HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformal Agenda 12-22-2009I.,.. '��II�AlIO101�
_
counr-ry
F L
O
R
1 D A
AGENDA
REVISED 12/17/2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
1:30 P.M.
INFORMAL MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER - COMMISSIONER GRANDE, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
2. DISCUSSION ON DRAFT POLICY ON SURPLUS COMPUTER EQUIPMENT
3. DISCUSSION ON LAND USE CHANGES FROM NON-RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL
- COMMISSIONER COWARD
4. DISCUSSION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COUNTY'S ENERGY BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM
5. ADJOURNMENT
CONFERENCE ROOM #3
ROGER POITRAS ADMINISTRATION ANNEX
2300 VIRGINIA AVENUE, FORT PIERCE FLORIDA 34982
NOTICE: All Proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken by the Board at these meetings will need a record of the
proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during
a hearing will be swom in. Any party to the proceedings will be granted the opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Anyone with a disability
requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Manager at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48)
hours prior to the meeting.
Item #2
Procedure for the Donation of Surplus Computer Equipment to
St. Lucie County Nonprofit Agencies
After the BOCC approves the removal of the fixed assets from the capital asset inventory
and declares the computer equipment surplus, each Commissioner will select one or
more nonprofit agencies to receive surplus computers. Each Commissioner will receive
up to 25 computers to allocate to his/her agency or agencies, on an annual basis, if
available.
The approved nonprofit agencies will be notified that they have been selected to
receive a donation of County computer equipment.
2. The nonprofit agencies will have a minimum of 30 days from the date of the
notification to submit documentation of the following:
Meet the definition of a nonprofit agency per Florida Statute Section
273.01(3):
a. Private nonprofit agency means a nonprofit charitable organization, no
part of the net earnings of which inures or may lawfully inure to the benefit
of any private shareholder or individual, which has been held to be tax-
exempt under provisions of s. 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954;
and
b. Which has a principal mission of: (1) Public health and welfare, (2)
education, (3) environmental restoration and conservation, (4) civil and
human rights; or (5) the relief of human suffering and poverty.
3. The nonprofit must acknowledge in writinq that all computer equipment is
being donated "AS IS" with no specific warranty or guarantee to its
functionality and or use. No assignment of warranty, support services,
licensing, replacement parts, and or liability is implied in the transfer of said
computer equipment.
4. The computer equipment will be sorted and labeled by the County for each
awarded nonprofit agency to pick up. Once notified, each nonprofit agency will
be given 14 days to arrange pick-up of donated computer equipment.
Computer Specifications:
2 & 3 series Howards approximately 8 years old.
The OS version for all the PCs is XP.
Office versions are a mix of XP, 2000 and 2003.
CPU sizes range from P4 1.8s, P4 2.4s and some P4 3.2s.
The ram standard was 512 Megs, PC133.
Hard drives ranged from 20 gig to 80 gig.
Release of Nonprofit Agency for Grant/Donation of Computer Equipment
Nonprofit Agency Name:
Address:
City, State, and Zip:
Phone:
The nonprofit agency is solely responsible for the transportation of the computer equipment. The nonprofit
agency shall accept the computer equipment "AS IS" with no specific warranty or guarantee to
its functionality and or use. No assignment of warranty, support services, licensing,
replacement parts, and or liability is implied in the transfer of said computer equipment.
Released by County:
Received by Nonprofit:
Signature
Date Release to Nonprofit:
List of Computer equipment:
(Including number of devices)
Signature
Print Name
Print Name
Item #3
Growth Management Department
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
THROUGH: N/A
FROM: Mark Satterlee, AICP, Growth Management Dire
DATE: December 22, 2009
SUBJECT: Nonresidential to Residential Land Use Amendments
Background:
Growth Management staff has been requested to research our database to determine the
number of nonresidential to residential future land use amendments the county has authorized
in the past several years (1999-2009).
Research shows the county approved nine such amendments, six of which remain
undeveloped. The purpose of the research was to identify and then contact the property owner
to determine their interest in returning the land use to the previous nonresidential designation.
Because there is a large oversupply of residentially designated land and very little demand for
additional residential development, the property owner may be interested in returning to the
previous designation. As an incentive, the county could process the changes at no cost to the
property owners.
To accomplish these potential land use amendments prior to November 1, 2010, the
amendment process would have to begin very soon.
The attached table shows the undeveloped land use amendments, current zoning and the
status of any development approval or site plan.
Recommendation
Board discussion and direction on proceeding with extending the offer to process land use
amendments.
December 15, 2009
Page 2
Undeveloped Land Use Changes from Commercial to Residential
1999-2009
Former
Former
Name
FLU
FLU
Zoning
Zoning
Acres
Units
Owner
Indrio Crossings
RM
COM
RM-9*
CG
9.70
87
Anya Group Inc
Home Dynamics
Sedona
RM
COM
PUD
CG
35.32
318
Sedona LLC
FM Millcreek
Millcreek'
RM
COM
PUD*
CG
5.76
52
Holding LLC
AW River Landing
River Landing2
RS/RU
RS/RU
PUD*
CO, RS-2
11.17
56
LLC
Robert Rigel
RU
COM
HIRD
CG
8.59
43
Robert Rigel
Orchid Place
RM
COM
PUD*
RS-4
8.88
80
Orchid Place LLC
Total = 1 /9.41 1 b6b
'Millcreek numbers are for a portion of the total 63 acre PUD site for a total of 406 units.
2River Landing numbers are for a portion of the total 28 acre PUD site for a total of 99 units.
'Expired Site Plan
ITEM 4
12/21/2009
STAFF REDUCTIONS
■ Since 2007, the BOCC has reduced staff by 252
positions or 1/3 of the workforce.
