block basis. Ms.
Nolan said the consultant stated that he used that method in other
communities, but not in Gulf Stream. She referred to the Benefits
Safety Table which measures the safety, reliability and aesthetics
Obenefits assigned to each property by EBUs (Equivalent Benefit Units)
and said the methodology penalizes condominiums, adding that G.S. Shores
receives no benefit from this methodology.
With regard to the improvement of aesthetics, safety and reliability,
Ms. Nolan said she believes aesthetics is a Town -wide benefit and added
that FP &L disagrees that overhead utility undergrounding is safer and
more reliable. She said a different methodology is provided for each
benefit and there are flaws with the recommended methodology. Ms. Nolan
referred to The Willdan Report where it states "The undergrounding of
overhead utilities substantially reduces the frequency of outages, when
compared to the frequency of outages occurring with overhead networks,"
saying it is a paraphrase from "Out of Sight, Out of Mind" and is taken
out of context and misleading. She said the actual quote says "When
compared to overhead power systems, underground power systems tend to
have fewer power outages, but the duration of these outages tend to be
much longer. Underground power systems are not immune from outage
during storms. The bottom line -- reliability benefits associated with
burying existing overhead power lines are uncertain and in most
instances do not appear to be significant to justify the high price tag
that undergrounding carries." Ms. Nolan referred to a follow -on report
by the Edison Electric Institute in 2008 entitled "Out of Sight, Out of
Mind Revisited" which evaluates overhead and underground electric system
reliability based on data from prior storm years and read portions of
that aloud.
Ms. Nolan said she does not believe the assessment methodology is fair
and reasonable and said the costs apportioned to the individual
condominium units are in excess of the benefit received. She summarized
that the aesthetics benefit is Town -wide, safety is for emergency
ingress and egress Town -wide and not parcel specific, smaller parcels
and condo units are paying a disproportionate percentage of the project
cost, and private streets should not be funded by the public. She said
the consultants have provided one option, but there are other methods of
assessments, adding that statute provides for the front - footage method
and square footage of parcel method.
Ms. Nolan said the consultants were to develop a methodology that meets
the needs of the residents of Gulf Stream and there is not one size fits
all. She said Gulf Stream has golf courses, clubs, a private school,
historic Australian Pines, private streets, single family homes, multi-
family homes, condominiums and a timeshare. She asked the consultants
to address questions, some of which the Town Attorney has covered, such
as: How many undergrounding projects have been completed, how many were
funded through special assessments v. ad valorem, what was the method
used and how did those communities relate to Gulf Stream in terms of
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011 Page 7
number of units, length of roadways, public and private roads, concrete
or wooden poles? Ms. Nolan said this methodology was recently used in
Jupiter Inlet Colony, but it is all similar -sized single family homes on
similar -sized lots and no condominiums. She said, in their case there
was probably not a lot of disparity in the way parcels were assessed.
Ms. Nolan said according to special assessment law this assessment for
each parcel of land is in excess of the proportional benefits received
Oand cannot be approved.
In conclusion, Ms. Nolan said the role of the Commission is to look at
the facts presented and determine if there is enough evidence on the
record to support a finding that this ordinance as proposed does not
confer more costs than it does benefits to the properties identified in
this special assessment area. She said their decision cannot be
arbitrary or capricious, it must be reasonable and fairly and equitably
apportioned and supported by competent substantial evidence, not
conjectures. Ms. Nolan said there are many issues yet to be addressed
and there are options available that remove arbitrariness from the
assessment which are front - footage and area, and these are the options
G.S. Shores finds fair and reasonable for all residents of Gulf Stream.
Commissioner Anderson asked Ms. Nolan if Place Au Soleil was included in
her numbers. Ms. Nolan said Place Au Soleil created a special district
and it was not included in her numbers.
In response to Ms. Nolan's comments, Mr. Isaac said they could have used
a different methodology, but the methodology used is not inappropriate.
He said they did factor in square footage by accounting for acreage and
lot size of properties and vacant lots were assessed because they are
charged as potential. He said density factors were not used in
condominiums because their cost would have been much more. Mr. Isaac
said front footage may not be the best means saying the Statute does not
state you must use front footage or square footage and in the event
there is no front footage you can go another way. He said it references
that as an example and it was used long ago. There are many items to be
considered regarding front footage, such as properties on cul de sacs
where front footage consists of their driveway. The utilization of the
services is what provides the benefits to the properties.
