Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 06-01-2010
IniniIli fill HIM Will iiliiliiiiiliilliiliiiliililiilliijiiiliki iIII lliliil illiililliiiliiiililInini hill Will Win iliiflillttiAIR Ili lililiili#illll iiiiiiiliill June 1, 2010 6:00 P.M. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REVISED 05/28/2010 WFICOMF ALL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED. ALL MEETINGS PROVIDED WITH WIRELESS INTERNET ACCESS FOR PUBLIC CONVENIENCE. PLEASE TURN OFF ALL CELL PHONES AND PAGERS PRIOR TO ENTERING THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS. PLEASE MUTE THE VOLUME ON ALL LAPTOPS AND PDAS WHILE IN USE IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS. GENERAL RULES AND PROCEDURES - Attached is the agenda, which will determine the order of business conducted at today's Board meeting. CONSENT AGENDA — These items are considered routine and are enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests. REGULAR AGENDA — Proclamations, Presentations, Public Hearings, and Department requests are items, which the Commission will discuss individually, usually in the order listed on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS — These items may be heard on the first and third Tuesday at 6:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible, or on a second or fourth Tuesday, which begins at 9:00 A.M., then public hearings will be heard at 9:00 A.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. These time designations are intended to indicate that an item will not be addressed ri6g to the listed time. The Chairman will open each public hearing and asks anyone wishing to speak to come forward, one at a time. Comments will be limited to five minutes. As a general rule, when issues are scheduled before the Commission under department request or public hearing, the order of presentation is: (1) County staff presents the details of the Board item (2) Commissioners comment (3) if a public hearing, the Chairman will ask for public comment, (4) further discussion and action by the board. ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION — Please state your name and address, speaking clearly into the microphone. If you have backup material, please have eight copies for distribution. NON -AGENDA ITEMS — These items are presented by an individual Commissioner or staff as necessary at the conclusion of the printed agenda. PUBLIC COMMENT — Time is allotted at the beginning of each meeting for general public comment. Please limit comments to five minutes. DECORUM — Please be respectful of others' opinions. MEETINGS - All Board meetings are open to the public and are held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 6:00 P.M. and on the second and fourth Tuesdays at 9:00 A.M., unless otherwise advertised. Meetings are held in the County Commission Chambers in the Roger Poitras Administration Annex at 2300 Virginia Ave., Ft. Pierce, FL 34982. The Board schedules additional workshops throughout the year as necessary to accomplish their goals and commitments. Notice is provided of these workshops. Assistive Listening Device is available to anyone with a hearing disability. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Services Director at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. June 1, 2010 6:00 P.M. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS www.co.st-lucie.fl.us www.stlucieco.org Charles Grande, Chairman District No. 4 Doug Coward, Vice Chairman District No. 2 Chris Dzadovsky District No. 1 Paula A. Lewis District No. 3 Chris Craft District No. 5 I. INVOCATION II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. MINUTES Approve the minutes from the May 25, 2010 meeting. IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS Update on the Green Collar Task Force by Sean Mitchell Green Collar Task Force Joint Apprenticeship and Training Program Board V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT VI. CONSENT AGENDA A. WARRANTS Approve warrant list No. 35 B. COUNTY ATTORNEY Ordinance No. 10-025 — St. Lucie County Energy Improvement District; Permission to Advertise Consider staff recommendation to grant permission to advertise Ordinance No. 10-025 on June 15, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible. 2. Request to have the Board to approve a participation agreement between Florida Association of Clerks of Court (FACC) Services Group and St. Lucie County Drug Lab for the use of credit card transactions. Consider staff recommendation to approve the "MYFLORIDACOUNTY" participation agreement. B. COUNTY ATTORNEY CONTINUED Certificate of Participation for the Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program for FY2010/2011 from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in the amount of $206,153.00. Consider staff recommendation to approve the County's participation as the coordinating unit of government in the FDLE Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Furthermore, staff recommends that if the grant funds are awarded, then the County would receive and distribute funds equally to each law enforcement agency (F.P.P.D., P.S.L.P.D., and S.L.S.O.). 4. Removable License Agreement — Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. — Kim's Fina at Angle Road — Monitoring Wells Consider staff recommendation to approve the Revocable License Agreement, authorize the Chairman to sign the Revocable License Agreement and instruct Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. to record the Revocable License Agreement in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. 5. Treasure Coast FBO, LLC - Assignment of Donald M. Ayres Hangar Sublease to Keith J. Snyder Consider staff recommendation to approve consent to the proposed Assignment and Assumption from Donald M. Ayres to Keith J. Snyder, and authorize the Chairman to sign the document. 6. Volo Holding Fort Pierce, LLC - Assignment of Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. Hangar Sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc. Consider staff recommendation to approve consent to the proposed Assignment and Assumption from Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. Hangar Sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc., and authorize the Chairman to sign the document. St. Lucie County v. State of Florida, et. al.; Validation of North Lennard Road MSBU Special Assessment Improvement Bonds Based on the recommendations of the County's consulting engineer, staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed settlement with ExxonMobil. C. GRANTS/DISASTER RECOVERY Severe Repetitive Loss Program — Contracts Consider staff recommendation to approve of one Severe Repetitive Loss grant contract with the Florida Department of Emergency Management as outlined in the attached memorandum. END OF CONSENT AGENDA VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A-D. PUBLIC WORKS Sunland Gardens, Harmony Heights 1, Harmony Heights 2, and Sunrise Park Street Lighting Districts Consider staff recommendation to adopt Item No. VII-A Resolution No. 10-163, Item No. VII-B Resolution No. 10-164, Item No. VII-C Resolution No. 10-165, and Item No. VII-D Resolution No. 10-166 as outlined in the agenda memorandum. E. COUNTY ATTORNEY Resolution No. 10-113 — TVC Municipal Services Taxing Unit Consider staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 10-113 and authorize the Chairman to sign the Resolution. F. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Planning Division: Transmittal hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report -Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan Consider staff recommendation to approve transmittal of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report - Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs. G. UTILITIES Resolution No. 10-149, Rates, Fees and Charges Consider staff recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 10-149 authorizing the adjustment of water, wastewater, and reuse utility rates, fees and charges within the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District as outlined in the agenda memorandum and attached exhibits. H. COUNTY ATTORNEY Ordinance No. 10-021 — Pain Management Clinics This is the first of two public hearings. The second hearing will be on June 15, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard. END OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Vill. COUNTY ATTORNEY Interlocal Agreement — Treasure Coast Research Park Consider staff recommendation to approve the Interocal Agreement and authorize the Chairman to sign the Agreement. IX. COUNTY ATTORNEY Code Enforcement Case No. 65167- 7704 Salerno, Fort Pierce, FL - Unsightly and Unsanitary Matters Consider staff recommendation to authorize a 30 day notice be sent to the property owners ordering them to remove the unsightly and unsanitary matters on the property or St. Lucie County will have it abated, including, but not limited to, removing the dead trees, killing or removing the bees, and place a lien on the property. X. ANNOUNCEMENTS The Board of County Commissioners scheduled projected Strategic Planning Session continuation date is Monday, June 7th from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Havert L. Fenn Center. The Board of County Commissioners will hold a Joint meeting with the Treasure Coast Education & Research Development Authority on Thursday, June 10, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. at the University of Florida / IFAS Center located at 2199 S. Rock Road, Fort Pierce, FL 34945 3. The Board of County Commissioners will hold an Informal Monthly Meeting on Tuesday, June 22, 2010 at 1:30 p.m. in Conference Room #3. County offices will be closed on Monday, July 5, 2010 to observe Independence Day. 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 Director at (772) 462-1777 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA REGULAR MEETING Date: May 25, 2010 Convened: 9:00 a.m. Adjourned:10:00 a.m. Commissioners Present: Chairman, Charles Grande, Doug Coward, Paula A. Lewis, Chris Craft, Chris Dzadovsky Others Present: Faye Outlaw, County Administrator, Lee Ann Lowery, Asst. County Administrator, Heather Young, County Attorney, Mark Satterlee, Growth Management Director, Marie Gouin, OMB Director, Laurie Waldie, Utilities Director, Jim David, Mosquito Control Director, Beth Ryder, Community Services Director, Don West, Public Works Director, Mike Pawley, County Engineer, Millie Delgado -Feliciano, Deputy Clerk INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. MINUTES Approve the minutes from the May 18, 2010 meeting. It was moved by Com. Craft, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve the minutes of the meeting held May 18, 2010, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. Engaging Youth for Positive Change Presentation - London Reeves, Program Director Infinity Teen Center, and Boys & Girls Clubs of St. Lucie County. (No one was present to give this presentation) B. League of Women Voter to presented the recognition award to SLCTV C. Erica Byfield, President, Comet Creative presented the 2010 Tourism Photo Contest Winner Kenneth Smith. V. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT None VI. CONSENT AGENDA It was moved by Com. Lewis, seconded by Com. Dzadovsky, to approve the Consent Agenda to include The addition of VI-B-11, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously. A. WARRANTS Approve warrant list No. 34 The Board approved Warrant List No. 34. B. COUNTY ATTORNEY Resolution No. 10-146 — "Renewable & Alternative Energy Day at Indian River State College on Florida's Research Coast" The Board approved adopting Resolution No. 10-146 as drafted. 