Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout06/30/2011 * Public HearingJune 23, 2011 MAYOR: William F. Koch, Jr. VICE MAYOR: Joan K. Orthwein COMMISSIONER: Fred B. Devitt III Muriel J. Anderson ) Chris D. Wheeler PUBLIC HEARING BEING HELD BY THE TOWN COMMISSION, SITTING AS THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM ON THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 2011 AT 9:00 A.M., IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA. UeT�1 I. Call to Order. II. Pledge of Allegiance. III. Roll Call. IV. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -11; A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING A PROJECT OF UNDERGROUNDING OVERHEAD UTILITIES INCLUDING ELECTRIC, CABLE TELEVISION AND TELEPHONE FACILITIES SERVING CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE TOWN; PROVIDING FINDINGS; EQUALIZING, APPROVING, CONFIRMING, IMPOSING AND LEVYING CERTAIN NON - AD VALOREM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY SPECIALLY BENEFITTED BY SUCH PROJECT TO PAY THE COST THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT AND THE COLLECTION OF SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSSMENTS BY THE METHOD PROVIDED FOR BY CHAPTERS 170 AND 197, FLORIDA STATUTES; CONFIRMING THE MUNICIPALITY'S INTENTION TO ISSUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CONFLICTS AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. A. Related Correspondence. B. Presentation by Consultants. c. Questions & Comments from Public. D. Answers from Consultants. E. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -11 VOTE. V. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -12; A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING BORROWING BY THE MUNICIPALITY OF THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $5,497,742 TO FINANCE THE COST OF THE PROJECT OF UNDERGROUNDING THE ELECTRIC, CABLE TELEVISION AND TELEPHONE UTILITY FACILITIES SERVING THE MUNICIPALITY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO. 011 -9; PROVIDING THAT SUCH DEBT SHALL NOT BE A GENERAL OBLIGATION OF THE TOWN BUT SHALL BE PAYABLE ONLY FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED BY THE TOWN PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 011 -11 AND CERTAIN OTHER MONIES AS PROVIDED HEREIN; MAKING CERTAIN COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. A. Presentation by Consultant. B. Questions and Comments from the Public. C. Answers from Consultants. D. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -12 VOTE. VI. Adjournment. SHOULD ANY INTERESTED PARTY SEEK TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE TOWN COMMISSION, SITTING AS THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS 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, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. F.S.S. 286.0105 MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE TOWN COMMISSION, SITTING AS THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM ON THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 2011 AT 9:00 A.M., IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA. I. Call to Order. The Meeting was called to Order by Mayor Koch at 9:00 A.M. CII. Pledge of Allegiance. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by the Mayor. III. Roll Call. Present and William F. Koch, Jr. Mayor Participating Joan K. Orthwein Vice -Mayor Muriel J. Anderson Commissioner Fred B. Devitt, III Commissioner Via Telephone Chris D. Wheeler Commissioner Also Present and William H. Thrasher Town Manager Participating Rita L. Taylor Town Clerk John Randolph Town Attorney Garrett J. Ward Police Chief Presentations: Susan Schoettle -Gumm, Esq. Special Counsel For Project Team Habib Isaac of Willdan Fin. Consult. Financial Services Danny Brannon of Brannon Undergrounding & Gillespie, LLC Consultant Chris Smith, Resident Jupiter Island Mark E. Raymond, Esq. Bond Counsel Speakers: Marcie Nolan Oppenheimer Counsel, G.S. Shores Of Becker & Poliakoff COA Daniel Commerford, Mayor Jupiter Inlet Colony John Caldwell, V.P. Golfview Club HOA Ed Johnson, Pres. Golf Stream Manor James Gammon, Res. Gulf Stream Margo Gannon Stahl, Res. Gulf Stream Robert Ganger, Pres., Gulf Stream Civic Assoc. IV. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -11; A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING A PROJECT OF �./ �•/ UNDERGROUNDING OVERHEAD UTILITIES INCLUDING ELECTRIC, CABLE TELEVISION AND TELEPHONE FACILITIES SERVING CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE TOWN; PROVIDING FINDINGS; EQUALIZING, APPROVING, CONFIRMING, IMPOSING AND LEVYING CERTAIN NON- AD VALOREM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY SPECIALLY BENEFITTED BY SUCH PROJECT TO PAY THE COST THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT AND THE COLLECTION OF SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSSMENTS BY THE METHOD PROVIDED FOR BY CHAPTERS 170 AND 197, FLORIDA STATUTES; CONFIRMING THE MUNICIPALITY'S INTENTION TO ISSUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CONFLICTS AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. O Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Clerk Taylor read Resolution No. 011 -11 this 30th day of June, 2011. A. Related Correspondence. Clerk Taylor read the following letters were made a part of the record and will Stream: Page 2 in title, presented for adoption into the record, all of which be filed with the Town of Gulf A letter dated June 29, 2011 addressed to the Town Commission from John Caldwell, Vice - President of Golfview Club COA, voicing Golfview Clubs concerns, objections and opposition to the project assessment methodology. Golfview Club Condominium Owners Association requests that their assessment be no more than $6,128.00 per unit, which is cited as the average on Page 11 of the April 28, 2011 Willdan Assessment Methodology Report. A letter dated June 13, 2011 addressed to her from Matthew Weatherbie, 3121 Polo Drive in Gulf Stream, expressing his support of the non -ad valorem assessments for the utility undergrounding project. An email addressed to her from Robert Dockerty, 3000 N. Ocean Blvd. in Gulf Stream, expressing his support of the