Commissioner Devitt asked Mr. Isaac if any of the items pointed by Ms.
Nolan have come up in the past. Mr. Isaac said the safety, reliability
Cand aesthetics benefits mean something different to everyone and it is
very common, but they try to account for as much as possible. He said
he has done 12 assessments and his firm has done many more. With regard
to Jupiter Inlet Colony, it is correct that it is primarily single
family homes, but he is not using the same methodology in Gulf Stream
because he has to account for golf courses, a school, Town properties
and properties outside of Gulf Stream that will benefit from the
project. Mr. Isaac said he has done the field work and is being very
comprehensive in his approach, but it seems the feeling is that
condominiums should be treated like single family homes, but that is not
the use of the property and it is not an equivalency. He said Ms. Nolan
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011
Page 8
is correct in that benefit units equate to dollars and he believes the
methodology is fair, reasonable and defensible.
Commissioner Devitt asked Mr. Isaac if there is anything they will do
differently in the plan based on what was discussed today. Mr. Isaac
said he heard the concerns of Gulf Stream Shores and has already made
some adjustments he thought were reasonable. For example, the entire
C complex goes out when the primary network goes out and so the benefit
unit assigned which was assigned to individual units was changed to
assign one to the entire complex to be divided evenly amongst the number
of units. He said another change that was made is that they did account
for auxiliary units on single family properties.
Mr. Thrasher asked Mr. Isaac if he was aware of private streets when he
toured the Town. Mr. Isaac said he was not aware of private streets
because there were not gates to keep him from entering, there were gates
on private property only.
John Caldwell, Vice - President of Golfview Club, said the complex, with 6
units, is being assessed $70,000 at a per unit assessment of about
$10,000, which is disproportionate compared to the other condominium
complexes. He said they are opposed to this and they agree with G.S.
Shores and suggested the consultants prepare a detailed rebuttal
addressing the discrepancies to the assessment methodology. He said
some of the issues were addressed by the consultants, but not to his
satisfaction, and believes that if this went to court it would be found
as arbitrary and unfair.
Mayor Koch asked Mr. Caldwell if he agreed with preserving the Town's
historic highway and trees. Mr. Caldwell said yes, but now is not the
time because the economy is critical.
Ms. Margo Gannon said it is important that people in this room be
recognized as being opposed to the assessment. She said she believes
that the majority of residents in the room are opposed and suggested the
Commission reject the ordinance and not move forward at this time. Ms.
Gannon said the Town should have waited for the undergrounding vote
until annexation was complete.
Mr. Robert Ganger, President of the Gulf Stream Civic Association,
clarified that those who voted to be annexed into Gulf Stream were aware
C> that the undergrounding assessment would be around $9,000 and they voted
100% in favor of being annexed. He said there are differences between
condominiums and their case has been made. There was a positive straw
vote which is binding and, until something radical changes in the
information that was used to assess, we should move forward with the
process. Mr. Ganger said if the Commission chooses not to move forward
today it would be penalizing those who voted in favor of the project.
Mr. Van Loundsbury said he owns a single family home and a condominium
and his assessment for his condominium at the Bermuda Club is higher
then the assessment on his single family home. He said it does not seem
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011
Page 9
fair or reasonable and suggested the Town look at other methodologies
before moving forward.
Mr. Isaac said that the condo assessment was decreased about $2,400 and
would be surprised if the single family assessment was lower than that.
V. ORDINANCE NO. 011/2; AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM,
FLORIDA, REGARDING A UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT AND NON -AD
VALOREM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO FUND SUCH PROJECT; PROVIDING FOR
AUTHORITY; PROVIDING FOR LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR
DEVELOPMENT AND CONSIDERATION OF UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT
NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 170, FLORIDA
STATUTES; PROVIDING FOR AN ASSESSMENT ADOPTION PROCESS,
INCLUDING MAILING AND PUBLICATION OF NOTICES AND AN
EQUALIZATION HEARING; PROVIDING FOR ORDINANCE AS AN ALTERNATIVE
METHOD; PROVIDING FOR LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION AND SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Clerk Taylor read Ordinance 011/2 in title, being presented for 1st
reading this 28th day of April, 2011. Commissioner Anderson moved and
Vice -Mayor Orthwein seconded to pass Ordinance 011/2 on first reading.