■ 115 of the deleted positions were management and
professional level positions.
■ Per the former County Administrator's Board
presentations in July 2008, it was contemplated that the
County would not undertake any new initiatives given its
reduced staffing.
• However, the state of our local economy compelled the
Board to initiate new initiatives in 2009 to increase job
opportunity for SLC citizens and economic activity for
®SLC businesses.
12/21/2009
r
STAFF WORKLOAD
' 48 - New Initiatives and Major Projects from BOCC
2008 Strategic Planning Session
' 121 - Additional FY 08/09 New Initiatives & Major
Projects
• Does not include 15 TS Fay Public Works projects
• Does not include 45 new projects undertaken as part of the
Local Economic Stimulus Program
' 23 - Additional New Initiatives & Major Projects to date
' 192 - New Initiatives and Major Projects since 2008
• These initiatives and major projects are in addition to
providing core programs and services with reduced staffing.
., Future staff reductions are likely.
DEPARTMENT IMPACTS
► In general, ten of
the County's 18
Departments have
been primarily
impacted by the
increased
workload.
• Administration
• OMB
• Human Resources
• Grants
• Public Works
• Parks & Recreation
• Central Services
• Community Services
• ERD
• Growth Management
►a
12/21/2009
ENERGY BLOCK GRANT PROJECT
CONSIDERATIONS
■ Staff continues to support the implementation of
new initiatives by the BOCC and remains committed
to putting forth the best effort to accomplish them.
■ Based on the EECBG application, the proposed
staff involvement includes:
• 15% of the Cooperative Extension (CE) Director's time will
be paid by the grant to oversee the education programs on
energy conservation, technology and funding as required for
the project.
• Grant will also pay for a full-time person to be supervised by
the CE Director. This person will be responsible for
developing, coordinating and conducting the education
programs.
SOLAR MSBU
■ Staff expertise is available to implement a MSBU
with legal and technical assistance.
- County Attorney's December 9 memo to Barbara
Guettler, MSBU Coordinator, to draft resolution 09-1616
to create Solar MSBU
■ Assistant Tax Collector's December 11 letter to
County Administrator indicating collection rates of
96%-97% for MSBUs for 2006-2008.
■ Direction required regarding types of
improvements eligible to be funded, funding limits,
etc.
3
12/21/2009
STAFF EXPERTISE
■ The proposed financing component of the potential
Energy Block Grant program presents an unparalleled
constraint for staff involvement.
■ No staff expertise is available to develop and operate a
Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) or
similar financial institution.
• Highly specialized and regulated industry.
• Lack of staff expertise impacts ability to properly supervise a consultant
or employee.
• Lack of staff expertise impacts ability to monitor and determine
compliance with regulations and requirements.
Per December 17 email to County Attorney, Public Financial
Management (PFM) is in the process of implementing Energy
Efficiency Financing programs in California and has offered to
bmi.assist SLC.
FAC ENERGY FINANCING DISTRICT
(EFD) CONSIDERATIONS
■ The Need for Implementing Legislation
To address unique voluntary contractual assessment programs
■ The Nature of the "Assessment District"
Ch. 170 (special assessments) or Ch. 189 (special districts)
■ Loan to Value Ratio
Establish a legislative maximum or leave to local government;
Mortgage company concerns about priority of a large assessment
■ Redefining the Concept of Public Improvements
Expand to include public benefit of energy conservation and
greenhouse gas reduction to enable public finance mechanisms
■ Local Program Implementation
Establish parameters such as types of improvements allowed,
4
12/21/2009
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO: Barbara Guettler, MSBU Coordinator
FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney ,% -
C.A. NO.: 09-1616
DATE: December 9, 2009
SUBJECT: Solar MSBU
Please note that Commissioner Coward is interested in having the County adopt a
resolution that would preserve the option of the County to create a Solar MSBU and collect the
assessments on the ad valorem tax roll. Please draft a resolution to this effect and discuss the
issue with the Property Appraiser and Tax Collector. According to the state law, we will need
to adopt the resolution and obtain the consent of the Property Appraiser and Tax Collector
before March 1, 2010.
DSM/caf
Copy to: County Administrator
Public Works Director
County Engineer
Bob Davis, CPA, CGFO, CFC
St. Lucie County Tax Collector
P.O. Box 308 • Fort Pierce, Florida 34954-0308
Website: www.tcslc.com
Email: taxcollector@stlucieco.gov
FORT PIERCE
County Administration Bldg.
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982-5632
(772)462-1650
Fax (772) 462-2 101
Faye Outlaw, County Administrator
St Lucie County
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
Dear Ms Outlaw:
4 CoLLgt'
Tod
GCIE CO
December 11, 2009
PORT ST. LUCIE
1664 SE Walton Road
Suite 101
Port St. Lucie, FL 34952-7656
(772)337-5600
Fax (772) 337-5624
As per your request the collection rates for MSBU's is listed below for the past three years.
Tax Year MSBU # Average Collection %
2006 24 97.17%
2007 24 96.63% *
2008 22 96.05% *
*does not include one parcel that is uncollected which is in a tax deed application process.
If any further clarification is needed please let me know.
Sincerely,
Larry Clan j
Assistant Tax Collector
REAL ESTATE AND PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES • MOTOR VEHICLES, VESSELS & MOBILE HOMES • ALARM PERMITS
HUNTING, FISHING & TRAPPING LICENSES • LOCAL BUSINESS TAX RECEIPTS • TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX
Ja'net Pentz
From: Jay Glover [GLOVERJ@pfm.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 2:27 PM
To: Daniel McIntyre
Cc: David Moore; Marie Gouin; Ja'net Pentz; Jay Glover
Subject: RE: Energy Finance Districts
Attachments: SLC_Presentation_12-17-2009. pdf
Dan, attached is the information you requested. PFM is in the midst of implementing Energy Efficiency Financing
Programs with a few issuers in California. The attached presentation provides information on the program that PFM has
developed in CA as well as information on a potential similar program we are working on here in Florida. As you know
this is still in its very early stages in Florida.