2. Green Collar Task Force Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee, Inc. — Facilities Use Agreement 05/21/10 FZABWARR FUND TITLE 001 001113 001164 001180 001188 001194 001503 001510 001511 001512 001515 101 101002 101003 101004 101006 102 102001 102809 105 107 107002 107003 107005 107006 107162 107205 107206 109 113 114 116 117 118 119 121 123 127 128 129 130102 136 138 140 140001 150 160 183 ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD WARRANT LIST #34- 15-MAY-2010 TO 21-MAY-2010 FUND SUMMARY General Fund CDBG Supp Disaster Recovery Subgran USDOJ Violence Against Women Grant US Dept Housing HUD Shelter Plus Gr Section 112/MPO/Fhwa/Planning 2007 U.S. Dept of Housing & Community DHS/CERTComm Emergency Response Tm CSBG FY 2009-2010 ARRA CSBG 2009 Neighborhood Stabilization Program FDCA EMPA FY10 Transportation Trust Fund Transportation Trust/80o Constitut Transportation Trust/Local Option Transportation Trust/County Fuel Tx Transportation Trust/Impact Fees Unincorporated Services Fund Drainage Maintenance MSTU Paradise Park Phase 2 SFWMD Library Special Grants Fund Fine & Forfeiture Fund Fine & Forfeiture Fund-E911 Surchar Fine & Forfeiture Fund-800 Mhz Oper F&F Fund -Legal Aid F&F Fund -Court Related Technology Edward Byrne Mem. JAG 2009 Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prev FDCF Criminal Justice, Mental Healt Drug Abuse Fund Harmony Heights 3 Fund Harmony Heights 4 Fund Sunland Gardens Fund Sunrise Park Fund Paradise Park Fund Holiday Pines Fund Blakely Subdivision Fund Queens Cove Lighting Dist#13 Fund Pine Hollow Street Lighting MSTU Kings Hwy Industrial Park Lighting Parks MSTU Fund FTA 5307-ARRA 2009 Capital Projects Monte Carlo Lighting MSTU#4 Fund Palm Lake Gardens MSTU Fund Airport Fund Port Fund Impact Fee Collections Plan Maintenance RAD Fund Ct Administrator-19th Judicial Cir EXPENSES 486,802.05 5,152.00 14,494.35 8, 588.83 894.94 4,761.10 6.99 457.45 2,413.81 115,543.77 15,654.06 550.00 12,735.88 6,353.96 7,421.33 80,275.58 4,494.85 3,582.54 4,131.78 1,792.85 289,287.03 15,090.06 51,335.88 8, 757.17 19, 756. 69 27,015.06 927.50 181.35 35.00 230.31 506.53 563.51 140.18 875.65 854.21 96.81 354.05 376.04 497.92 1,638,381.00 701.76 1,754.03 256.03 12,655.76 148.80 289.00 7.28 4, 912.43 PAGE PAYROLL 30,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 05/21/10 ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD PAGE FZABWARR WARRANT LIST #34- 15-MAY-2010 TO 21-MAY-2010 FUND SUMMARY FUND TITLE EXPENSES PAYROLL 183001 Ct Administrator-Arbitration/Mediat 100.80 0.00 183006 Guardian Ad Litem Fund 16,453.17 0.00 189101 Home Consortium FY 2008 12,000.00 0.00 189102 Home Consortium 2009 1,900.00 0.00 310001 Impact Fees -Library 1,825.01 0.00 316 County Capital 495.00 0.00 362 Sports Complex Improv Fund 6,196.00 0.00 396 Lennard Road 1 - Roadway Capital 2,685.56 0.00 401 Sanitary Landfill Fund 214,558.71 0.00 418 Golf Course Fund 42,034.91 0.00 451 S. Hutchinson Utilities Fund 809.95 0.00 461 Sports Complex Fund 23,578.66 0.00 471 No County Utility District-Operatin 66,380.42 0.00 491 Building Code Fund 900.54 0.00 505 Health Insurance Fund 38,765.94 1,633.70 611 Tourist Development Trust-Adv Fund 31.60 0.00 625 Law Library 1,625.01 0.00 630 Tax Deed Overbid Agency Fund 15,141.73 0.00 801 Bank Fund 10,594.44 0.00 GRAND TOTAL: 3,310,172.61 31,833.70 The Board approved the proposed Facilities Use Agreement with Green Collar Task Force Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee, Inc., and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreement. B. COUNTY ATTORNEY CONTINUED 3. Adopt Resolution No. 10-160 to award the 2010-2011 Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Treatment Fund Grant to the St. Lucie County Drug Screening Lab pursuant to Section 893.165F.S. The Board approved adopting Resolution No. 10-160 and awarded the 2010-2011 funds collected from the Drug Abuse trust fund to the St. Lucie County Drug Screening Lab. Once approved the FY10111 budget will be revised to reflect this annual allocation. 4. Interocal Agreement with the Property Appraiser— Solid Waste Service Assessment The Board approved the Interlocal Agreement and authorized the Chairman to sign the Agreement. 5. Resolution No. 10-082 — Establishing an Administrative Fee Policy for Street Lighting Improvement Service Districts The Board approved the adoption of proposed Resolution No. 10-082 as drafted. Ordinance No. 10-011 — Abandoned Real Property Registration System — Permission to Advertise The Board granted permission to advertise Ordinance No. 10-011 for a public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners on June 15, 2010 beginning at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard. Request to have the Board to amend and approve a Contractual Rate Agreement (Amendment No. 0004) with United for Families, Inc (UFF) for drug screening services. The Board approved the Amended Contractual Rate Agreement with United for Families, Inc., and authorized the Chairman to sign the Amended Contractual Rate Agreement. Madison Vines, L.L.C. — Approval to Joinder and Consent of Mortgagee/Lien Holder for Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Water and Wastewater Supply Agreement The Board approved the proposed Joinder and Consent of Mortgagee/Lien Holder for Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Water and Wastewater Supply Agreement for Madison Vines, L.L.C., and authorized the Chairman to sign the document. Missionary Flights and Services, Inc. - Landlord's Release and Consent for Mortgage to TD Bank, N.A. The Board approved the proposed Landlord's Release and Consent, and authorized the Chairman to sign the document. 10. Resolution No.10-158 - Supporting the Construction of the C-23/C-24 Reservoirs The Board adopted the attached Resolution No. 10-158 as drafted. B. COUNTY ATTORNEY CONTINUED C. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Purchasing Division: 2 L7 X Amendment to the Co-op Contract for the Purchase of Diesel, Gasoline, Heating & Emergency Generator Fuel The Board approved the first amendment to Contract No. C08-08-361 with Glover Oil Company, Inc. extending the term through July 21, 2011, and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County Attorney. 2. Amendment to Contract for Preventive Maintenance Services for County Fleet Vehicles The Board approved the second amendment to Contract No. C08-08-374 with Reliable Tire & Auto Care Center, extending the contract through August 21, 2011, and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County Attorney. 3. Amendment to Medical Examiner's Budget FY 2009/2010 The Board approved the Medical Examiner's budget reduction request in the amount of $6,493. St. Lucie County's share of the Medical Examiner's budget will change from $519,682 to $513,189 for FY 2009/2010. 4. Amendment to Contracts for Tree Trimming and Removal Services The Board approved the second amendment to Contract No. C08-08-347 with Tri- Brothers Tree & Landscaping, Inc. and Contract No. C08-08-345 with Paul Fasnacht Lawn & Tree Trimming, extending the contracts through August 11, 2011, and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County Attorney. Assignment of Contract for the Garbage Collection and Recycling Services for St. Lucie County Facilities The Board approved the assignment of Contract C08-05-231 from All Haul to Waste Pro USA, Inc., and authorized the Chairman to sign the documents as approved by the County Attorney. PUBLIC WORKS Administration: 1. Taylor Creek Dredging Phase 2 The Board approved Budget Resolution No. 10-152 and Budget Amendment No. 10-021 establishing the fund for the Florida Department of Transportation grant for the Taylor Creek Dredging Phase 2 project in the amount of $454,904 with a $454,904 local match as outlined in the agenda memorandum and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County Attorney. PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED Engineering Division: 2. Beau Rivage Drainage Improvements (South Shore Drive and Everglades Boulevard Culvert Replacements) The Board approved awarding the bid to Melvin Bush Construction, Inc. in the amount of $61,722.30 for construction of the Beau Rivage Drainage Improvements, CIP form CIP10- 035, Budget Amendment Number BA10-022, and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approve by the County Attorney. HOUSING & COMMUNITY SERVICES Library Division: 1. St. Lucie West Library Annual Payment The Board approved the annual payment of $150,197 for Contracted Services to IRSC for library services at St. Lucie West Library for FY2009/10. 2. SirsiDynix Annual Software Maintenance Contract Renewal The Board approved th e SirsiDynix software maintenance contract in the amount of $33,161.71 and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County attorney. K] Community Services Division: 3. Transit Shelter Funds The Board approved the acceptance of fee -in -lieu of payment in the amount of $15,000, approval of Budget Resolution 10-035, and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County Attorney. Housing Division: 4. Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Initiative (CDBG DRI) Closeout The Board approved closing out the CDBG DRI grant, and authorized the Chairman to sign documents as approved by the County Attorney. F. UTILITIES Fairwinds Wastewater Treatment Plant Lift Station and Force Main project The Board approved the Fairwinds Wastewater Treatment Plant Lift Station and Force Main project, capital project summary for CIP10-033, and granted permission to advertise an Invitation to Bid for the construction of this project. 2. St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District Annual Comprehensive Report for Fiscal Year 2008/2009 The Board adopted Resolution No. 10-154 ratifying and accepting the Fiscal Year 2008/2009 St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District Annual Comprehensive Report. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS There are no public hearings scheduled for May 25, 2010. Vill. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Tourism: TDC Capital Funding for National Navy UDT-SEAL Museum Board consideration of the TDC's recommendation to enter into a grant agreement with the National Navy UDT-SEAL Museum to provide TDC capital funds generated in the remaining FY10 and the entire FY2011 for an estimated amount of $193,528 or Board consideration to fully fund the UDT-SEAL expansion project in the amount of $400,000. The Tourism Coordinator addressed the Board on this item. She alluded to the meeting held on March 23, 2010 where the Board supported funding the Heathcote Botanical Gardens and the Backus Gallery expansion project. The Board also directed staff to review and consider bonding future TDC capital funds for the Seal Museum $400,000 expansion project and to present this option to the TDC for consideration. It was the determined by staff that bonding of the funds was not a feasible option due to prohibitive costs and interest. Therefore, two other options were recommended for the TDC's consideration. The 1 st option was the Seal Museum borrows the funds on a basis of an agreement that the TDC capital funds would reimburse the museum for the payments on the loan. The 2^d to provide the museum with the balance of the 2010 FY capital funds and the projected 2011 FY capital funds estimated at $193,528.00 The Seal Museum would then borrow the remaining funds on the basis of an agreement that the TDC capital funds would then reimburse them for the payment on the loan. After the TDC deliberated on the two options, they decided to fund the Seal Museum through 2011 in the amount of $193,528 they did not go with the exact options presented they had concerns about committing the TDC capital funds for an estimated 4 years. Staff is requesting the Board consider entering into an agreement with the Seal Museum to provide the TDC capital funds FY 2010 and in the entire FY 2011 in the amount of $193,528 or to fund them in full at $400,000. Com. Craft stated his direction was that he would have liked to fund the Seal Museum in full. This is still his position and he respects the decision of the TDC, however these funds were sitting there for years and felt this would have been a worthwhile project for the county. Com. Dzadovsky addressed the rating system presented at the first meeting. He had made the motion to go back to the TDC and find how to fund the balance or what mechanism they could use to do this. El Staff stated this was how the TDC opted to make their recommendation due to their concerns about committing the funds for 4 years. Com. Coward wanted to reiterate these are bed tax dollars and not tax payer dollars. He stated the Seal Museum was his first choice because they were ready to move forward. He does wish to fully fund this partnership. He believes it is a perfect partnership to borrow the money and have the loan paid back with TDC dollars; however he believes they should have a 10% reserve or contingency for something that may come up. Com. Craft stated he believed they could extend the loan longer than 4 or 5 years. He is looking for the Board to secure the full funding of this project even if it's over time. Com. Grande stated he believed the Seal Museum and the TDC can work out the specific loan details and he believes there is sufficient revenue in the Tourist Development bed tax to pay the loan over time without using the reserve funds they have upfront and