There was no discussion. All voted AYE. Clerk Taylor announced that
this Ordinance will be presented for adoption on 2nd reading at the
Regular Meeting of the Town Commission on Friday, May 13, 2011 at 9:OC
A.M.
Commissioner Anderson said she would like the Consultants to explore the
various other assessment methods discussed during this meeting and
report to the Commission. Mr. Randolph said if Commissioner Anderson
wanted the Consultants to explore other assessment methodologies, she
could make a motion to that effect. Mayor Koch asked the Consultants if
they researched other options. Mr. Isaac said they considered other
methods and do not recommend the front footage or area methods for this
particular project because there would be huge discrepancies in
assessments for like properties. He said he recommends the methodology
used and believes it is the best approach for the characteristics of the
Town. Vice -Mayor Orthwein asked if they have used this method for
communities with single family and multi - family dwellings. Mr. Isaac
confirmed that and added that they always weigh multi - family at a
discount to that of a single family. He said his presentation provided
the discount applied to condominiums for all benefit categories, which
�) was a 45% discount for safety, 33% for reliability and 28% for
aesthetics, equaling a 40% discount overall. Mr. Isaac said the number
of units that will be utilizing the services must be considered and he
is comfortable with his recommendation. Commissioner Anderson was
satisfied with his response.
Ms. Schoettle addressed the Commission regarding special assessments for
capital improvements saying there are two primary requirements for
validity of special assessments. She said one is that the project or
improvement being constructed provides special benefit. Most Florida
case law where courts are uncomfortable finding special benefit relates
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011 Page 10
to the provision of services that are not specific capital improvements,
such as fire and garbage. Generally, in Florida cases, when there is a
capital improvement to provide service to a property, the courts are
willing, and have little difficulty, to find special benefit. In this
situation we are talking about capital improvements that will provide
direct service to all the assessed parcels. The other primary
requirement for validity is whether the costs have been fairly and
reasonably apportioned and the threshold for that is not arbitrary.
v That is the reason you hire a consultant such as Willdan to develop a
methodology that shows the considerations of the characteristics of the
community and the characteristics of the type of improvement being
constructed. Front footage has historically been used for improvements
to sidewalks, water and sewer and is a somewhat antiquated approach
which can result in some extreme inequities. The trend in the industry
has been to move away from front footage although it is still mentioned
in Florida statutes. In addition, Ms. Schoettle said that under the
Town's home rule powers you may use a reasonable and appropriate
allocation methodology which you determine to be reasonable and fair.
Ms. Schoettle said there are no improvements to the roadways, the
improvements will be in easements and rights -of -way. She said she does
not believe there is a requirement in Florida Law for private roads to
be excluded from the cost. With regard to general benefit to the
community, Willdan does not deny that there will be some general benefit
to the community, but it is not uncommon. Ms. Schoettle also mentioned
that if the Commission chose to go with an ad valorem tax Place Au
Soleil could not have been excluded and they are excluded from this
project because their utilities have already been undergrounded.
Therefore, the ad valorem option is not available to Gulf Stream for
this project.
VI. Engagement of Financial Advisor /Bond Council.
Mr. Thrasher said staff considered various options for the funding of
the Utility Undergrounding Project, including in- house. He said the
Town received a quote from Mark Raymond, Esq. to act as bond counsel for
the project. Mr. Thrasher asked for approval of the Agreement to engage
Mark Raymond, Esq. as Financial Advisor /Bond Counsel. Commissioner
Devitt moved and Commissioner Anderson seconded to authorize Mayor Koch
to accept and execute the Agreement for Engagement of Financial
Advisor /Bond Counsel. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
VII. Agreements.
a. Palm Beach County Property Appraiser Services in accordance with
Fl. Statutes 197.3632(2) related to billing non -ad valorem tax
assessments.
b. Palm Beach County Tax Collector Services related to collection of
non -ad valorem tax assessments.
c. Palm Beach County Information System Services to provide
compatible electronic medium to Property Appraiser and Tax
Collector.