I have some colleagues that lead the California effort coming to Florida on Monday, December 28. Do you think we
could get 1S-30 minutes (mid to late afternoon) with you and Faye to discuss how PFM might be able to assist the
County if there is desire to move forward with such a program. To the extent Commissioner Coward might be interested
we would be willing to meet with him as well.
Please feel free to share this information with anyone who might be interested.
Jay Glover
Senior Managing Consultant
Public Financial Management
300 South Orange Ave
Suite 1170
Orlando, FL 32801
(407) 648-2208
(407) 648-1323 fax
gloveri@pfm.com
From: Daniel McIntyre[mailto:mcintyred@stlucieco.org]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 4:02 PM
To: Jay Glover
Cc: David Moore; Marie Gouin; Ja'net Pentz
Subject: RE: Energy Finance Districts
Please forward the information. I have copied Faye with your email
From: Jay Glover [mailto:GLOVER]@pfm.com]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:11 AM
To: Daniel McIntyre
Cc: David Moore; Marie Gouin; Jay Glover
Subject: RE: Energy Finance Districts
Dan, as you will recall from our call with Commissioner Coward, I was planning to attend a company meeting/workshop
related to this topic. It was held last week and I am much more up to speed on the topic as a result. PFM has been very
involved in this type of program in California where activity seems to be moving very quickly. If this is something the
County is interested in pursuing I think PFM can be very helpful with the process. I am in the process of developing a
overview of what PFM can bring to the table as far as property assessed clean energy projects. Once complete
(hopefully today) I will send to you and Marie. Following this maybe we could set a meeting up with Faye to discuss. Let
me know your thoughts.
Jay Glover
Senior Managing Consultant
Public Financial Management
300 South Orange Ave
Suite 1170
Orlando, FL 32801
(407) 648-2208
(407) 648-1323 fax
gloveri@Pfm.com
From: Daniel McIntyre [mailto:mcintyred@stlucieco.org]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 9:01 AM
To: Jay Glover
Subject: FW: Energy Finance Districts
From: Faye W. Outlaw
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 8:55 AM
To: Chris Dzadovsky; Doug Coward; Paula Lewis; Charles Grande; Chris Craft
Cc: Lee Ann Lowery; William Hoeffner; Daniel McIntyre
Subject: FW: Energy Finance Districts
FYI
Faye W. Outlaw, MPA
County Administrator
St. Lucie County BOCC
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
772-462-1592
772-462-1648 Fax
outlawf@stlucieco.org
From: Diana Ferguson [mailto:dferguson@fl-counties.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 11:52 AM
To: Diana Ferguson
Cc: Adam Hollingsworth ; Adam Hollingsworth - Lynette; Alan Marshall; Alan Pierce; Albert Butcher; Allen Cherry; Allen
Cherry - Assistant; Angie Biddle; Ann Yarborough ; Arthur Lawson; Audrey Hendrick ; Ben Pingree ; Beth Ryder; Bill
Howell ; Bo Bludworth; Bob English; Bob Janes; Bob McLaughlin; Bob McLaughlin - Tonya; Bobbie Sewell ; Brad Carter;
Brad Purcell; Brad Purcell ; Bradley Arnold; Brandon Wagner ; Brenda Frazier ; Carolyn Baker ; Celeste Tornese; Cheryl
Lively; Chris Doolin; Chris Testerman; Chris Testerman - Stephanie; Cindy Brown ; Cindy Rodriguez ; Connie Cyr; Craig
Coffey; Dale Johnson; Dale Williams; Dan Wyrick; Dana Brown; David Graham ; Deb Armenti; Debbie Frederick; Debbie
Wight; disalz@yahoo.com; Don Butler; Dona DeMarsh; Donna Miller ; Donna -Marie Collins; Dori Roy; Doug Krueger;
Dough Vimmerstedt; Ed Hunzeker; Eddy Labrador; Edith Stewart; Edward Sealover ; Elithia Stanfield ; Eric Gassman ;
Faye W. Outlaw; Fred Moody; Fritz Behring; Garry Breeden ; Gretchen Harkins; Holly Schwartz ; Hunter Walker; Ivette
Arango; Jack R. Brown; Jaclyn Slaybaugh ; James D. Curry; James Dinneen; Jan Huffert ;
macleodj@hillsboroughcounty.org; Jean Rags ; Jennifer Langston; Jess McCarty ; Jess McCarty - Lourdes; Jesse
Caruthers ; jim.harrison@ocfl.net; Jo Thacker ; Joe Cone ; joeforte@seminolecountyfl.gov; Joe Mannion; Joe Mannion;
Joe Meek; Joe Rasco ; John H. Holley; miller@gadsdengov.net; jwilliams@gadsdencountyfl.gov; Jon Brown; Joseph A.