assessment methodology used to calculate the cost of the undergrounding project. A letter dated June 17, 2011 addressed to Mayor Koch from Douglas Dugan, General Manager of the Little Club, 200 Little Club Road in Gulf Stream. On behalf of the Board of Governors, Mr. Dugan expressed their unanimous support of the assessment methodology and their financial obligation to support the project. He said the Little Club will stand by their commitment of support to the Town of Gulf Stream and its residents. A letter dated June 21, 2011 addressed to the Town Commission, which was received via email from Paul Lyons, 2999 Polo Drive in Gulf Stream, expressing his support of the undergrounding project and the assessment methodology, saying the majority must prevail. In his letter, Mr. Lyons urged the Commission to proceed with the project only if it is funded by a Non -Ad Valorem assessment, as he believes it is a fair approach. A letter dated June 21, 2011 addressed to the Mayor and Commissioners from Barbara Whitaker, a real estate professional who resides at 1120 N. O Ocean Blvd. in Gulf Stream, expressing her strong support of the undergrounding project and the assessment methodology, saying that it will enhance the charm and overall quality of life on the Island. A letter dated June 20, 2011 addressed to the Town Commission from Robert and Helen Burns, 3232 Gulf Stream Road in Gulf Stream, expressing their strong support of the undergrounding project and saying they believe the assessment methodology used to assess property owners is reasonable. B. Presentation by Consultants. Susan Schoettle -Gumm, Special Counsel for the Project Team, introduced herself. She stated that she has been working with local governments on revenue mechanisms for over 20 years and her practice primarily focuses Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 3 on specialized mechanisms such as special assessments. Ms. Schoettle talked about the Project Team and stated the following: Habib Isaac is the technical expert and Senior Project Manager with Willdan Financial Services who provided the detailed methodology analysis and produced information identifying physical characteristics of parcels; Lee Evett, Vice - President of Willdan Financial Services, provided the overall project management and serves as liaison for the public; and, Danny �l Brannon of Brannon and Gillespie, is the Project Manager and a former engineer of FPL who has worked on several other projects like this one. Ms. Schoettle submitted resumes to the Town Clerk to be entered into the record. The Resumes of Susan Schoettle -Gumm, PLLC, the Firm of Brannon & Gillespie, LLC (which includes the resumes of James S. Gillespie, P.E., General Partner, and Danny P. Brannon, P.E., General Partner) and Habib Isaac, Senior Project Manager for Willdan Financial Services were made a part of the record and will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. Ms. Schoettle stated that one or all of the Project Team has been involved in this project for over a year. In March of 2010, Mr. Brannon made a presentation to the Commission which included preliminary project costs and identified the project area, which is east of the Intracoastal Waterway. Place Au Soleil, a Gulf Stream community located west of the Intracoastal, was not included because their utilities were already underground and would not benefit from the project. Ms. Schoettle said the Town had several discussions prior to that time concerning benefits residents would receive from undergrounding. In 2005, following a strong hurricane season which produced a lot of damage, residents came to the Town with renewed interest in undergrounding. The Town participated in a consortium of local government to get FPL and the Florida Public Service Commission to develop a government credit which would reduce the cost that FPL would otherwise charge the Town. This has finally been approved by the Florida Public Service Commission. In January of 2011, the Town conducted a straw poll of property owners in the proposed project area which included their individual preliminary cost estimates. The Straw Ballots were counted on February 7, 2011 and the majority of property owners voted in favor of the project as well as the Non -Ad Valorem Assessment to fund the cost. With the majority in favor, the Commission determined that they would proceed with the Oprocess of adopting and considering special assessments. Ms. Schoettle explained some of the legal issues related to special assessments. She said the project or service must provide special benefits to properties as defined in discussions of Florida Case Law. Capital improvement projects which provide direct service to properties clearly provide special benefits. Courts have provided detailed analysis on different types of improvements and services to discern whether required special benefits to properties have been applied and the cost of the project must be allocated to assessed properties in a reasonable and fair manner and must not be arbitrary. Ms. Schoettle said the experts hired by the Town are highly experienced in developing assessments for undergrounding, they have completed a number of such Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 4 projects and assessment programs and the Non -Ad Valorem assessment methodology chosen is not arbitrary, but rather it is fair and reasonable. She said if Ad Valorem value was used as a sole portion of the assessment methodology it would be challenged and possibly held invalid because the Town has no authority to levy a tax within a restricted area of the community. Taxes must be imposed jurisdiction- wide and on a uniform basis and the Town would not have been able to exclude Place Au Soleil from this project. Ms. Schoettle said Willdan looked at physical characteristics of properties in the project area, including single family residences, condominiums, a time share, golf courses, vacant property, both large and small. They identified three major special benefits to properties which are improved safety, reliability and aesthetics. These benefits have not been specifically discussed in Florida Case Law relating to utility undergrounding projects, but they have been discussed in California Case Law where many undergrounding projects and special assessments have occurred. Willdan used these major special benefits to allocate costs among the parcels. Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) has specifically been upheld in Florida Case Law, and improved aesthetics as a special benefit to properties has also been recognized in Florida Case Law as a valid special benefit. Ms. Schoettle said there is sufficient support in Florida Case Law for the methodology that Willdan has recommended for this project. Ms. Schoettle said that during public comment, alternative methodologies were raised, which they looked at. She said Mr. Isaac's presentation, and her memo distributed to the Commission on June 29th, include factors that Willdan used, and did not use, in their discussion and rationale concerning the assessment methodology. Some members of the community may believe another methodology would be more fair and reasonable, but Florida Courts do not require that there be only one reasonable methodology. Ms. Schoettle distributed a replacement page for Attachment "D" of her memo to the Commission, which she identified for the record as a Memorandum dated June 28, 2011 addressed to the Mayor and Commissioners from Susan Schoettle -Gumm regarding the Town of Gulf Stream Undergrounding Project and Proposed Special Assessments, and copies the Town Manager, Town Attorney, Town Clerk, Bond Counsel Mark Raymond, and Marcie Nolan, Esq. She said the memo recaps issues raised and provides information specifically related to suggestions by citizens of the community. The Memorandum was entered into the record and will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. Danny Brannon introduced himself, stating that his Firm has been involved in a number of undergrounding initiatives from Jupiter Island to Hollywood to communities on the West Coast of Florida. He said he worked for FPL for 25 years as a distribution engineer, a service center manager responsible for construction and design personnel, and was called on to review fatal accident sites by claims personnel and he feels strongly about his opinion on this subject. To achieve the best possible results to this study, his Firm coordinated their findings with Willdan's findings of the physical characteristics assessment. Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 5 Mr. Brannon referred to his memo dated May 3, 2011 addressed to Mayor Koch which was previously entered into the record and filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. He recapped the three major special benefits beginning with improved safety. He said, in his experience working with a power company, he does not recall any incidents where fatalities or serious injuries involving the public were associated with underground O facilities. With regard to liability, Mr. Brannon said FPL put forward the Storm Secure Program to improve the ability of their facilities to withstand hurricanes and adverse storm impact and are installing poles throughout the community to harden the existing lines. One of the initiatives put forward in the Storm Secure Program is undergrounding which FPL views as a significant opportunity to improve their reliability. FPL supports undergrounding on their website and, as an incentive to promote undergrounding, they offer a credit to local governments for their undergrounding initiatives which covers 25% of their cost. Habib Isaac of Willdan Financial Services introduced himself and stated that he has been involved in this field for over eight years and his specialty is in new funding mechanisms, specifically in taxes and assessments where it requires the need to illustrate a nexus of special benefits to properties. Mr. Isaac said he will participate in a panel as a speaker for the League of California Cities in September as an expert in the provisions of special benefits utilized assessments in relation to any type of city -wide or municipal -wide assessment. Mr. Isaac distributed a power point presentation entitled Town of Gulf Stream - Utility Undergrounding Methodology dated June 30, 2011 by Willdan Financial Services, which summarizes his presentation of April 28, 2011 and provides additional information, including the factors used in the recommended assessment methodology. The Willdan Financial Services Power Point Presentation of June 30, 2011 was made a part of the record and will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. Mr. Isaac referred to a list of other utility undergrounding projects funded by Non -Ad Valorem Assessments, both in California and in Florida, each having different characteristics. In the Town of Palm Beach, there are single family, multi - family, non - residential and government properties and, with a Non -Ad Valorem Assessment, government properties O are not exempt from assessment. He referred to the City of Solana Beach, CA, where the project was divided into three different assessment districts because each area warranted an adjustment to the way the special benefits were identified. Mr. Isaac said the driver of determining how to allocate costs is dependent on the characteristics of the project area. He said in developing the assessment methodology, a team conducted fieldwork and looked at all properties to customize assessment to Town characteristics and to identify the project area. They realized there are some properties outside of the Town's jurisdiction to the north that will benefit from the project and, therefore, they allocated a cost to that benefit as non - assessable, meaning that it must be funded by other Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 6 sources rather than over - assessing properties in the project area. Mr. Isaac reviewed the three major special benefits of improved safety, reliability and aesthetics saying that these benefits were confirmed as special benefits in the California court case where the court ruled that the special benefits to properties are improved safety, reliability and aesthetics. He said Willdan is in compliance with those special benefit Oprovisions. With regard to Equivalent Benefit Units (EBU), Mr. Isaac said to