this could be used for what could come up in the future. Mr. Craig Mundt, representing the Seal Museum, referenced the recommendation made by the Board on March 23,d. He provided the Board with statistics regarding attendance and also the contribution of $1 million dollars in artifacts by many contributors. They are presently in dialogue with a local bank and feel confident the outcome will be a positive one. Com. Dzadovsky asked if he believed once this project is concluded the museum would be self-sufficient with regards to administrative staff and or volunteers to run the museum. Mr. Mundt stated he believed this to be so. Com. Lewis stated she would like to secure the term of the loan extension beyond 2 or 3 years. She is in agreement with the present discussions. Com. Coward stated he did not believe the $193,000 is in hand and asked what was available. The Management and Budget Director stated 20,000 to 30,000 but by the end of this fiscal year they should have $75, 000 to $78,000. Com. Coward stated he would like to retain 10% of the existing dollars and give the remaining dollars to the Seal Museum, and then the museum will be required to secure the loan in the amount of $400,000 and rely on the county to pay it back on an unspecified amount of time. It is difficult to guarantee an unknown especially with the oil spill that just occurred and we are not sure the affect it may have on tourism. Com. Craft stated he did not wish the contribution to exceed what the payment would be in any one year. Com. Grande stated he felt they should not permit the funds to be used for anything other than the loan payment or principal reduction. Com. Lewis stated she did not like the concept of putting a cap, she would prefer it cover the loan payment. Com. Craft stated he would like to give broad direction to staff to work with the applicant. He believes the motion should simply be that they will fund it up to $400,000 and before anything is signed off on it come back to the Board and they will not deplete the bed tax for the year. Com. Coward recommended rather than making a motion that direction be given to staff to work with the applicant and come back with the proposal limited to $400,000 for the Board to review. The Board concurred, no action taken at this time. 5 BOARD UPDATES The Board members provided updates on the committees and/or boards they serve. The following Board appointee changes were made, Com. Dzadovsky will be the Board's appointee to the TDC within 60 days and Com. Grande will now be the Board's appointee to the Fire Board. There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman Clerk of the Circuit Court 05/28/10 FZABWARR FUND TITLE 001 001113 001164 001176 001180 001188 001194 001442 001443 001508 001509 001510 001511 001512 001513 001515 101 101001 101002 101003 101004 101006 102 102001 102809 107 107001 107002 107006 107205 129 130 130101 130102 130105 130107 130204 130207 130210 140 140361 150 160 183 183001 183004 185010 189100 ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD WARRANT LIST #35- 22-MAY-2010 TO 28-MAY-2010 FUND SUMMARY General Fund CDBG Supp Disaster Recovery Subgran USDOJ Violence Against Women Grant FTA Section 5303 F/Y06 US Dept Housing HUD Shelter Plus Gr Section 112/MPO/Fhwa/Planning 2007 U.S. Dept of Housing & Community FCTD Planning Grant Agreement FDCA RCMP Grant FTA Buses US Dept of Housing CDBG 09 CSBG FY 2009-2010 ARRA CSBG 2009 Neighborhood Stabilization Program EITC CSBG T&TA Program FDCA EMPA FY10 Transportation Trust Fund Transportation Trust Interlocals Transportation Trust/80o Constitut Transportation Trust/Local Option Transportation Trust/County Fuel Tx Transportation Trust/Impact Fees Unincorporated Services Fund Drainage Maintenance MSTU Paradise Park Phase 2 SFWMD Fine & Forfeiture Fund Fine & Forfeiture Fund -Wireless Sur Fine & Forfeiture Fund-E911 Surchar F&F Fund -Court Related Technology Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prev Parks MSTU Fund SLC Public Transit MSTU FTA Operating and Capital Assist FTA 5307-ARRA 2009 Capital Projects FTA 5307-2 2009 Cap & Oper FTA 5311 Block Grant FDOT - Intermodal Facility Grant FDOT Fized Route Grant FDOT 5311 Block Grant Airport Fund FDOT - Port of Ft. Pierce Dredging Impact Fee Collections Plan Maintenance RAD Fund Ct Administrator-19th Judicial Cir Ct Administrator-Arbitration/Mediat Ct Admin.- Teen Court FHFA SHIP 2008/2009 Home Consortium EXPENSES 1, 358, 699. 79 97,799.92 3.43 40.34 0.00 7,053.84 1,380.00 115.59 100.00 183.00 22.81 1,889.75 160.45 99,457.00 14.30 1,490.37 3,192.04 80.34 49,652.35 7,395.80 11,503.57 73,086.91 11,810.93 40,564.62 3, 084.00 17,134.78 87.60 4,120.64 1,129.60 1, 567.45 1,500.00 47,239.08 5,899.00 9,462.24 125,177.00 10,409.68 2,700.00 21,566.37 51,246.58 4,559.60 19,100.00 109.69 5, 632.46 3, 864.34 300.00 391.80 0.00 115.06 PAGE PAYROLL 520,568.68 3,266.82 51.27 543.02 270.18 9,239.39 0.00 1,575.05 0.00 0.00 318.02 2,238.32 3, 319.04 3,773.84 0.00 0.00 33,593.69 1,237.60 44,171.35 22,661.37 17,244.75 0.00 68,142.83 9,869.20 0.00 103,800.98 1,122.83 35,971.20 8, 736.95 2,076.00 0.00 2,067.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11,486.56 0.00 1,523.20 3,110.46 3,009.49 0.00 5,404.72 4,112.04 1,538.84 05/28/10 FZABWARR FUND TITLE 189201 310001 318 396 397 398 401 418 451 458 461 471 478 479 491 505 505001 606 611 625 655 665 801 ST. LUCIE COUNTY - BOARD WARRANT LIST #35- 22-MAY-2010 TO 28-MAY-2010 FUND SUMMARY FHFC Hurricane Housing Recovery Pla Impact Fees -Library County Capital -Transportation Bond Lennard Road 1 - Roadway Capital Lennard Road 2 - Water Capital Lennard Road 3 - Sewer Capital Sanitary Landfill Fund Golf Course Fund S. Hutchinson Utilities Fund SH Util-Renewal & Replacement Fund Sports Complex Fund No County Utility District-Operatin No Cty Util Dist -Renewal & Replace No Cty Util Dist -Capital Facilities Building Code Fund Health Insurance Fund Property/Casualty Insurance Fund Shared Pool Cash -Property Appraiser Tourist Development Trust-Adv Fund Law Library Insurance Agency Fund SLC Art in Public Places Trust Fund Bank Fund GRAND TOTAL EXPENSES 13.90 5,718.98 95,661.62 546.67 4,332.27 546.66 27,884.52 6,469.28 389.92 48.52 14,122.85 19,127.80 19,558.24 110.18 1,476.07 622,363.33 1, 015, 021 . 78 200,000.00 8, 393.42 30.00 109,350.00 7.13 220,729.36 4, 473, 996. 62 PAGE 2 PAYROLL 193.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53,025.59 19,715.70 3,540.26 656.23 19,630.86 7, 718.56 1,316.92 1,481.03 16,816.42 2,820.10 4,330.74 0.00 1, 901.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1, 059, 192 . 18 AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. VI-B-1 DATE: June 1, 2010 REGULAR[] PUBLIC HEARING [ ] CONSENT [ x ] TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Daniel S. McIntyre County Attorney SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 10-025 - St. Lucie County Sustainability District; Permission to Advertise BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum CA 10-0644. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board grant permission to advertise Ordinance No.10-025 for a public hearing on June 15, 2010 at 6:00 pm or as soon thereafter as possible. COMMISSION ACTION: �(J APPROVED [ J DENIED [ ] OTHER: / Review and Approvals r �1 [X] County Attorney:_I Daniel S. McIntyre CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, M PA County Administrator INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney C.A. NO.: 10-0644 DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 10-025 - St. Lucie County Sustainability District; Permission to Advertise BACKGROUND: Attached to this memorandum is a copy of draft Ordinance No. 10-025 which, if adopted, would create the St. Lucie County Sustainability District. As proposed, the district would provide financing to a property owner who voluntarily participates in the sustainability program through non -ad valorem assessments levied on the program. The program would assist property owners who desire to install energy efficient improvements. The District would include the municipalities unless the municipalities decide to exempt themselves by ordinance. The proposed criteria for eligibility is set out in Section 1-19.10. In addition, each proposed property owner must obtain an energy savings audit that includes the estimated cost savings resulting from the implementation of the energy savings program. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Board grant permission to advertise Ordinance No.10- 025 for a public hearing on June 15, 2010 at 6:00 pm or as soon thereafter as possible. Resp ctfully submitt DSM/cb Daniel S. Mcln Attachment County Attorn ORDINANCE NO. 10-025 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CREATING CHAPTER 1-19 "SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY IMPROVEMENT," AND ENACTING ARTICLE I ENTITLED "ST. LUCIE COUNTY SUSTAINABILITY DISTRICT" OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF THE SPECIAL DISTRICT, ITS PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY; IMPROVEMENTS; USES OF NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; DEFINITIONS; ELIGIBLE PROPERTY OWNERS; ENERGY AUDITS AND AGREEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County") is a non -charter county and political subdivision of he State of Florida ("State"), duly organized and operating under the Constitution and the laws of the State; WHEREAS, pursuant to Article VII, Section 10 of the Florida Constitution, Chapter 125, F.S., and Chapter 189, F.S., the County is authorized to form an Energy Improvement District for the purpose of encouraging, accommodating, and financing energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements (both as defined in this Ordinance) on residential and commercial properties in the County; and WHEREAS, the County desires to form the St. Lucie County Sustainability District (the "District") pursuant to the Florida Constitution for the purpose of accomplishing the energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements, including paying the costs necessary and incidental thereto through non -ad valorem assessments; and WHEREAS, the State of Florida has declared it the public policy of the State to develop energy management programs aimed at promoting energy conservation; and WHEREAS, home and business energy consumption accounts for approximately 70% of the overall usage of electric energy; and WHEREAS, the State of Florida has adopted a schedule for increasing the energy performance of buildings subject to the Florida Energy Efficiency Code for Building Construction Chapter 553, F.S.; and Underlined passages are added. -1- S*Fwele *krewgk passages are added. WHEREAS, there is a vast quantity of existing structures with many years of remaining life before replacement, and these structures are not as energy efficient as today's standards, nor do many existing buildings have renewable energy systems installed to provide some or all of their electric energy needs; and WHEREAS, a major contributor to statewide and County greenhouse gas emissions is the inefficient use of energy by existing occupied building stock; and WHEREAS, installing energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements on existing structures can provide significant progress towards greenhouse gas reductions and increased energy conservation in the County and statewide; and WHEREAS, installing energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements on existing structures can provide significant progress towards greenhouse gas reductions and increased energy conservation in the County and statewide; and WHEREAS, reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will improve air quality, lower fossil fuels use, create energy independence and security, promote the creation of jobs and economic development by stimulating "green industries" and save its citizens money by reducing energy consumption; and WHEREAS, existing homeowners, and business property owners, may be highly leveraged on their properties and the current housing market may prevent property owners from financing these types of projects with traditional equity financing options; and WHEREAS, the expected life of energy efficiency and renewable energy projects may require a longer term payback period than offered by traditional equity financing may afford necessitating an alternative financing option to install the improvements; and WHEREAS, the formation of a Sustainabi Iity District, and the voluntary participation in the program by property owners, will provide an alternative financing option to install the improvements; and WHEREAS, the District will provide financing to a property owner who participates in the program through non -ad valorem assessments levied on the property, pursuant to Chapter 197, F.S., where the improvements occur to minimize risk of failure for non-payment of the District's funds; and Underlined passages are added. -2- 6iruekien9k passages are added. WHEREAS, the District will have options to raise capital to fund the program through federal or state grant funds, private loans from a financial institution, state or federal loan or bond guarantee programs or other private or not -for -profit sources of funds; and WHEREAS, local governments within Florida and nationally have either formed, or are contemplating the formation of, special districts to provide alternative financing options allowing a property owner to finance energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements through non -ad valorem assessments repaid through their property taxes; and WHEREAS, the County finds that local needs and conditions warrant the formation of the District as an economical means to implement its energy efficiency and renewable energy goals and the Board of County Commissioners desire to enact an ordinance creating a new Chapter 1-19 entitled "Sustainability and Energy Improvement," Code of Ordinances of St. Lucie County, relating to a Sustainability District. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, as follows, that: Section 1. That the Code of Laws of St. Lucie County, Florida, is hereby amended by adding a new Chapter 1-19 entitled "Sustainability and Energy Improvement", including Article I thereof "St. Lucie County Energy Improvement District" to read as follows: Section 1-19.1 Declaration of District. Pursuant to and in accordance with the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutes. 5125.01, the County hereby forms the "St. Lucie County Sustainability District" (the District") as a "dependent special district" within the meaning of Chapter 189. Florida Statutes. Section 1-19.2 Description of District. The Districts will consist of, and shall include property within the geographical boundaries of the County; as set forth in Section 7.59, Florida Statutes. and, if any such property is located within any municipality in the County, such property shall be so included in the District unless such municipality shall have enacted an ordinance setting forth the exclusion of property within its boundaries from the District. Section 1-19.3 District Board. The membership of the District's Board shall be identical to the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Section 1-19.4 Purpose of the District. The purpose of the St. Lucie County Sustainability District (the "District") is to accomplish energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements. as well as broader sustainability issues, such as water conservation on Underlined passages are added. -3- S*rnek*kreugh passages are added. residential and commercial properties by financing such improvements to be repaid through non -ad valorem assessments on the property owner's property taxes. Section 1-19-5. Authority of the District. The District shall have, and the Board may exercise by majority vote. the following powers: A. To sue and be sued in the name of the District, to adopt and use a seal and authorize the use of a facsimile thereof, and to make and execute contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient to the exercise of its powers. B. To contract for the services of consultants to perform planning. engineering. legal, or other professional services. C. To borrow money and accept gifts, to apply for and use grants or loans of money or other property from the United States, the state, a unit of local government. or any person for any District purpose and enter into agreements required in connection therewith. and to hold use sell and dispose of such moneys or property for any District purpose in accordance with the terms of the gift. grant, loan, or agreement relating thereto. D. To adopt resolutions and procedures prescribing the powers, duties, and functions of the officers of the District; the conduct of the business of the District; the maintenance of records' and the form of other documents and records of the District. The Board may also adopt ordinances and resolutions that are necessary to conduct District business if such ordinances do not conflict with any ordinances of a local general purpose government within whose jurisdiction the District is located. Any resolution or ordinance adopted by the Board and approved by referendum vote of District electors may only be repealed by referendum vote of District electors. f. To acquire by purchase lease gift dedication. devise. or otherwise, real and personal property or any estate therein for any purpose authorized by this act and to trade, sell or otherwise dispose of surplus real or personal property. The Board may purchase equipment by an installment sales contract if funds are available to pay the current year's installments on the equipment and to pay the amounts due that year on all other installments and indebtedness. G. To hold control and acquire by donation or purchase any public easement. dedication to public use platted reservation for public purposes. or reservation for those purposes authorized by this act and to use such easement. dedication. or reservation for any purpose authorized by this act consistent with applicable adopted local government comprehensive plans and land development regulations. Underlined passages are added. -4- 5t-welt through passages are added. H. To lease as lessor or lessee to or from any person. firm, corporation, association, or body, public or private, any facility or property of any nature for the use of the District when necessary to carry out the District's duties and authority under this act, I. To borrow money and issue bonds, revenue anticipation notes, or certificates payable from and secured by a pledge of funds, revenues, assessments, warrants, notes, or other evidence of indebtedness, and mortgage real and personal property when necessary to carry out the District's duties and authority under this act. J. To charge user fees and assessments authorized by resolution of the Board, in amounts necessary to conduct District activities and services, and to enforce their receipt and collection in the manner prescribed by resolution and authorized by law. K. To cooperate or contract with other persons or entities, including other governmental agencies, as necessary, convenient, incidental, or proper in connection with providing effective mutual aid and furthering any power, duty, or purpose authorized by this act. L. To assess and impose upon real property in the District non -ad valorem assessments as authorized by this act. M. To impose and foreclose non -ad valorem assessment liens as provided by this act or to impose, collect, and enforce non -ad valorem assessments pursuant to Chapter 197. N. To select as a depository for its funds any qualified public depository as defined in S. 280.02 which meets all the requirements of Chapter 280 and has been designated by the Chief Financial Officer as a qualified public depository, upon such terms and conditions as to the payment of interest upon the funds deposited as the Board deems just and reasonable. O. To provide financing to owners of residential and commercial property within the Sustainability District authorized for the purposes of this Chapter. Section 1-19.6 Description of Improvements. The improvements to be financed by the County for properties within the District shall consist of. and shall be limited to, any improvements constituting "energy efficiency "renewable energy improvements". or broader sustainability improvements such as water conservation, as defined herein. The improvements to be constructed on each property shall be set forth in a written agreement executed between the property owner and the District. Underlined passages are added. -5- 64wek-tkreugh passages are added. Section 1-19.7 Financing. The cost of the improvements undertaken by the property owner and financed by the District shall be assessed on the related property in the amount or amounts set forth in the written agreement for such property and shall be financed by federal or state grant funds, private loans from a financial institution, state or federal loan or bond guarantee programs or other private or not -for -profit sources of funds which shall be payable through non -ad valorem assessments by the property owner. Section 1-19.8 Non -ad valorem assessments. Pursuant to Chapter 197, F.S., non ad -valorem assessments levied pursuant to this Ordinance shall remain liens, coequal with the lien of all state, county, district, and municipal taxes, superior in dignity to all other liens, titles, and claims, until paid. Section 1-19.9 Definitions. A. Energy efficiency improvement. A material improvement made to an existing residential or commercial property that reduces energy consumption, including but not limited to: i. Caulking, weatherstripping (cost of weatherstripping shall not exceed fifteen hundred dollars) and air duct sealing; ii. Insulation in walls, roofs. floors, foundations and in heating and cooling distribution systems radiant barriers; iii. Heating and cooling system upgrades, combined heat and power systems automatic energy control systems, heating, ventilating or air conditioning and distribution system modifications or replacements in homes, builodings or central plants including microturbines and fuel cells; iv. Storm or weathertight windows and doors, multiglazed windows and doors heat -absorbing or heat -reflective glazed and coated windows and door systems, additional glazing reductions in glass area, and other window and door system modificaitons that reduce energy consumption; V. Replacement or modification of lighting fixtures to increase the energy efficiency of the system without increasing the overall illumination of a residential or commercial building unless such increase in illumination is necessary to conform to the applicable building code for the proposed lighting system; vi. High efficiency water or pool heating systems; Underlined passages are added. -6- 6#rueli 4hren9k passages are added. vii. Permanent rainwater harvesting systems reducing energy demands such as cisterns or rain barrels for capture, storage and reuse of water. viii. Reflective roof or other cool roof systems that increase solar reflectance and thermal emittance. ix. Commercial refrigeration system upgrades and systems for heat recovery from compressors and condensers. X. An energy efficiency improvement does not include a household appliance such as a washing machine or refrigerator that is not permanently fixed to real property. B. Renewable energy improvement. Any fixture, product, system, device or interacting, group of devices installed behind the meter on any residential or commercial building that produces energy from renewable resources including but not limited to photovoltaic systems, small wind systems, biomass systems, or biogas or methane recovery systems, as may be authorized. C. Broader sustainability improvements. Includes improvements such as water conservation thru improved sustainability. Section 1-19.10 Eligible property owners. An eligible property owner (or property) must meet the following criteria: the program. A. Be the legal owner and provide proof of ownership in the application for B. Property must be located within St. Lucie County. C. Property owner must be current on property taxes, and show no delinquency in the last five years on the property subject of the application for improvements. D. Property owner must be current on any mortgage. E. Property owner cannot be in bankruptcy nor can the property be an asset in any bankruptcy proceeding. E. Property cannot be in foreclosure. Underlined passages are added. -7- 64oruelt *hrough passages are added. G. Property cannot have any federal income tax lien, judgment lien or similar involuntary lien encumbering the property. H. Improvements must be reasonable for the scope of the property project and to the property value as approved by the District. Section 1-19 11 Energy Savings Audit. An energy savings audit shall be conducted by a qualified energy auditor or a certified building energy rater. The District shall provide a list of, and set forth the minimum standards for, qualified or certified auditors and raters. At a minimum, the energy savings audit shall include the following