Baird Sr.; Joseph Parrish; Juan Del Cerro ; Judi Kennington-Korf ; June Fisher; Karen Windon ; Kathleen Zebraski; Kathy
Jordan ; Kelly Horton; Kelly Shoemaker ; Ken Little ; Ken Morris ; kscott@coj.net; Lea Ann Thomas ; Lee Niblock; Lee
Niblock - Assistant; LEG STAFF; Leigh Holt ; Leo Ochs; Lexton H. Albritton Jr.; Lily Rooks; lilyrooks@gmail.com; Linda
Weinberg ; Lisa K. B. Roberts ; Lisa Rinaman ; Lisa Spriggs; Lisa Williams; Lyle Seigler; hindede@co.walton.fl.us; Lyndon
Bonner; Lynn Lanier; Mark Jeffries; Mark Jeffries; Mark Lapp ; Marsha Hosack ; Matt Davis; mlundquist@sjcfl.us; Melissa
Sheets; Michael Moron; Michael Zito ; Mike Griffis ; nicholas.azzara@mymanatee.org; Olga Sanchez de Fuentes ; Paige
Carter -Smith; Paras J. Desai; Patrick Bell; Patti Webster ; Paul Voight; Penny Stanley; Pete Winton ; Peter S. Herbert;
Ramon Gavarrete; Reggie Cardozo; Rick Leary; Rick Mills ; Ricky Helms ; Ricky Lyons; Robert Hill ; Roger Baltz; Ron
Mcqueen; Ron McQueen -Lisa; Ron Zimmerly ; Ruth Attaway; Ruth Attaway - Kay; Sabrina O'Bryan; Sally Sherman; Sam
Johnson; Sandy Minkoff; Sarah M. Bleakley; Shannon B. Hewett; Sherry Howard; Shington Lamy ; Shirl Williams; Sonya
Daniel; Susan Dietrich ; Tim Sanders; Todd Bonlarron; Valerie Lovett; Vincent Long ; Vincent Long (Nan Swain); Wayne
Harris; Wendell Taylor; Will Collins; William Hoeffner; Winn Webb; Yvonne Parrish
Subject: Energy Finance Districts
County Lobbyists:
During the Energy Independence Workgroup at the FAC Legislative Conference last week, there was a discussion of
energy finance districts. In an nutshell, the concept involves local governments fronting money to homeowners for
renewable energy and/or energy efficiency projects, which would then be repaid on the property tax bill. This would be
a purely voluntary program — counties would have the option of creating such a district, and homeowners would then
have the option of whether to participate. There are some details that still need to be worked out. However, there was
a significant amount of interest in the issue, and I received comments from several Commissioners that they were
interested in pursuing specific statutory authorization for these districts.
Because of the level of interest, I wanted to make sure that everyone had received Paul D'Arellis' white paper on the
issue. Paul is with Berger Singerman in Ft. Lauderdale and gave a presentation to the Energy Independence Workgroup
last week. Please let me know if your county is interested in pursuing this issue. Both energy committees will be
discussing economic incentives for implementing energy policy during the committee weeks in January and February, so
facilitating committee presentations on the issue seems like a good first step. Because it is such a complicated issue, an
interim project might be the way to go. But there may be opportunities to pursue a bill this year — we will have to
continue developing a strategy as we move forward.
To that end, please let me know if you have dedicated a county or contract lobbyist to working on this issue. It would be
great to keep everyone on the same page. I will also be consulting with Sarah Bleakley and Davin Suggs as the issue
progresses.
Thanks!
Diana
Diana Ferguson
Legislative Staff Attorney
Florida Association of Counties
100 S. Monroe St., Tallahassee, FL 32301
P.O. Box 549, Tallahassee, FL 32302
Phone: (850) 922-4300 Cell: (850) 459-3453
dferguson(c_fl-counties.com www.fi-counties.com
All About Florida
Please Note: Florida has very broad public records laws. Most written communications to or from County officials regarding County business are public records
available to the public and media upon request. It is the policy of St. Lucie County that all County records shall be open for personal inspection, examination and /
or copying. Your e-mail communications will be subject to public disclosure unless an exemption applies to the communication. If you received this email in error,
please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete all materials from all computers.
Please Note: Florida has very broad public records laws. Most written communications to or from County officials regarding County business are public records
available to the public and media upon request. It is the policy of St. Lucie County that all County records shall be open for personal inspection, examination and /
or copying. Your e-mail communications will be subject to public disclosure unless an exemption applies to the communication. If you received this email in error,
please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete all materials from all computers.
Electronic mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Therefore, we cannot represent
that the information in this e-mail, and any attachments, is complete, accurate,
uncorrupted, timely or free of viruses or that such information will not be intercepted
by third parties. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may
be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and
proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you
are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise
disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you
have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank you in
advance for your cooperation.
Please Note: Florida has very broad public records laws. Most written communications to or from County officials regarding County business are public records
available to the public and media upon request. It is the policy of St. Lucie County that all County records shall be open for personal inspection, examination and /
or copying. Your e-mail communications will be subject to public disclosure unless an exemption applies to the communication. If you received this email in error,
please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete all materials from all computers.
Electronic mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Therefore, we cannot represent
that the information in this e-mail, and any attachments, is complete, accurate,
uncorrupted, timely or free of viruses or that such information will not be intercepted
by third parties. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may
be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and
proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you
are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise
disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you
have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank you in
advance for your cooperation.
4
tQ
�L
O
O
E i
o
V
o
4.+
CV
cl
it
�/♦
�' � U
V
OW
I I
Q-oo,M
I .00 N
M N M
a a M o0 N
hD M
00
C R N O^ 00
O C
N a
O L O
u O O v
C M
t6
C
Z
3
a
i
E
E
V
X
W
C
N (�
m
�W�
L
QJ U
tka W CC
= I I
W
CJ
N
y
O
m
L
O*43
m
L.
a)
M
•N
=
m
a,d
E
O
V
N
O
0
Vi
C
N
E
E
•++
C
O
M
t`
o
O
O
Q
E
O
N
OL
M
L
o
L
a)
ma
to
'v
r
i
c .
u
atw
O
I
I
I
I
a
1
E ;
PACE Bond Financing
What are PACE Bonds?