be sure they proportionately spread the cost to properties they assigned EBUs to each category of safety, reliability and aesthetics. EBU is established for each special benefit component based on property type, lot size and other characteristics, assigning condos, multi - family and non- residential properties in relation to single family. He said the project cost estimate now includes financing costs in the event the Commission chooses to move forward to finance the project, and these costs have been calculated and are part of the report within the Resolution. Costs that are considered non - assessable for properties outside of the Town's jurisdiction are clearly identified. Mr. Isaac summarized the process of how EBUs are assigned to properties for each special benefit, with a comparison of Single Family Residence (SFR) to Condos, as follows: For improved safety, SFR equals 1.0 EBUs and Condo equals .55 EBUs or 55 %; for improved reliability, SFR equals 3.0 EBUs and Condo equals 2.02 EBUs or 67.33 %; and, for improved aesthetics, SFR equals 1.0 EBUs and Condo equals .72 EBUs or 72 %. Property size was taken into consideration and lot square footage was incorporated into the methodology with regard to safety. They looked at acreage for each condominium complex as a whole, as well as for each SFR, assigned EBUs to the condominium complex and, based on the number of units, spread the cost over the number of condo parcels. With regard to reliability, they used specific property data which was provided by the Project Engineer because they wanted differentiation between properties or streets that have already been undergrounded, such as Middle Road, but are still accessing overhead utilities. With regard to aesthetics, they looked at density factors and, in relation to density generation of a single family property compared to a multi - family property, they found the typical density for a single family was 2.32 persons and 1.69 persons for multi - family, with multi - family being approximately 72% of a single family home. All dwellings benefit from �) improved aesthetics and different levels of population densities are generated from different property types. Mr. Isaac summarized the different assessments as follows: The total assessable cost is $5,518.144; there are 232 SFR parcels being charged a total assessment of $2,762,402, or 50.60% of the total cost; there are 362 Condo /MFR units and, although there are more overall MFR dwelling units, they are being charged $2,533.490, or 45.91% of the total cost. The average SFR cost equals $11,907 and the average Condo /MFR cost equals $7,057, a differential of about 40 %. Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 7 Mr. Isaac included assessment factors that were utilized, and were not utilized, in the assessment methodology. He summarized the comparison of factors considered in the categories of improved safety, reliability and aesthetics. Some of the factors used were type of development, land parcel size, dwelling units, guest quarters on SFR, number of persons per household, overhead wires and poles adjacent to parcel, utilities O requiring undergrounding and zoning potential. Factors not utilized were structure or unit square footage, land parcel front footage and number of bathrooms. With regard to front footage, Statutes, as an example state that you can use front footage for assessments, but it is not a requirement. Front footage has been used in the past, but over time industry practice has moved away from it because it does not give a true relationship between the benefits to properties and how they will utilize them. Mr. Isaac said if they used per property as a factor, they could not truly account for utilization of the property or show a special benefit finding, and it would be more like a flat parcel tax. Mr. Isaac said this is a non -ad valorem assessment which is why taxable value was not identified. Ad valorem assessment cannot be utilized as a factor to spread cost because you could be challenged as to whether it is a fair allocation of benefit. Taxable value is volatile and can be adjusted due to foreclosures and other events that depress costs in a particular year. With regard to electrical demand, this was addressed in Mr. Brannon's memorandum which was made a part of the record, but there is no relation to safety or aesthetics. Mr. Isaac submitted a new assessment roll to Clerk Taylor, pointing out that there was a formatting correction concerning decimal points and an onsite improvement adjustment to one property. Mr. Randolph asked Mr. Isaac to identify the document for the record. Mr. Isaac said the document is not dated and is identified as Base Assessment Roll and Base Assessment Roll plus Onsite and Financing Costs. Mr. Randolph said Mr. Isaac made reference to Exhibit "A" of the Resolution, which is the Assessment Methodology, and asked him to identify Exhibit "A" for the record. Ms. Schoettle stated that the Roll Mr. Isaac just submitted into the record replaces the Roll at the back of Exhibit "A" to Resolution No. 011 -11. Mr. Randolph asked that this Exhibit "A" be made a part of the record. Exhibit "A" to Resolution No. 011 -11 was made a part of the record and will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. OIn closing, Mr. Isaac said when his firm takes on a project they remain impartial, they do not have a vested interest in how they allocate costs and they are not contingent on whether or not the project moves forward. In the agreement with the Town, their involvement is only to provide the assessment costs and the report to the Town. Vice -Mayor Orthwein commented that she feels the EBU is the proper way to allocate costs and because it is a utility and not a tax on a property. She said is it something everyone will benefit from. C. Questions & Comments from Public. Mr. Christopher Smith, a resident of Jupiter Island, introduced himself and stated that he is an electrical engineer and is retired from Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 8 Microsoft. He has lived on Jupiter Island for 17 years, he is very active in Town government and was selected by the Mayor of Jupiter Island to serve on the underground