Clerk Taylor listed the three agreements requiring Commission Action.
Commissioner Devitt moved and Vice -Mayor Orthwein seconded to approve
Special Commission Meeting
Town Commission - April 28, 2011
Page 11
and authorize Mayor Koch to execute the following Agreements with: Palm
Beach County Property Appraiser for services related to billing non -ad
valorem tax assessments; Palm Beach County Tax collector for services
related to the collection of non -ad valorem tax assessments; and, Palm
Beach County Information System Services to provide compatible
electronic medium to Property Appraiser and Tax Collector. There was no
discussion. All voted AYE
�r VIII. Adjournment. Commissioner Devitt moved and Vice -Mayor Orthwein
seconded to adjourn the meeting. There was no further discussion. All
voted AXE. The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M.
Gail C. Abbale
Administrative As
N
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Town Commission of the Town of Gulf
Stream, Florida, at a public hearing to be held on Friday, May 13, 2011,
at 9:00 A.M., in the Commission Chambers of the Town Hall, 100 Sea Road,
Gulf Stream, Florida, will have on the agenda the adoption of the
following:
ORDINANCE NO. 011/2; AN ORDINANCE OF
THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF GULF
STREAM, FLORIDA, REGARDING A UTILITY
UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT AND NON -AD
VALOREM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO FUND
SUCH PROJECT; PROVIDING FOR AUTHORITY;
PROVIDING FOR LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS;
PROVIDING FOR DEVELOPMENT AND CONSIDER-
ATION OF UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING PROJECT
NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT
TO CHAPTER 170, FLORIDA STATUTES AND
MUNICIPAL HOME RULE AUTHORITY; PROVIDING
FOR ORDINANCE AS AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD;
PROVIDING FOR LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION AND
SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
The proposed ordinance noticed here is available to the public on
weekdays at the Town Hall, 100 Sea Road, Gulf Stream, Florida between
the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M.
ALL PERSONS INTERESTED IN THESE MATTERS may appear before the Town
Commission at the time and place aforesaid and be heard. Pursuant to
the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person
requiring special accommodations to participate in this meeting, because
of disability or impairment, should contact the Town Clerk, 561 - 276 -5116
at least five (5) days prior to the hearing in order for the Town to
reasonably accommodate the request.
SHOULD ANY INTERESTED PARTY SEEK TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE TOWN
COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING,
SAID PARTY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE,
MAY NEED TO INSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE
O WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL
IS TO BE BASED. 286.0105, F.S.S.
Publish: Palm Beach Post
Date: May 1, 2011
TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA
2, 1 Z_ 7��
Rita L. Taylor, Tovn Clerk
THE PALM BEACH POST
Published Daily and Sunday
West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Ellen Sanita, who on oath
says that she is Call Center Revenue Manager of The Palm Beach Post, a daily
and Sunday newspaper, published at West Palm Beach in Palm Beach County,
Florida; that the attached copy of advertising for Notice in the matter
Ordinance 011/2 was published in said newspaper in the issues of May 1, 2011.
Affiant further says that the said The Post is a newspaper published at West Palm
Beach, in said Palm Beach County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has
heretofore been continuously published in said Palm Beach County, Florida,
daily and Sunday and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post
office in West Palm Beach, in said Palm Beach County, Florida, for a period of
one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that she /he has neither paid nor promised
any person, firm or corporation any discount rebate, commission or refund for the
purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.
Also published in Martin, St. Lucie and Indian River Counties.
Sworn to and subscribed before 2nd day of May, A.D. 2011.
Who is personally known to me.
NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORIDA
Karen M. McUnton
`CCo �sion #DD832672
,,,,,{ Expires: NOV. 15, 2012
WMEDTHRU AnA?MC BONDING Cos UM
at
hat the
of Gulf
Bring to .
011, at
cham-
B Road,
on the
noticed here is
to weekdays at
,a Road, Gulf
n the hours of
'ED IN THESE
Bfore the Town
Person requiring
IDB to parh Ci pate
se of disability or
ontact the Town
at lea.t fiva (91
l