While Florida is yet to pass specific PACE legislation, many states have enacted legislation that allows cities and/or counties to
issue Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Bonds to finance energy efficiency and renewable energy products installed on
private property. Within Florida, legislation already exists that allows municipalities to finance improvements through the
issuance of assessment bonds although some legal hurdles will need to be addressed. Due to the unique benefits, PACE Bonds
(Loans) will replace existing financing and payment options for the majority of the energy efficient improvements for residential
and commercial properties.
Why do Property Owners in your City/County want PACE Loans?
PROBLEMS PACE LOAN SOLUTION
■ Energy efficient and renewable energy products have N A PACE Assessment (Loan) solves both problems
higher sticker prices N PACE Loans finance 100% of the cost, thus property
■ All available financing options (home equity loans, owners pay no up -front out of pocket costs
consumer loans) have provisions which accelerate d PACE Loans do not need to be paid off when the
repayment if a property owner moves property owner moves because the loan is secured and
■ Homeowners not sure how long they will stay in their repaid from a tax levied on the property
home M These unique features makes PACE Assessments
■ Consequently, when replacing/adding products less (Loans) more attractive than other financing solutions
than 1/3 choose to purchase energy efficient products and enables a property owner to lower their overall
due to higher upfront costs, even though energy energy costs by purchasing energy efficiency
efficient products deliver a lower total cost of improvements.
ownership
PACE Loan Terms and Eligibility
■ All products that reduce energy and which are
permanently affixed to the property are financeable
■ Loans are amortized and repaid over 10-20 years
■ Included as a separate line item on property tax bill
■ Low fixed taxable interest rates between 6-8%,
depending market conditions
All property owners who are current on their mortgage
and their property taxes are eligible
Loan amounts cannot exceed 10% the tax assessed
value of the property
Property owner receives significant tax credits (up to
$1,500 for energy efficiency products and up to 30% of
the total cost for renewable energy products)
Why would a city and/or county want to implement PFM's PACE loan program?
■ Property owners want to see this financing available M Creates jobs
■ Contractors want to see this financing available 0 Improves property values (studies have shown efficient
■ This program is 100% voluntary. Impacts only those properties sell for more money)
that wish to participate M Increases revenue to city (permitting fees, sales tax,
long-term property tax)
Why is PFM involved?
■ PFM has partnered with industry leaders to offer cities
and counties a turn -key PACE Program
What does PFM and its partners provide?
■ Experience. Our team has significant experience in all
facets of PACE, including implementing PACE
programs.
■ Our team designs/develops the program (we have a
template which is customized to fit your policy and
program objectives)
■ Our team creates the financing district
■ Our team underwrites the bonds
What does the Program cost?
■ The program fees are added to the loan balance and are
paid upon bond issuance
■ There are no costs to the city or county to implement
the Program
■ Our team markets the program to property owners and
the contractor community (website, community
outreach, workshops, PR, etc.) Our team provides 24/7
customer service
■ Our team reviews and processes all the loan
applications, including tax lien filings
■ Our team provides ongoing assessment administration
and ongoing program support
■ The program requires no general fund support of the
City or County
cn
N
E
0
L
E
L.
0
_N
i
L
5�
�L
L0
_N
mr
U
N
3
O
C
O
(II
�
a!
L
>
o-
L
v
o
N
(Ci
c
C
C
C:
N
N
cu
N
C
N
O
C
O
C
N
>
(B
Q
a)N
U)
X
C
—
U
>
00
3:
E
O
O
C
(a
Q
D
o
m
o
o
N
.,..
o
Q
a�i
o
U
>,
E
c
a)
0
O
.0
Q
Q
O
L
0
OC
C
?�
U
O
n
Q+'
44--.
O
p
_O
O
C
O
U
W
(p
W
(�
o.'
C
(�
L
L
V/
>
C
a)
^
W
O
O
C
O
O
O
U
U
C
O
cn
U
+ .
CD
�i�
co
E=
O
C
O
a)
E
a)O
U-
N
CLi
-0
>'
X
>.
p
U
CD
O
O)
C)
i3
C
O
o
a)m
N
Q.
N
N
C
r'epi
�-
C-
U
C
0-C
a)
0-
0
Q
4—
O
0
(O
co
C
O
m
E
X
O
Q
Q
zo
a
C
a�
cn
(Q
L
U
L
Q
_0
W
co
O
O
.0
U
cn
AL
W
C
O
N
Q!
Q 3: o
L -
L
Q C
Q.
C Y
W
(a [J
O -
N
a� N
Q C
W
Q
O
N
Ol
UN Y
ZI C
N
N
> -0 OJ
>
a'
1
L O 0
o N
m u o
au
E
V1 Y
to C
_0 a1
o
C
-0
ai 'Ad
O
U + H
W
U- m
a E 3
cu
a,
cu w o
> rn
ai
w
L a
O L ybn
N
aJ O
Q. N 3
w
aJ i �C
ro
� -M o
OL
Y fD N
N v =
4-
—_
v
U a, .
L
Y O
C: a0�
7 Y
f°
Q U
U a
c cu
L Q
-
�o
u a-
U m ro
3
N E
0CUc
Qua
L Y Q
-0
Y o
cu a �
Q v
E E �
cc) mo
E
o m
oGJ
U a) Y
N ++
Y N
m CL y
E
N a)
a �, >
c aJ X
o o
ni a)
Y (a N
Lncu
L Y
L
v E y C
Q u
CL
E Q
o a,
Y _O InQ
N
U
d-
'0
V/
0
■
N
c
0
M
r
0
0
L.
0
f� I,
W
V
■ NNW% I
0
L.
Q.