steering committee which met every month to review progress of the project. Mr. Smith took photos and videos of the progress for their historical archives and said he was asked to speak today to explain what the benefits of the undergrounding O meant to Jupiter Island residents. He submitted his presentation which was previously entered into the record of the Public Hearing of May 13, 2011 and will be entered into the record for the current Public Hearing and filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. Mr. Smith said the major benefits were fewer outages, quicker recovery after storm damage and improved aesthetics. The new system was complete in 2009 and since then there has been a substantial reduction in outages and there have been no system failures. Prior to undergrounding the Island averaged 9 outages per month and after undergrounding they have had maybe one outage per month, but none due to system failure on the Island. Before undergrounding, live wires corroded by salt would fall. Mr. Smith referred to photos of a neighbor's property where a live wire fell to the ground charring the driveway and lawn, pointing out that it could have been fatal to someone standing under the wire as it fell. He talked about recovery time following damage from Hurricanes Francis and Jeanne saying that Jupiter Island took 4 to 5 days to restore power and it took only a few hours in nearby communities with undergrounding. After Hurricane Francis high tension wires and poles were down and no traffic was allowed on, off or through the Island until FPL could turn everything off. FPL brought in 5,000 workers from other states to help and it took 5 days to get trucks on the Island to begin cleanup and power restoration. Mr. Smith referred to a photo of a power pole with various wiring and said they were all over their Island. He said, as in Gulf Stream, their residents take pride in the beauty of their Island with lovely homes and landscaping, and then there are the ugly poles. He referred to a photo of an entrance to a home with power pole in front of it, and another photo of the same entrance without the pole and wiring, saying the improvement in aesthetics was amazing. Marcie Nolan, an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, introduced herself and stated that she represents Gulf Stream Shores COA. She said Gulf Stream Shores consists of 54 units on 1.2 acres of land with 200 linear feet of front footage. Ms. Nolan said that Candy Gouwens, the President �) of the Association could not be present today; however she would read Ms. Gouwens' letter into the record and submit it to the Town Clerk. Ms. Nolan wanted to confirm that the Power Point Presentations she gave and distributed to the Commission at both the April 28, 2011 May 13, 2011 Public Hearings were made a part of the record. Ms. Nolan re- submitted the Power Point Presentations of April 28, 2011 and May 13, 2011 to the Town Clerk and requested both be entered into the record for today's Public Hearing as well. The Power Point Presentations of April 28, 2011, May 13, 2011 were entered into the previous records and will be entered into the record of this June 30, 2011 Public Hearing and will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. Ms. Nolan read Ms. Gouwens' letter dated June 28, 2011 addressed to Mayor Koch. Ms. Gouwens Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 9 expressed their concerns and objections to the assessment methodology and requested that the Town defer approval of the special assessment and spend more time reviewing the impact the methodology will have on various dwellings throughout the Town. Ms. Gouwens letter was made a part of the record and will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream. OMs. Nolan said the Equalizing Board is to determine whether the rates are proportionately and equally divided among all property owners. With regard to the different variables on EBUs, she said Gulf Stream Shores requests that they look at the variations in parcel size, unit size, Homestead property over Seasonal property, average use of power, or look at a condo as .25 of a unit as opposed to what is being proposed today. Ms. Nolan said a straw ballot went to property owners with the assessment methodology attached, which gave everyone an idea of what their assessment would be. She said that methodology was not reviewed or approved by the Commission, yet three letters read in today's backup which relied upon that methodology for their vote of approval of the project were made public record. Ms. Nolan said Hillside House has 11 condo units, having the same number of units and are the same size as Las Casitas; however, their assessments are different within $2,000. Gulf Stream Shores has 54 units averaging in size of 750 SF and their assessment is $6,000. This does not appear rational or equal. In closing, Ms. Nolan said the letters of support from property owners relying on a non - approved assessment methodology, indicate that property owners believed their assessments were set in stone. She said one letter of objection was read into the record; however, when she asked for backup there were two other letters of objection that were not read into the record. One was a letter dated June 2, 2011 from Caldwell & Associates and the other was dated May 24, 2011 from an attorney representing Hillside house. Ms. Nolan said she has requested emails from the Town Clerk which have not yet been received and cannot be sure if there is additional correspondence concerning the assessment indicating how other property owners feel about it. She said five Commissioners set the policies and she asked them to look at condos in a different way than single family homes with regard to aesthetics and safety, and to look at the methodology and how it impacts Gulf Stream Shores. O John Caldwell, Vice President of Golfview Condominiums COA, introduced himself, and said their position was summed up in his letter which was read today stating the disparities and unfairness they believe exists. He said the inherent approach in methodology is subjective, but there are other methodologies that are objective that could easily be applied, such as