information: A. Recommendations for energy savings measures; B. Estimated energy savings and a priority ranking for each measure; C. Estimated renewable energy to be produced; D. Estimated greenhouse gas reduction; and E. Estimated cost savings resulting from the implementation of the recommendations and use of funds made available by the District. The Board mU establish an alternative process to meet this requirement, but that process must be based upon professionally accepted methodologies for documenting the information required herein. Section 1-19.12 Application. An eligible property owner must submit a complete application to the District for its approval. A complete application shall include the following information: A. Proof of ownership and location of the property. Organizational documents if the property owner is not on the title as an individual. B. Documentation showing the structure or building, subject of the application is an existing structure or building on the date of application. C. A cost estimate for the installation of the energy savings measures completed by a Florida licensed contractor (including the name and license number of the contractor) This estimate shall include all construction costs, equipment, permitting fees. Underlined passages are added. -8- passages are added. recording fees for the assessment of liens, energy audit costs, and contingency fees. Estimated costs shall be reasonable for the scope of the proposed project and in relation to the property value. D. Written documentation indicating that the property owner is current in the mortgage, if one exists on the property, and that there are no federal or state tax liens, judgments liens or similar involuntary liens against the property subject of the application. E. Disclosure regarding non -ad valorem assessments. F. State of Florida Fair Lending Notice as_reauired. Section 1-19.13 Written agreement. Upon submittal of a complete application to enter into the program as approved by the District at a public hearing, the property owner shall enter into a voluntary written agreement with the District that shall constitute the property owner's consent to be subject to a non -ad valorem assessment as set forth in Section 1-19.7 of this Ordinance. The written agreement shall provide for the following: A. The maximum limit of the financing for the program shall be $50,000 per property unless: A higher financing amount is consented to by the mortgage holder on the property, if one exists, and ii. The energy audit, or information on energy savings measures provided in the application, shows a demonstrated high level of energy savings or renewable energy produced over the duration of the financing. been given. B. Express voluntary consent to accept the non -ad valorem assessment has C. The length of time permitted for the property owner to repay the non - ad valorem assessment shall not exceed 20 years including the term, interest rate and administrative fees. p. The property owner shall be responsible for assuring the improvements are completed as reflected in the approved application documents. The property owner also consents to providing access to property to the County to verify that the improvements have been completed as proposed in the application. Underlined passages are added. -9- ugh passages are added. E. At the time f a transfer of property ownership excepting foreclosure, the past due balances of any non -ad valorem assessment under this Subsection shall be due for payment but future payments shall continue as a lien on the properyt. F. The risks associated with participating in the program shall be disclosed in the written agreement including risks related to the failure of the participating property owners to make payments and the risk of issuance of a tax certificate and loss of the property_ pursuant to Chapter 197. F.S. E. The cost of an energy savings audit or the cost to complete an estimate of information on energy savings measures estimated energy savings for each measure, estimated greenhouse gas reductions and estimated cost savings from the projects will be subject to reimbursement upon execution of the written agreement to accept the non -ad valorem assessment. H. The property owner shall agree to apply any rebates provided by an entity other than the District received for the projects approved by the District, towards the repayment of the non -ad valorem assessment. I. If properU taxes are paid through an escrow account, the property owner is responsible for notifying the lender of any adjustment to monthly payments. J. The property owner shall provide all copies of final permits and inspections to the District upon completion of the projects. K. The property owner shall agree to provide the District 5 years of utility statements showing the energy usage for the property following the year in which the improvements are made The statements shall be due on the final day of the month when the improvements were completed. Section 1-19.14 Notice Pursuant to and in accordance with Chapter 189, Florida Statutes the County published the notice of the public hearing to adopt and approve to form the Sustainability District The County has determined that it is not possible to mail notice of such public hearing to each address within the District because the properties to be included in the District have not yet been identified. Section 1-19- .15 Authorization of County Officers and Employees The Board and all other County offices and employees are hereby authorized and directed to take all action necessary and appropriate to effectuate the provisions of this Ordinance. Underlined passages are added. -10- biruek *hrougk passages are added. Section 2. Conflicts. Pursuant to Section 189.4041, Florida Statutes the County finds that the formation of the District is consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Section 3. Severability. If any provisions or portion of this Ordinance is declared by any court of competent jurisdiction to be void, unconstitutional, or unenforceable, then all remaining provisions and portions of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4. Effective Date. The Ordinance shall have effect upon becoming law. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, this 15th day of June, 2010. ATTEST: Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: County Attorney Underlined passages are added. _11_ bsrueM through passages are added. AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. VI-B-2 DATE: June 1, 2010 REGULAR[ ] PUBLIC HEARING [ ] CONSENT Pq TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY (DEPT): County Attorney Mark Godwin yh Criminal Justice Coordinator SUBJECT: Request to have the Board to approve a participation agreement between Florida Association of Clerks of Court (FACC) Services Group and St. Lucie County Drug Lab for the use of credit card transactions. BACKGROUND: Please see attached Memorandum CA No. 10-0645. FUNDS AVAIL: Funds received for drug screening would be deposited into the fine and forfeiture fund in the account string: 107-2360-369940- 2053 Drug Lab Testing. PREVIOUS ACTION: The St. Lucie County Drug Screening Lab Opened for testing on July 1, 2008. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the "MYFLORIDACOUNTY" participation agreement. COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: ]APPROVED [ ] DENIED OTHER: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator [X] County Attorney: )a --- Dan McIntyre Review and Approvals 1 [x] Management & Budget: �1 Marie Gouin, Director Patty Marston, Analyst C0 NTY Attorney F t O R I D A MEMO RAN DUM10-0645 TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney FROM: Mark J. Godwin, Criminal Justice Coordinator DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Agreement Approval for the use of credit card transactions at the SLC Drug Lab ITEM NO. Consent / VI-B-2 Background: The SLC Drug Screening Lab has been operating since it's opening (2008) on a cash only basis. Due to the number of participants utilizing the services of the SLC Drug Screening Lab, the staff have been asked numerous times, if the lab would take credit cards in lieu of cash. Electronic credit card transactions would make the lab more efficient, thus eliminating issuing invoices to the private and public sector businesses. Furthermore, parents or guardians of juvenile defendants would be provided an opportunity to process payments over the internet, by phone or by linking to a private secure portal. This would eliminate the excuse of the parent not wanting to give their child or drug addicted relative cash. Cash in the hands of an individual addicted to drugs or alcohol, provides a great temptation and results in the defendant showing up for a drug screen without funds. The processing of credit card payments transactions would be completed through "MyFloridaCounty" which is implemented through E-commerce for processing. A transaction fee of 3.5% percent of the lab fees would be added to the client's bill ($1.05 on $30.00). Payments to the lab would be made "over the counter" with Visa, Master -Card, and Discover credit cards and bank debit cards. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board approve the "MYFLORIDACOUNTY" Participation Agreement, which would be between St. Lucie County and Florida Association of Court Clerks (FACC) Services Group, LLC. This will allow the Lab to run more efficiently and generate additional revenue. Respectfully submitted, Mark J. Godwin Criminal Justice Coordinator "MYFLORIDACOUNTY" PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT This Participation Agreement ("Agreement") effective as of the day of , 2010, is entered into between the FACC Services Group, LLC (hereinafter referred to as the "Services Group"), and St. Lucie County (hereinafter referred to as "Participant"), provides as follows. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Services Group has established an Internet Access Portal (Portal) referred to as "MyFloridaCounty" with E-commerce capability; and WHEREAS, the Services Group has developed and implemented an E-commerce service application through "MyFloridaCounty" for processing of over-the-counter credit card payment transactions, identified as MFC CENTRAL CASHIER, which provides a single electronic point of payment for a single transaction; and AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above recitals and the mutual covenant and agreements set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: SECTION A — DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this Agreement, the following terms and/or phrases shall be defined as follows: 1. Application — A particular database on the Portal, or the software bridge to one particular database stored elsewhere for information lookup, or a particular electronic transaction for gathering data, processing a service, or processing requests from the public, and the user interface to allow public access and/or interaction with the same on-line. 2. Transaction — A specific electronic order or filing of information and/or receipt of a service(s), payment of Statutory Fee(s), and charges for gathering of data by an agency for a governmental purpose which begins upon the user's request for service(s) and is completed once service(s) are rendered and payment has been received by the Participant. For the purpose of this Agreement, an electronic transaction may include multiple services processed within a single electronic commerce (E-commerce) payment. 3. Statutory Fee — The governmental agencies' license fees, renewal fees, taxes, recording fees or other charges assessed by statute, regulation, ordinance, charter, or other governmental act for the governmental function accessed by users or subscribers. 4. Service Charge — Per transaction cost levied against user of a credit card or bank debit card, as herein provided, for payment of statutory fees, other statutorily prescribed revenues, and Portal operational costs and due to Services Group at time of transaction. Pursuant to s. 215.322 (5), F.S., said charge shall be sufficient to pay charges by the financial institution, Services Group, or credit card company for the service. 5. Handling Charges — Cost levied against users for payment of costs, as herein defined, for the transmission to users (electronically or manual) of ordered documents. 6. Public Records — All records under the control of the Participant deemed to be public records as set forth in Florida Statutes and Rules of Court. 