L
4 �
C:
0
ro
Q)
Q
_
O
-
L
4-
O_
cu
c(0/)O
L
'
h
Y
d
3
•2
=
a
O
`
U
c
Q
+�'
'°
t
N
a)
E
n
v
c
c�
3
0
>_C
� O
C Q'
O �
r O
� O
U O
C N
a)
U �
2 N
D
O
O
C C/)
O
-0 Q)
a) w
N
LL C
O
� a)
a) M
E -0
L a)
O� `- y1... M
Q a)
a) M
E
D h
65 a)
z' a
to
nM
-0o
U)
UN
j�
Em
O a)
�_
a)
Co
` L
0 O
� Y
oa
ate)
cn a)
n E
Q
U to
a) a)
U
N
C -0
O ru
C w
+' W C
R3
C U
O C
bD +, ro
J IL
v
c ,., ao 4—
�
0) 41
ca "� 41
ao E
N C N
o N
eN v
CU N
J (D . X vNi
d W Q
Y
j
cn
(n
CO
00
O
O
N
U
�
(1)
�
�
W
tiS
Q-
O
L
U.
-0
N
cn
W
Q
0)
L
O
a)
U)
a)
U
M
C
O
o)
a)
C:
O
C
O
O
a)
�'
0
U
-o
-O
L
c
O
O
-C
U
m
`}-
O
to
a)
cn
U)
C:
>'
Q)
a)
-0
C6
�
U
_U
a)
],
a)
O
E
>
c
Ca
m
O
W
U
Q
W
O
U
�
Cn
"a
U
C
m
a)
a)
U
O
�
_
cn
O
+_•
cn
•�
00
O
N
E
L
CD
a
CD
cn
tCi
G?
V
0
E
0
s�.
0
a-+
i
L
+
i >,
^` O
W
C�O�n
a)
U)
0> '-' a�
0
cII >+ N
N
•O
O Q O caa
4—L
U)
a)(T(
� O
U) I.O a"�
i
m
U)
(n
+r O
Co ��
U N U C
O
�
"�.
O
L
U M �
_� C N
�-.__ —
�
O
cn
CL
� 00
U�'-N
L.
W,,
�cu
f�
`ice
W
4-0)
O
N -O 0
L >'
+J
_0
2
0 �
-�
O
-6 C)
LO
Cti
ca
p CY)
Z cn-0
-0
ma.�
U)O
mm
C7
L
o f 6(1)
cu +-•
c
��
a) �
o
o
mom_
�o�C:
'E(n.—�C
-0�
04-
N
(�
C
CCU
LSCO
O
XO•
L
�'o�
oo�o
N
o0)o
--
cn
m
X�
_
U��N
_
UEca�Q
Um
I-ca
-L
-U)
I
I
I
I
O
cy)
F-
a)
m
LM
(1)
U.
0
-0
cm
cz
0
4—
ca
E
L-
0
W--
_rZ
cn
06
LaL
a.
11
Q.
cis
06
C)
CO
Cd
C)
U)
C6
06
ui
LU
(I--
E
U
X
co
a)
C
P,
tv
r-
rq
dj
M
Y
(U '0
in
go C
V. I E
c
IA
di.
.0 �—
B
kn
ps
E
J9
Lh
Ln
Ul
ip 0
0
di
fi
qd,
ri
cr
Ul
Ln
4-1
06
u
40
x
m
F-
OL
E
E _no
m m
CL E
5 E dl
E x
E
L2
83 E
44 ti 'R 00
0— o 7@
Cc, Ct?4
lo; i6 E
C'4 Q 0
di CU
ol 6 8 M,
IV J--
cu
U m m
maj di in M
2 A2
10 OR di
dl di
uruas .
w
2-
A A C3 Q. CL:k :3 W Id e-
P. P6 V),o
OL v In ol SO CL 4, cx
CL
M
0 dA OL O E "d 91 C3
to. di 2L,
0.0 x oal. -owl ow. ,-, 1 4m
22 a in
Rio
P 5 E
0 T T
12 vi C c Z A E'5
—Omd'az. . IV IV :3 = 0 It d tj IV.
U) U; U) ca 0 0 u� LE fn qj iV p. 4s
d,
5,4
a tn Ind ICU
cn e
wl r_
Ak 0
w
eg
o
LL
OL
w
LL
E
0
CL
W
V
0
0)
a� C
O o
O C
C: Ri
a) L
E N
W +-
O N
L � U
O C o
`+- a)cn
E a)
(� > f�
O cn
Q
E o
O o N
W
� U
Eco �, Q
0 " U X
a-- N C '- CU
a E
) >> O
c o -a Q
O a)
a) +�-� co o
O .�' 3
> O
N C C o
-0 O
m a--' En C
.0 (nn N
N N �
C
a 0 co cn
0 a)to C
C E w N
O U)
cn — N
U 0 X N
C cm � ca
N
0
C
0
m
nL,
W
C
0
0
0
2
w
co
O
U
Q.
O
L
Q-
L
C
O
a)
C
ca
U
O
C
U)
�
0)
O
is
r-
C
U
U
Co
o
O
C
O
C
>
L_
C
N
CD
�
C
o
C
'
E
cn
>
O
0
p
in
O
U
E
a)
�-
a)
>1
0)
a
a)
o
+-
a)
a)
C
a)
a)
.9
Q
E
Q
�>
U
cn
a)
>>
0)
+.
cn
ca
Q
p
m
Q)
C
a)
U
0
U
ca
>
a)
cO
ce
N
O
4--
>>
p
a-'
Q
>,
C
O
N
�_
a)
a)
a-
aa)
Q-
o
a)
U
0
cn
N
E
m
0
x
0
a)
L
0
m
O
c
O
E
Q_
o
Q
I
Q
I
Q
I
U
I
=
I
ti
I
W
U)
a)
c
C
0
a)
U)
C
0
U
>>
0)
a`)
C
a)
C
a)
a)
Q
E
0
cn
c
ca
a)
cn
C
O
cn
cn
E
a)
2
C�
cn
()
U
O
a)
Lx
W
Q)
U
C
a)
-a
C
a)
0-
a)
-o
rn
C
a)
0
C
a)
a)
>
O
cn
a)
a)
U
U
El
a
O
C
0
U
a)
U
O
a)
O
cn
cn
1
L
r-4
N
0
L.