square footage, which have not been considered. Mr. Caldwell said the rationale is vague and he believes that safety, reliability and aesthetics should not be equally weighted in assessing the $5 million dollar cost because they are not equally as important to everyone. He realizes everyone will be better off with wires underground, but it is the allocation differentials they are disputing. Mr. Caldwell pointed out that the consultants used a new average assessment figure today of $7,057 and asked if the assessments will continue to change. He said Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 10 his small community of 13 residents, which sits on less than 1/3 of an acre with no obstructions or extreme density, is paying more than 55% of the units assessed in this project and believes it is not fair or reasonable. He asked if their assessment could be changed so it is not higher than Gulf Stream Shores or not more than the $7,057 which is the new average. Mr. Caldwell said he read a letter from the Town Manager G quoting Willdan Financial Services and believes the consultants did not use logic to make their assumptions and conclusions. Ed Johnson, President of the Board of Directors of Gulfstream Manor Board of Directors, introduced himself and said following the May 13, 2011 Public Hearing he wrote a letter to the Mayor to which he received no reply and it was not read into the record. Mr. Johnson read his letter dated May 23, 2011 aloud which was entered into the record will be filed with the Town of Gulf Stream, In summary, his letter said, based on results of a straw ballot sent to Gulf Stream property owners, the Town determined undergrounding to be in the best interest of the public. The straw ballot was taken prior to Gulfstream Manor being annexed into the Town and they were not aware of the annexation, the Ordinance approving the Project or the estimated $6,000,000 cost of the Project until March 18, 2011. The letter expressed their concerns about their $200,000.00 assessment and the methodology used. Mr. Johnson said he conducted a straw poll of the 713 individual weekly owners of Gulfstream Manor and, with 45% of ballots returned, 89% were against the Project and 97% were against the methodology to fund it. James Gammon, a resident of N. Ocean Blvd. in Gulf Stream, introduced himself and expressed concerns with the reliability of undergrounding. He said the original assessment received from Willdan referred to a study done by the Edison Electric Institute. They conducted a nation- wide survey on how well underground systems held up following storms and they found that, although there was a slight improvement in the number of outages, when there was an outage the amount of time it took to restore power was greatly increased. In addition, he said the barrier island is in a flood zone and one of the problems found in this study is that underground systems do not do well when exposed to water. He said Jupiter Island's project was completed in 2009 and works well because it is a new system, but he noted that since 2009 there have been no storms and we have been in a drought situation. GRobert Ganger, President of the Gulf Stream Civic Association, introduced himself and said this project has been in talking stages for a very long time. He said in early 2006 workers came in from Ohio to help the Town restore power after Hurricane Wilma and, after being in Town for 10 days, they indicated that the Town could save themselves a lot of trouble by burying lines. The Civic Association conducted a survey and 9 out of 10 property owners said the lines should be buried and were willing to pay $10,000 to $15,000 to do so. Mr. Ganger said he is not demeaning the right to question the assessment or any other action taken by the Commission, but undergrounding will make the Town a better place to live. He noted that the assessment does not have to be paid all at once, but rather over time, and when the financial process Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 11 is done, it may end up costing less. He said he would like to urge everyone on behalf of the Civic Association to proceed with the Project and get the two Resolutions approved. Mr. Ganger said that Jupiter Inlet Colony is just beginning their undergrounding project and introduced Daniel Commerford, Mayor of O Jupiter Inlet Colony. Mayor Commerford said he is a former college professor and a former labor arbitrator and believes he is well- suited for his job. He described Inlet Colony, which is on the southern tip of Jupiter Island, saying it is unlike Gulf Stream, except for the fact that they are located on a barrier island. There are 235 single family residences ranging in value from $700,000 to $9,000,000, there are no condominiums, high rises, timeshares or commercial property, only beach club and one town hall. Mayor Commerford said they interviewed other firms, but Willdan are the leading experts in this field, providing legally defensive assessments. He said that everyone would benefit by this project and, with the exception of one resident, there has never been a question in Jupiter Inlet Colony of why everyone was being assessed the same amount for safety, reliability and aesthetics, aesthetics being the least important benefit from this project. Mayor Commerford said there is a high rise condominium behind their town hall which is part of the Town of Tequesta. He spoke of an incident where a 13,000 volt power line fell behind their town hall which energized the ground for 400 feet around, almost electrocuting a police officer, it blew up a 9'inch water main going into that high rise and blew out 1 and 2 -foot chunks of concrete because it energized rebar that was running up to a poured concrete building behind town hall and because wires were laying across the road nobody could get in or out of their community. Jupiter Inlet Colony had already voted in favor of undergrounding were preparing to commence, but if they had not, an incident like this would have been a major convincing factor. Mayor Commerford said they typically have interruptions during a single year that are non -storm related, they have fires on the electric poles about once a month