Loading...
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