Q
Q.
Q
L
CL
E
0
U
cn
a
FW
V
ca
U.
L�J
m
0)
O
QL
U
Z3
0-
0
O
N
C
70
O
>
O
>
>O
7
U)
E
O
O
C
O
4—
Q
U
U)
O
.U)
0)
O
O
v--
N
i
•
asi ---o
E-0 C
co c6 t-
U
L
U) U) 0[)LL
i
O m
T<<L
CO o >
o
C
(D C
F
%
O
Q
0
O c
L
Q-S�
W
U
`-
D
C
N
o N
co U
N
(0czz_
(B
d)
E
0
C
�.
� o
� c.
om
o N
CSC
U cn
p'
a)C
C�
x
p
o'-
m
}—U
mo
F
a)
.0
J m
r
U)
o W
('o�
LL
Q
N -
U
D
� p
yo
211n
C>
o
�
.o
ZT-- -a
Q
n CU
a) C o
LL
ca
C
� C
Ln N
ZJ
o
c
a�
Q
in
C
c
cn-
ca
Co }
C) :
yDgo
a)
0-
0
L
Q
`'a
E Q
o cU
a)
DL U
O
Q �
O
a) c
� a)
O O
a)
r- >11
U 0)
Ca L-
a)
CU C
>1 a)
c (u
a) a)
c U
m
E U
a)
Q O
U) I--
— Q
-r- L
U_ O
a)
a)
F- a)
> 0)
O a)
i2 C
E a)
a)
L
E
■
E
O
CO
�
C
-�
N
O
U
-0
❑
O
�
to
L
v
�
Q
❑
LO
E
I
L
Q)
O
L-
O
C: a
O QJ
C� O
Q
>
E _0
O v
U -0
-4.-J 4�
c LO
m D
U E
Q)
an �-
L, O
L
Q
ca
E v
QJ U
O _0
4-J O
ai in
ru
C Qj
O m
U
c
O
ra
v Q)
L N
ai a)
> 4J
m CII
L
a-
Ln
L Qi
v tn '-
Q)
c
U) -
L L O " Q
av
V v a)
a) -0 Nc
� eo 0
._...
60-Inf
60-uef
SO-Inf
^
_
80-uef
N Y
n w
o
L0-Inf
Y
L0-uef
go-Inf
70
90-uef
'E
w
e
So-Inf
Q
So-uef
Q
tbo-Inf
L
b0-uef
~ N
41 o 41
2
EO-Inf
Eo-uef
u� a`_
j >-
ZO-Inf
0 °
N co o
ZO-uef
TO-Inf
CL
To-uef
U `
=a
00-Inf
CD
�j M
00-Uef
66-Inf
66-uef
O
O Cl
O
O O O
O
CY
N
O 00
w
Zt N
s}uiod sise8
ui peajdS
n
s�
y 1
Ln
O 03
C �
N
0 U Q i
j 0
O C �
L L O i
U �
Q as CIS
(1) i
C r0 >
N p -p
En
pcn
O C p
Q L «- N
v— +' O v
_0N O EnO
L• �- N N p N
bn ` O i X
a--J � O (B
cu
E 1 N (ten a)E
E V L (n (n O 6- E
a--+ U O C
In (6 N � O N Q 'L
Qj co U �-. U � Q CO
' O (� C O O C En
LL CL
r C C O a)O (6 O .
N +' >' C
ca
(n J J Q Qa3 En a) 0 ' � O
cn a m co ca cB Q E —
U 'D p O� N C CY)' U OU w-- Q
D N c- i O a) B N(D >1 CO
O Q N > (LS
O) r (n L
0 0 u) 1 Q O -
LL LL Z
O D
V /aj
".
L. m av
® E
U
V I�.iO O
a--j
, `� QJ aai
)e . c—
O =_
G�
ttL11
LM
U)
a
O
U
0
U)
O
U)
N
L
ca C
a) L` ^
W
-� � O
O a)
CU
C m
O O E +,
N L- Q) cn
> o c
-- O
C O O
O a)
-'n' a) O
- Q
4L-• cn o
cm N .2 .0
C cn cn �
X cn
a) O "
a) c6 0- C
ca U _CD O
c� cn
_0 - a)
L cn Q
_O U L O
L
L_ > Q
• cn 4--
O 0 O
_ O
� Q)
cn
Ln ' X -0
CD D
a) cn_J (u a) (6
W N 0 O
cn 0
O cn
L cn
a)
O a U)
cn
Z U cn cu
L
o) a)
. d5 a)
a)
U cn
_ a)
a) L Q
Q E > U
U O O
C L Q.
C E m
a)
F-- Q cn
a) O
co
Q
C C � N
a)
([i
a) � L
a)
C
O O
-0 3t
O U a) cn
Ln U a)
0 O O
> a) L Q
W
-cn o U o
I- a)
0) cn C
X a) o
a) a
c_a >
U cn cn
O Q C C
U) E O o
y ^ `
C
O O (� >
L
� n�'
-0 O
W Q
U > _
c6
a)
-O O m
o 0-
_E >
o cn a)
E C S
cn }' +
cn -o
N C n >
cn a) m
cn
L
C
EQ-a)
a)
� a
a)
N m 0- Q
-� Q- O
O 4--
L cn O
CY) L cn
E: N -cn
0) O i O
C p (6 a)
m� ca
0 0 m
a)
> cn
CD a)
a)
O
a) L cu
C a) L
Q Q. o 0-
cn
D
E
O
L
cn a)
a) E
D
cn cn cn cn
a)
(13 cn
U cn
cu C >,
C 0)
a)
C
c W
ca C:
ca
0) 4—
a)-0
O N
a)
E E
O a)
O C
C
"t " L.
a)
O
a)
ca _0
a)
a
C*
CN
T--4
E
O
L.
a.
n.