7. Point of Sale Credit Card Transaction — A credit card payment transaction originating electronically at the point of service and/or at the point of collection for statutory fees as defined herein. 8. Refund — Processed credit card transaction that a portion is given back to either customer or customer's bank by Services Group or Participant. 9. Charge -Back — The reversal of the dollar value (financial liability), in whole or in part, of a particular transaction by the card issuer to the acquirer, and usually, by the merchant bank to the merchant. 10. Technology Committee — purpose is to provide program and policy direction and coordination relating to the application of technology within the offices of Clerks and Comptrollers and to provide development and management oversight for Association - sponsored applications. SECTION B - GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Term of Agreement This Agreement shall commence on the date above published and shall continue in effect in accordance with its terms. This Agreement may be amended only by the written agreement of the parties. 2. Representations (a) Services Group represents it is a vending services company as contemplated in s. 215.322(5), F.S. (b) Services Group represents that the Service Charge as herein defined is sufficient, subject to future modification of said charge as may be mutually agreed to in writing by the Parties hereto, to pay for such costs that may be imposed upon Participant by the Services Group as a vending services company for Point of Sale Credit Card Services hereunder pursuant to s. 215.322(5), F.S. 2 (c) Participant may utilize MFC CENTRAL CASHIER for any legal payment by an individual and/or corporation of a financial obligation pursuant to state statute and/or regulation; local ordinance; and/or regulation; and/or by contract agreement. (d) This Agreement shall not restrict Participant from providing unrestricted access to and copies of the Official Records Index or documents from Participant's website. (e) This Agreement shall not restrict Participant from providing data directly to the public, upon request, by electronic means (including, but not limited to, FTP, CD-ROM, web download). 3. Limitations of Liability (a) The MFC CENTRAL CASHIER Services provides credit card processing services to enable credit card payment by Users. Participant hereby acknowledges that all fund processing services are provided by third party fund processors. Service Group shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions of third parties in connection with fund processing services. (b) Services Group and/or Participant is not responsible for events beyond its reasonable control. (c) Participant is not liable to Services Group or to any third person for any damages associated with or resulting from MFC CENTRAL CASHIER services including, but not limited to financial and/or E-commerce functions, unless caused by Participant as a result of failure to perform those responsibilities of Participant as delineated herein. (d) Except as provided by Florida law, business records regarding account holders or instant access users, and activity, payment and personal information of either is the property of Services Group. Services Group shall be responsible for the security and confidentiality of such business records and further agrees to comply with all current or future laws requiring governmental entities to maintain the confidentiality of any information transmitted to them through MFC CENTRAL CASHIER through the on-line payment process. (e) This Limitations of Liability section shall survive termination of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Services Group and Participant agree that by entering into this Agreement Participant does not waive any rights of sovereign immunity granted to Participant under the Constitution or the laws of the State of Florida. 4. Financial Responsibilities (a) All Statutory fees, and other statutorily prescribed revenues collected pursuant to this agreement by Services Group on behalf of the Participant will be transmitted to the Participant in full within one (1) business day of the availability of funds to the Services Group either by release by the appropriate financial institution or resolution of any outstanding issue(s) that has resulted in disbursement delay. 3 (b) The Participant will provide, prior to implementation, bank account and other information to allow electronic deposits of funds collected on behalf of the Participant as delineated in Attachment A. This bank account must support Automated Clearing House (ACH) transfer deposits. Any changes to such information shall be enforceable against Services Group five (5) business days after acknowledgment of receipt by Services Group of written notice of any such change. (c) The Participant will provide contact information (name, address, telephone, e- mail, and facsimile) for an individual who shall serve as a single -point of contact for financial questions relevant to the Participant as delineated in Attachment A. Any changes to such information shall be enforceable against the Services Group within five (5) business days after acknowledgment of receipt by Services Group of written notice of any such change. (d) A non-refundable charge/fee per each successful E-commerce transaction processed shall be charged as more fully set forth below. (1) A charge/fee in the amount of 3.5% of the E-commerce transaction. The charge/fee may be changed with notice to the Participant. The charge/fee shall be levied against MFC CENTRAL CASHIER system users as an add -on cost against each E-commerce transaction and is not the responsibility of the Participant. Said charge/fee shall be retained by the Services Group who shall be responsible for the applicable disbursement of resulting funds. (e) Participant acknowledges and authorizes Services Group to process credit card transactions payments on its behalf. Services Group shall do business as "MyFloridaCounty". (f) Participants will notify Services Group management of financial irregularities regarding a specific transaction or batch of transactions upon discovery of such irregularities but pursuant to Bank Card Rules, said period shall not exceed eighteen (18) months from the time of transaction or batch processing. After this time period, transactions and funds transfers are considered settled. (g) When charge -backs and/or refunds are due to Services Group and Participant, the Participant will: (1) Initiate payment of funds associated with charge-backs/refunds to the Services Group within thirty (30) business days of the time the charge -back or refund is authorized and/or the Participant is notified that such a charge -back or refund has been authorized. (2) If the charge-back/refund is not resolved by payment of invoice within thirty (30) business days, the Participant will then be required to initiate electronic transfer of outstanding funds within one (1) business day of being notified of such an occurrence. .19 (h) Services Group agrees to comply with any recommendations made in any independent audit which are commercially practicable unless Services Group and Participants otherwise mutually agree. Any such audit will be performed by a competent and reputable CPA licensed in Florida. Participant and Services Group agree that audits shall be performed annually or special audits which may be required as set forth below. Participant shall have the right to have a special audit performed at any time in addition to the annual audit. The cost of any special audit shall be borne as follows: (1) Special audits required by State or Federal Agencies will be borne by Services Group. (2) Special audits performed at the request of Participant shall be borne by the requesting Participant, unless such special audit reveals material errors or impropriety by Services Group, in which case the cost of such audit shall be borne by Services Group. To the extent an audit report discloses any discrepancies in Services Group charges, billings, or financial records, and following a period for review and verification of the amount by Services Group, Services Group will adjust and either pay any overcharge, or bill for any under charge as soon as reasonably possible, but not to exceed thirty (30) days. Services Group shall cooperate to assure that verification is completed in a timely manner mutually agreed to by both parties. The MFC CENTRAL CASHIER accounting system is to be in accordance with industry acceptable accounting standards and include a numbered chart of accounts, books of original entry of all transactions, appropriate subsidiary ledgers, a general ledger, which includes to -date postings and an audit trail through financial statements. Such books may either be maintained on paper or on computer with appropriate backup. Interruption of Services (a) Each party shall use reasonable efforts to provide adequate and uninterrupted service under the terms of this Agreement. However, no party shall be liable for delay or interruption of service when the same shall be due to circumstances beyond the control of the party, its agents or employees, including but not limited to unanticipated equipment malfunction; periodic maintenance or update of the computer system or systems upon which such records or Applications reside; interruption of service due to problems with other networks; or force majeure or Acts of God. (b) Services Group will not be liable for any damages, claims or lost revenue arising from or as a result of any downtime due to circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Services Group. (c) Each party shall in good faith notify the other party if a delay or interruption of service is anticipated (i.e., due to maintenance or otherwise) and shall immediately notify the other party if a delay or interruption of service is being experienced for any reason. 5 6. Disclaimer of Warranties (a) Services Group makes no warranties, express or implied, including the implied warranties of merchantability, accuracy, non -infringement and fitness for a particular purpose, with respect to the Portal, the Applications, or the services to be provided under this Agreement unless otherwise provided in this Agreement or applicable service schedule. (b) Services Group shall have no liability for inaccuracies in the data prior to the Participant data extraction process or prior to delivery of data/information to the central database. (c) Services Group shall not be liable to Participant or any third party for lost interest on funds collected due to delays caused by payment processing and funds transfer processes that are beyond Portal Provider's control. 7. Resolution of Disputes Any questions and issues related to the application, which cannot be settled or determined by mutual agreement of the parties, shall first be submitted by any of the parties to the FACC Technology Committee for the purpose of attempting resolution. 8. Termination Provisions (a) At the option of the Participant, this Agreement may be terminated upon Services Group material breach of any term, provision or condition of this Agreement, which breach is not cured following thirty (30) days written notice to Services Group specifying the breach or if Services Group has not, in good faith, instituted a cure within said thirty (30) day period of receipt of such written notice and continued diligently to effectuate a cure provided such cure can be reasonably accomplished within sixty (60) days of receipt of such notice. (b) Upon thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other party, either the Participant or the Services Group may terminate this Agreement without cause, with all outstanding operational and financial transactions being settled within (90) days of termination. (c) Any notice in connection with termination by either party shall be in accordance with Section E of this Agreement titled "Notices". 9. Assignment No party hereto may assign this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, and any such assignment of this Agreement without the permission of the other party shall be null and void. 2 SECTION C — SCOPE OF WORK The purpose of this Agreement is to provide service applications through an E-commerce service identified as "MyFloridaCounty". C.10 Over -the -Counter Credit Card Services (MFC CENTRAL CASHIER) — Participant contracts with the Services Group to process credit card payments through MFC CENTRAL CASHIER. C.10a The Services Group agrees to: 1. Establish and maintain an on-line Internet based Credit Card Processing Service (MFC CENTRAL CASHIER) for the purpose of assisting the public and Participant with point of sale credit card transaction processing. The MFC CENTRAL CASHIER shall provide the necessary computer programs to provide Participant with system access capabilities for Point of Sale credit card transactions. 