and they have electrical outages every week lasting from 15 minutes to 4 hours. Mayor Commerford said that he Mayor Falcone of Jupiter Island started talking about undergrounding immediately following the 2004 hurricanes O and helped to form MUUC (Municipal Underground Utilities Consortium) of which Mr. Thrasher was a member and participated in every conference call over the past 5 - 6 years. He also credited Mr. Randolph and Jupiter Island who did all the work on this project early on and spent their own money to ensure a Right -of -Way Agreement with FPL. Small communities have benefitted from the Consortium put together by Palm Beach's Deputy Town Manager Tom Bradford and their MUUC assessments have been between $700 and $1200. Big towns like West Palm Beach, Naples, Tampa and Miami Beach, whose dues have been $12,000 per assessment, have all spent about $50,000 so far with no expectation of undergrounding in the near future. Small towns were awakened from a chain of events between 2004 and 2005 and, believing he is a driving force, Mayor Commerford felt the time was right to move forward. Prior to the ballot Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 12 taking place, he wrote a letter to his constituents and Jupiter Inlet Colony had a 75% turnout, 77% voted in favor, they assembled their team which is identical to Gulf Stream, their project cost is approximately $3,000,000.00 and secured a loan at a very good rate. Mayor Commerford said contractors are bidding low, interest rates are fairly low at this time and they will receive a 25% credit from FPL which amounts to over a O million dollars. He said they could not have moved forward on this without the larger towns paying for the $400,000 study MUUC did and presented to the Florida Public Service Commission. It was a difficult process to get this credit established and he strongly recommended doing this now before the credit disappears and contractors are no longer hungry for work. Margo Gannon, a resident of Gulf Stream Shores Condominiums, introduced herself. She said the Commission has been hearing from everyone how unfair the assessment is to Gulf Stream Shores and other condo owners and asked how they do not realize the difference between a $150,000 condominium unit and a million dollar home. She said she believes the assessment is based on an unfair methodology and requested that the Commission consider these concerns and objections before moving forward. D. Answers from Consultants. Mr. Isaac and Ms. Schoettle addressed some of the issues brought forward by the public. Ms. Schoettle said one of the comments from Ms. Nolan was that the assessments should be equal, but rather they should be proportioned based on relative special benefits. The methodology looks at physical characteristics of a parcel and includes many factors, such as density. For example, Gulf Stream Shores has more density than any other parcel in the project area, having more people and units in one area that will benefit from the project. In response to criticism of the straw poll, she said it was done early in the process and preliminary assessment estimates were made. Following the straw poll, Ms. Schoettle said she advised Willdan to take a hard look at the methodology to further distinguish between condos and single family, make adjustments as appropriate and take it back to the Commission for their decision. When re- analyzing the methodology, the consultants did not limit themselves in relation to the straw poll. In looking at individual parcels and there specific characteristics, she believes this methodology provides a fair and reasonable allocation of the cost of this project in relation to relative special benefit to each assessed Cparcel. 1 Mr. Isaac addressed the discrepancy of assessments from one condominium complex to another, saying there should be discrepancies because are different unit densities from one complex to another. They cannot take all complexes as a whole, figure out their total land area and assess all parcels evenly. Mr. Isaac addressed the increase in the average assessment per condo parcel, saying the assessments now include finance costs and interest rates and capital interest is rolled into the financing which is used to pay the first year of debt service. With regard to the higher assessment of Golfview Club where Mr. Caldwell resides compared to the assessment of Gulf Stream Shores, a couple of Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 13 factors that drive up the cost is that Golfview Club requires meter upgrades and electrical undergrounding and Gulf Stream Shores does not. Mr. Isaac addressed Ms. Nolan's request that the Gulf Stream Shores per unit assessment should be $3,000, saying that safety assignments amount to $1,700 and safety and aesthetics together amount to $3,800 and, not Oincluding the cost of reliability, it is $800 higher than a $3,000 per unit assessment. He said Willdan is going by industry standards, their undergrounding experience, the number of projects completed and, specifically, the projects he has completed. Mr. Randolph asked Mr. Isaac if anything heard today would cause him to reconsider the methodology. Mr. Isaac said they gave another look at condo parcels, they made some adjustments and some are assessed less as a result. For example, he said instead of assigning one EBU per unit, they assigned one EBU per parcel and spread the cost over the number of units. In addition, they looked at density factors in relation to number of persons residing in a dwelling unit and because condo units are smaller it resulted in an assessment reduction. Mr. Randolph said they have heard some of these objections in the past and asked if they had given consideration to any of those in their review of the methodology. Mr. Isaac said they did, but because this is a non -ad valorem assessment, they could not take into consideration the value of the home in relation to the assessment amount. Commissioner Devitt said since the team has not been in everyone's backyards, he asked if further assessment increases will occur as the project progresses. Mr. Isaac said that contingencies have been included in the assessments. Commissioner