N
N
s
Uwj
3
O
O
O
O
O
#
O
(D
r
ch
0
O
N
Q
Q
o
0
0
0
0
a
L ;
c)
r)
o
rn
�
CY)
co
W
R � �
�-Zw
0
O
'
N
1
�
4-+
4J
L
_0
N
O cn
O
co
O
O
co
=
lV)
000
O
A�
i�
N
Qn
�'
a
N
N
O
CV
O
++�
N
b
ccr
N
N
►
F
v
U
yr
L�
L
cc
pco
A
V /
0-
?
Ca
L
CD
?'
a�
a
m
d
=
�
O
O
=
O
tu
L-
O
y--
V1
O
U
r
�
aD
v
N
"�
U
U
U
U
U
Q
U
i
�
N
C:
C
vn
a
i
O
O
tw
�1
N
O
U
C
Q
/1♦
.}.1
f6
E
O
�++
i
■
=
bA
>
4-0
O
.�
O
.
Q.
E
E
E
O O
U U
VEGETATION REMOVAL PROCESS REVIEW
There are two primary tools that assist in preventing "clear -cutting" of native trees:
• Vegetation Removal Permit (VRP) and Fee
• Landscape and Mitigation Improvement Agreement
In 2008, the VRP fee was significantly increased and the landscape and mitigation
improvement agreement (including requirement for a bond) was developed and
implemented. As a result, developers must make a more significant financial
commitment to clear property than previously required.
1. An applicant applies to the Environmental Resources Department (ERD) for a VRP.
Some activities, such as removal of exotics, are exempt from a VRP but must still be
reviewed by ERD to confirm they are exempt.
The VRP exemption fee is $50 but is waived for homeowners and HOAs applying
for removal of exotics in conservation areas.
2. Since 2008, ERD has been including a COA for site plan approvals and extensions
that requires a landscape and mitigation improvement agreement and bond be
approved by the BOCC before a VRP will be issued.
3. The landscape and mitigation improvement agreement requires the developer
complete the improvements within 12 months of VRP issuance, with a possible 6
months extension.
• Improvements must be in healthy condition for 18 months after installation before
the bond will be released.
• Bond must cover 100% of the cost of the improvements including labor.
4. ERD reviews the VRP application for consistency with site plan, conditions of
approval (COA) and the Land Development Code, including required mitigation for
removal of native trees which cannot be avoided and the submission of the required
Improvement Agreement and bond.
5. With an approved agreement and bond, the VRP can be issued. Prior to April 2008,
the fee for a VRP was $50, regardless of the size of the property. The fee is now
$100 per unit for single family development or $100 per multi -family building. The
non-residential fee is $200 per building.
6. If a developer or individual does not comply with the VRP or removes trees without a
permit, Code Compliance works with ERD to resolve the violation. Violations are
subject to Code Enforcement Board fine plus tree mitigation at a ratio of 4:1.
Considerations:
• Consider making the improvement agreement applicable to commercial/industrial
development applications processed through the Building Division (less than 6000
square feet);
• Consider strengthening agreement language regarding preservation areas/trees;
• Consider increasing VRP fee for multi -family and non-residential development;
• Consider additional language regarding required site conditions during term of
agreement.
VEGETATION REMOVAL PROCESS REVIEW
There are two primary tools that assist in preventing "clear -cutting" of native trees:
• Vegetation Removal Permit (VRP) and Fee
• Landscape and Mitigation Improvement Agreement
In 2008, the VRP fee was significantly increased and the landscape and mitigation
improvement agreement (including requirement for a bond) was developed and
implemented. As a result, developers must make a more significant financial
commitment to clear property than previously required.
1. An applicant applies to the Environmental Resources Department (ERD) for a VRP.
Some activities, such as removal of exotics, are exempt from a VRP but must still be
reviewed by ERD to confirm they are exempt.
• The VRP exemption fee is $50 but is waived for homeowners and HOAs applying
for removal of exotics in conservation areas.
2. Since 2008, ERD has been including a COA for site plan approvals and extensions
that requires a landscape and mitigation improvement agreement and bond be
approved by the BOCC before a VRP will be issued.
3. The landscape and mitigation improvement agreement requires the developer
complete the improvements within 12 months of VRP issuance, with a possible 6
months extension.
• Improvements must be in healthy condition for 18 months after installation before
the bond will be released.
• Bond must cover 100% of the cost of the improvements including labor.
4. ERD reviews the VRP application for consistency with site plan, conditions of
approval (COA) and the Land Development Code, including required mitigation for
removal of native trees which cannot be avoided and the submission of the required
Improvement Agreement and bond.
5. With an approved agreement and bond, the VRP can be issued. Prior to April 2008,
the fee for a VRP was $50, regardless of the size of the property. The fee is now
$100 per unit for single family development or $100 per multi -family building. The
non-residential fee is $200 per building.
6. If a developer or individual does not comply with the VRP or removes trees without a
permit, Code Compliance works with ERD to resolve the violation. Violations are
subject to Code Enforcement Board fine plus tree mitigation at a ratio of 4:1.
Considerations:
• Consider making the improvement agreement applicable to commercial/industrial
development applications processed through the Building Division (less than 6000
square feet);
• Consider strengthening agreement language regarding preservation areas/trees;
• Consider increasing VRP fee for multi -family and non-residential development;
• Consider additional language regarding required site conditions during term of
agreement.