2. Credit cards to be accepted through MFC CENTRAL CASHIER will be Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover. Bank Debit cards displaying either Visa or MasterCard logos will be accepted. 3. Provide to Participant the number of Point -of -Sale credit card kits reasonably necessary pursuant to Participant's written notice to the Services Group. 4. Provide all publications, documents, forms, instructions and technical assistance as reasonably necessary for participation in the MFC CENTRAL CASHIER program 5. For every successful credit card transaction, charge credit card holder a service fee in accordance with Section B, 4, d. This service fee is a non-refundable fee. 6. Provide customer and technical support for all approved credit card inquires through a toll -free number for both Participants and their customers. 7. Provide support for installation and set up of credit card services. 8. Assume responsibility for charge backs and/or refunds resulting from credit card user fraud when transaction has been accepted for processing subject to the provisions of Section C.1 Ob, 2. and 3. of this Agreement. C.10b The Participant agrees to: 1. As required, provide all financial records and non-exempt court records pertaining to those transactions paid pursuant to this Agreement in good faith and to the best of Participant knowledge. Such records shall be provided to Services Group in a format as set forth below. 7 2. Pursuant to s. 215.322 (5), F.S., verify the identity of individuals presenting credit cards and/or bank debit cards for the purpose of initiating credit card transactions through MFC CENTRAL CASHIER. Verification shall be by valid picture identification and must match name on presented credit card. Upon implementation, AVS and CVV will be used to prevent fraud. AVS is the Address Verification System which ensures the five -digit zip code encoded on the card matches the information given by the cardholder at the time of the transaction. Customer Verification Value (CVV) is the security code on the card which protects Internet and phone transactions from fraud. 3. Verify that presented credit card and/or bank debit card has not expired. 4. Place explanation of service charges in a prominent position that is visible to potential users. 5. Provide a PC with Internet connection and attached printer. PC must have a Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0 browser or higher. 6. Participant may accept telephonic credit card transactions through MFC CENTRAL CASHIER subject to the provisions of Section C.IOb, 2. and 3. of the Agreement. In so doing, Participant will advise the caller of the charge assessed for the transaction and Assume responsibility for any refunds and/or charge -backs resulting from credit card user fraud when the Participant has failed to verify user identification pursuant to Section C.1 Ob, 2 of Agreement. 7. Provide customer support for credit card rejections at the time of transactions. 8. Participant may request on -site support and will be invoiced for all travel expense to the extent permitted by Section 112.061, F.S., and billable hours based on the Services Group's Technical Assistance Program (TAP) rates in effect at the time. 9. Participant will establish a single point of contact for the administration of adding, modifying, and deleting users and services. Said point of contact will be the person authorized to update user and service information with the Services Group. 10. When accepting multiple service payments processed within a single MFC CENTRAL CASHIER transaction the Participant will be responsible for reconciling the transaction to each of the individual service payments processed within that single MFC CENTRAL CASHIER transaction. SECTION E - NOTICES All notices shall be in writing and shall be given by hand, sent by recognized overnight courier (such as Federal Express) or mailed by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, in a postage prepaid envelope, and addressed as set forth below. Notice shall be considered effective 8 immediately upon receipt if delivered by hand or by recognized courier, and presumed to have been delivered three (3) days after deposit in the mail. SERVICES GROUP PARTICIPANT Tarin L. Bachle See Attachment A Budget/Contract Manager FACC Services Group, LLC 3544 Maclay Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32312 (850) 921-0808 (telephone) Any party may change the addressee/address for such notices upon written notice thereof to the other party, which change shall be effective five (5) days after changes to such information shall be enforceable against the party to whom the change was sent within five (5) business days after acknowledgment of receipt by Services Group of written notice of any such change. SECTION F - ILLEGAL PROVISIONS If any provision of this Agreement shall be declared to be illegal, void, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the other provisions shall not be affected but shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION G - ENTIRE AGREEMENT/GENERAL No amendment, waiver, or alteration of this Agreement shall be effective unless signed by an authorized officer of each of the parties to this Agreement. Any oral agreement or representation shall not bind any party to this Agreement. SECTION H - CONTRACT VENUE The formation, interpretation, and performance of this Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida; venue for all litigation relative to the formation, interpretation, and performance of this Contract shall be Leon County, Florida. W IN WITNESS TO THEIR AGREEMENT TO ALL OF THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING, the parties hereto have herein below executed this Agreement effective the day and year first above written: FACC Services Group LLC Name: Kenneth A. Kent Title: Executive Vice President Date: 10 M. Name: Charles Grande Title: Chairman, St. Lucie County BOCC Date: ATTACHMENT A Application Set -Up ADMIN/USER INFOMRATION: 1. County: 2. Contact Name/Administrator: 3. Office Address: 4. Phone Number: 5. Fax Number: 6. E-mail Address: BANKING INFORMATION: Please fill in the banking information below: MFC Central Cashier ❑ ❑ ❑ 7. Name of Bank: 8. Bank Account No: 9. Bank Routing No: 10. Bank Phone Number: 11. Bank Fax Number: 12. Bank Email Address: 13. Bank Mailing Address: Attachment A Page 1 TECHNICAL CONTACT INFORMATION: Name: Phone Number: E-mail Address: Live Set -Up Date: Fax Attachment A Page 2 ITEM NO. VI.B.3 DATE: 6/1/10 • I . AGENDA REQUEST REGULAR ( ) PUBLIC HEARING ( ) LEG. ( ) QUASI -JD ( ) CONSENT ( X ) TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY - Mark Godwin SUBMITTED BY: County Attorney Criminal Justice Coordinator SUBJECT: Certificate of Participation for the Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program for FY2010/2011 from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in the amount of $206,153.00. BACKGROUND: Please see attached memorandum. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the County's participation as the coordinating unit of government in the FDLE Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Furthermore, staff recommends that if the grant funds are awarded, then the County would receive and distribute funds equally to each law enforcement agency (F.P.P.D., P.S.L.P.D., and S.L.S.O.). COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: APPROVED ( ) DENIED OTHER Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Coordination/Signatures County Attorney ( ) OMB Director Budget Analyst (Na �, 141N(Name) Ucri �,a Originating Dept. ( ) (Name) r - = INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Mark Godwin, Criminal Justice Coordinator41% C.A. NO.: 10-0657 DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: 2010 Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance (JAG) Grant Certificate BACKGROUND: The Florida Department of Law Enforcement anticipates an award from the U.S. Department of Justice for Federal Fiscal Year 10/11 in the amount of $206,153.00. These funds have been used in the past years by the Fort Pierce Police Department, the Port St. Lucie Police Department and the St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office. The funding from last year to this year has been dramatically reduced from $878,816.00 to $206,153.00 for St. Lucie County. In past years, the Byrne Grant supported a Crime Analyst for tracking Sexual Offenders, Pharmaceutical Diversion Program, and a Gang Abatement Program. There is no match required. Recommendation / Conclusion: Staff recommends that the Board approve the County's participation as the coordinating unit of government in the F.D.L.E. Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Furthermore, staff recommends that if the grant funds are awarded, then the County would receive and distribute funds equally to each law enforcement agency. FILE Florida Department of office of Criminal Justice Grants Charlie Crist, Governor Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Bill McCollum, Attorney General Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1489 Alex Sink, Chief Financial Officer Gerald M. Bailey (850) 617-1250 Charles H. Bronson, Commissioner of Agriculture Commissioner www.fdie.state.fl.us May 11, 2010 The Honorable Charles Grande Chairman, St. Lucie County Board of Commissioners 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 i Re: Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program — JAG Countywide — State Solicitation Dear Chairman Grande: The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) anticipates an award from the United States Department of Justice for FFY 2010 JAG funds. FDLE will distribute these funds in accordance with the JAG Countywide distribution provisions of Chapter 11 D-9, Florida Administrative Code. FDLE has set aside $206,153 funds for use by all units of government within St. Lucie County. The enclosed Program Announcement provides an overview of these funds and can be used by local units of government to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal justice system. Please note that the Program Announcement includes information from the U.S. Department of Justice relating several areas of national focus and its priorities to help maximize the effectiveness of the Byrne/JAG funding. As a condition of participation in this program, the units of government in each county must reach a consensus concerning the expenditure of these funds. This consensus must include the projects to be implemented as well as the agency responsible for such implementation. Developing such consensus will require someone to exercise leadership and assume a coordinating role in the development of applications for these funds. FDLE recommends that the Board of County Commissioners assume this responsibility. In the event the county declines to serve in this capacity, the Department will request the governing body of each municipality in the county, in descending order of population, to serve as the coordinating unit of government. Service • Integrity , Respect • Quality The Honorable Charles Grande May 11, 2010 Page Two The enclosed Certificate of Participation form requests the identification of an individual coordinator. We will send this individual further information regarding the application process in FDLE's on-line grant management system. Please complete the enclosed Certificate of Participation and return it within 30 days from the date of this correspondence to: Florida Department of Law Enforcement Office of Criminal Justice Grants 2331 Phillips Road Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Attention: Clayton H. Wilder, Administrator We look forward to working with you. If you have any questions or if we can provide you with any assistance regarding the JAG Program, please contact me at (850) 617-1250. Sincerely, �QYOlI.