Devitt asked how the weighting of factors within different benefit components is calculated. Mr. Isaac said everyone has an opinion as to which benefit is more important and believes it is fair and reasonable to apportion them evenly. Commissioner Devitt asked if the factors within the components are weighted evenly as well. Mr. Isaac said they are, which is where their methodology comes in as to how benefit units are assigned. Vice -Mayor Orthwein commented that undergrounding for the past 20 yea opportunity to get it done at this credit and lower contractor bids. C' hired the best consultants and she the Commission has been talking about rs and believes it is a great time, taking advantage of the 25% She said, as Commissioners, they have thanked them for their work. A previous speaker, Mr. Gammon, recommended using the total cost of a property owner's utility bill to calculate their assessment and Mr. Isaac responded saying they could not use usage of services because there are too many variables with vacant parcels and seasonal properties where land use can change over time. Commissioner Wheeler commented that the reason the Town hired experts is because they remain impartial and have no vested interest, and we are relying on the experts for their objectivity and should not second -guess them. Mr. Isaac mentioned that there will be opportunities for property owners to prepay their assessment and avoid financing costs, giving them an approximate 7% Town Commission Sitting as Board of Equalization Public Hearing - June 30, 2011 Page 14 discount. Ms. Schoettle said the deadline for prepayment is on or before November 1, 2011, as specified in the Resolution, and the purpose of the deadline is that prepayments must be made before the Town obtains financing. E. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -11 VOTE. Vice -Mayor Orthwein moved and Commissioner Anderson seconded to adopt oResolution No. 011 -11. Roll Call: Vice -Mayor Orthwein, AYE; Commissioner Devitt, AYE; Commissioner Anderson, AYE; Commissioner Wheeler, AYE; and, Mayor Koch, AYE. Motion passed unanimously, 5 - 0. V. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -12; A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING BORROWING BY THE MUNICIPALITY OF THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $5,497,742 TO FINANCE THE COST OF THE PROJECT OF UNDERGROUNDING THE ELECTRIC, CABLE TELEVISION AND TELEPHONE UTILITY FACILITIES SERVING THE MUNICIPALITY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO. 011 -9; PROVIDING THAT SUCH DEBT SHALL NOT BE A GENERAL OBLIGATION OF THE TOWN BUT SHALL BE PAYABLE ONLY FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED BY THE TOWN PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 011 -11 AND CERTAIN OTHER MONIES AS PROVIDED HEREIN; MAKING CERTAIN COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Clerk Taylor read Resolution No. 011 -12 in title, presented for adoption this 30th day of June, 2011. Commissioner Anderson commented that in one presentation, the bottom line was $5,518,144.00 and that number differs from the figure in the Resolution and asked why. A. Presentation by Consultant. Mark Raymond, Bond Counsel, introduced himself and responded to Commissioner Anderson's inquiry stating that the figure in the Resolution is the cost of the project and if you want to increase the amount of borrowing to the total amount of the assessment to $5,518,000 you can do so. He said he did not consider it material, it is $21,000 and said he is sure there is plenty of contingency built into the project cost and the financing will be sufficient. B. Questions and Comments from the Public. There were no questions or comments from the Public. C. Answers from Consultants. Mr. Raymond had nothing additional to report. D. RESOLUTION NO. 011 -12 VOTE. Vice -Mayor Orthwein moved and Commissioner Anderson seconded to adopt Resolution No. 011 -12. Roll Call: Vice -Mayor Orthwein, AYE; Commissioner Devitt, AYE; Commissioner Anderson, AYE; Commissioner Wheeler, AYE; and, Mayor Koch, AYE. Motion passed unanimously, 5 - 0. VI. Adjournment. Mayor Koch adjourned the meeting at 11:25 A.M. OO ` ✓Gail C. Abbale Administrative Assistant NOTICE OF APPEAL OF ADMINISTRAATIVE DECISION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Town Commission, sitting as the Board of Adjustment of the Town of Gulf Stream, will hold a Public Hearing on Friday, July 8, 2011 at 9:00 A.M., in the Commission Chambers of the Town Hall, 100 Sea Road, Gulf Stream, Florida, at which the following will be considered: An Appeal of the Administrative Decision by the Town Manager that in order to allow replacement of existing non - conforming windows on structures located at 1 and 3 Driftwood Landing in Gulf Stream, Florida, legally described as Lot 11, Driftwood Landing Subdivision, with sizes and styles that are prohibited, would require application for and approval of a variance. This Appeal is presented by Thomas N. Murphy, Jr. as Agent for W. L. Lyons Brown, Jr., owner of the property described herein. The Town Commission, sitting as the Board of Adjustment, shall make a final decision regarding the subject application at the hearing noticed above. The hearing may be adjourned from time to time and place to place as may be necessary to hear all parties and evidence. The complete application materials are on file in the Office of the Town Clerk located at 100 Sea Road, Gulf Stream, Florida 33483, and may be reviewed during regular business hours, which generally include non - holiday weekdays from 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. ALL PARTIES INTERESTED IN THESE MATTERS may appear before the Town Commission, sitting as the Board of Adjustment of the Town of Gulf Stream, at the time and place aforesaid and be heard. SHOULD ANY INTERESTED PARTY SEEK TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE TOWN COMMISSION, SITTING AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, 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, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 286.0105, F.S.S. 1 Dated: June 21, 2011 r � TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA Rita L. Taylor, VM Clerk