��HlWilder Administrator CHW/JP/ps Enclosures cc: Mayors in St. Lucie County Law Enforcement Agencies in St. Lucie County Project Directors in St. Lucie County CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program Date: Mr. Clayton H. Wilder Administrator Office of Criminal Justice Grants Florida Department of Law Enforcement 2331 Phillips Road Tallahassee, Florida 32308 Dear Mr. Wilder: This is to inform you that the Board of County Commissioners Accepts Declines the invitation to serve as the coordinating unit of government in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement's Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. For purposes of coordinating the preparation of our application(s) for grant funds with the Office of Criminal Justice Grants, we have designated the following person: Name: Title: E-mail address: Agency: Address: Telephone: County: Date: Sincerely, Chair, Board of County Commissioners PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program The State of Florida, Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), anticipates an award from the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) for $12,058,334 in Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) funds. FDLE will distribute these funds in accordance with the JAG Countywide distribution provisions of Chapter 11 D-9, Florida Administrative Code. This announcement is to notify eligible applicants of program requirements. Please note this Program Announcement includes information from the USDOJ relating several areas of national focus and its priorities to help maximize the effectiveness of the Byrne/JAG funding. Eligible Applicants Units of local government are eligible to receive subgrants from FDLE. "Units of local government" means any city, county, town, township, borough, parish, village, or other general-purpose political subdivision of a State and includes Native American Tribes that perform law enforcement functions as determined by the Secretary of the Interior. Program Strategy and Purposes JAG blends the previous Byrne Formula and Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Programs to provide agencies with the flexibility to prioritize and to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime based on their own local needs and conditions. JAG funds can be used for state and local initiatives, technical assistance, training, personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, and information systems for criminal justice. Local units of government receiving JAG funding have the flexibility to implement projects in any of the seven federally approved purpose areas, listed below. 1) Law enforcement programs 2) Prosecution and court programs 3) Prevention and education programs 4) Corrections and community corrections programs 5) Drug treatment programs 6) Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs 7) Crime victim and witness Programs Any law enforcement or justice initiative previously eligible for funding under Byme or LLEBG is eligible for JAG funding. Coordination Efforts Each county is allocated a sum of money for use by all local governments within the county. This amount is determined through a funding algorithm established in the administrative rule. Page 1 Chapter 11 D-9.005, Florida Administrative Code, requires that units of government in each county reach consensus concerning the expenditure of these funds, including the projects to be implemented and the agency responsible for such implementation. Maximum coordination is required to meet this program requirement, and the Department requests the county board of commissioners to serve as the coordinating unit for all local governments within the county. The Chairman, Board of County Commissioners, in each county so notified is requested to return to the Department a statement of certification indicating the county's willingness to serve. This certification must be returned within 30 days from the date of receipt of notification. In the event the county declines to serve in this capacity, the Department will request the governing body of each municipality in the county, in descending order of population, to serve as the coordinating unit of government. Each county or coordinating unit of government is encouraged to form a criminal justice coordinating/planning group to identify and implement criminal justice priorities for the county, to plan strategies to address those priorities, to identify areas of greatest need, and to review all possible sources of revenue to make sure that funds go to the programs or issues that need them most. Furthermore, FDLE requires that units of govemment in each county reach consensus concerning the expenditure of the JAG funds, including the projects to be implemented and the agency responsible for such implementation. Each county must document this consensus by submitting letters from at least 51 percent of the units of government which also represents at least 51 percent of the population located in said county. Match Requirements There is no match requirement under the guidelines of the JAG program. DOJBureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Priorities BJA wishes to ensure that recipients are aware of several areas of national focus and priority and to encourage recipients to maximize the effective use of JAG funds. The following is a brief list of key priorities: 1) Effective counterterrorism and terrorism prevention programs 2) Ensure that justice is truly done in the Criminal Justice System. 3) Smart Policing — evidence -based and data driven. 4) Offender Re-entry 5) Children exposed to violence are responded to effectively. For more information on BJA's priorities, recipients may access: hftp://www.omp.usdoi.gov/BJA/grant/l OJAGLocalSol.pd (seepages 2 and 3). This is for informational purposes only; do not apply for any funds through this solicitation. Recipient must still submit application for funding through SIMON. Page 2 Application Requirements and Deadlines Once the Certificate of Participation form designating the coordinator for your county is received, the Office of Criminal Justice Grants will send this individual further information regarding the application process. Applicants must apply on-line using FDLE's grant management system. The deadline for the on-line submission is 5.00 P.M., Friday, June 26, 2010. In addition, applicants must print out the completed application and submit two (2) hard copies (both with original signatures) no later than 5.00 P.M., Friday. July 2.2010. A separate application must be submitted for each proposed project. Applications should be mailed or hand delivered to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Office of Criminal Justice Grants, 2331 Phillips Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32308, Attention: Clayton H. Wilder, Administrator. Applications must be accompanied by letters of approval representing agreement among at least 51 percent of all units of locai government representing at least 51 percent of the county population as to the allocation of dollars to each project in the county. Questions regarding this Program Announcement should be directed to Clayton H. Wilder, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, at (850) 617-1250. Page 3 AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. VI-B-4 DATE June 1, 2010 REGULAR[] PUBLIC HEARING Leg. [ ] Quasi -JD [ ] CONSENT [X] TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY (DEPT.): County Attorney JoAnn Riley Property Acquisition Manager SUBJECT: Revocable License Agreement Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. Kim's Fina at Angle Road - Monitoring Wells BACKGROUND: See Attached Memorandum FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: September 21, 2004 — Handex of Florida, Inc. was granted permission by the Board of County Commissioners to install one (1) well in the right-of-way of Angle Road. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the Revocable License Agreement, authorize the Chairman to sign the Revocable License Agreement and instruct Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. to record the Revocable License Agreement in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. COMMISSION ACTION: K APPROVED [ ] OTHER [x] County Attorney: V Daniel McIntyre ( [x] Originating Dept: JoAnn Riley [ ] DENIED Review and Approvals [ ] Road and Bridge: Don Pauley [x] Engineering: MV Mike Powley CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator [x] Public Works: Don West PROPERTY ACQUISITION DIVISION MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: JoAnn Riley, Property Acquisition Manager DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Revocable License Agreement Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. Kim's Fina at Angle Road - Monitoring Wells BACKGROUND: The purpose of the monitoring wells in the County's right-of-way of Angle Road is because petroleum contamination from former onsite underground storage tanks at Kim's Fina. The County received a Right -of -Way Permit in April 2010 along with a letter dated October 21, 2009, from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection informing us that Imperial Testing Laboratories will be doing testing in the Angle Road right-of-way. Imperial Testing is proposing to install air sparge (AS) wells and soil vapor extraction (5VE) wells. The air sparge wells are a conduit to allow air at 4-cfm and approximately 7-psig to sparge the groundwater and transfer the hydrocarbons in the groundwater from the dissolved liquid phase to the free vapor phase. The sparged vapors are collected by the soil vapor extraction wells (5VE). This process allows for the removal of volatile and semi -volatile hydrocarbons from the impacted groundwater and soil. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the Revocable License Agreement, authorize the Chairman to sign the Revocable License Agreement and instruct Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. to record the Revocable License Agreement in the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. Respectfully submitted, A �, J nn Riley Property Acquisition Manager APPENDIX P-1 RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT FORM REVISED STANDARD COUNTY SPECIFICATIONS ST. LUCIE COUNTY ENGINEERING DIVISION 2300 VIRGINIA AVENUE 2ND FLOOR, FT PIERCE FL 34982 (462-1707) The following information shall be provided by the applicant (type or print): Name of Applicant Im erial Tes in%ne Nb. (863) 647-2877 Mailing Address 3905 Kidron Road Lakeland, FT 33811 Name of Applicant responsible for Utility after installationlmperial TPGt-; n g Phone No. (863) 647-2877 Ultimate owner does not take possession until acceptance of work. Laboratories Inc. Name of Contractor Imperial Testing Laboratar;P.al%oneNo. (863) 647— 877 - Contractor's License Number Contractor's Field Contact Name Randy Duncan Contractor is responsible for all conditions of this permit until ultimate owner takes possession of utility. Permitee representative responsible for notifying St. Lucie County24 hours prior to work Phone No. As the Applicant, we request permission to construct, operate and maintain a treatment system designed to remediate onsite petroleum contamination(aG ebnwn in nttarharb RAP) (drainage) (utility) installation (s) (hereinafter to as "Installation") on road drainage, or combination drainage/utilrty, —rights-of-way or easements deeded to or maintained by St. Lucie County, or dedicated to the public in the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, (hereinafter referred to as "County rights -of -way" known as Kim' s Fina The proposed installation is shown on the attached sketch(s) on 8'/2" x 14" or smaller paper, which reflects its located and character and details the aspects of same that will disturb County maintained improvements (hereinafter referred to as "Improvements"). We shall commence actual construction of the permitted installation within 30 days of permit issuance and complete same within_9D_—days thereof. Special conditions involved with this installation are as follows: ALL RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL BE SODDED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE Our proceedings with installation of work covered by this permit indicted our agreement to comply with the "Conditions of Right -of -Way Permit" and other provisions stipulated herein by the County. ApplicantImperial Testing Laboratories Inc Title: VE Engineering By:Mi rbaPl T4. 4t; l l ; nge.r Date: / 9 ' i c THE FOLLOWING TO BE COMPLETED BY THE COUNTY: Improvements are planned or in process on aforestated rights -of -way • yes • no Proposed installation is in accordance with Revised Standard County Specifications • yes • no Reviewed by Road & Bridge Manager The aforestated installation construction is hereby permitted under the following provisions: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA by County Engineer - Enforcing Official By Date: See reverse side for "Conditions of Right -of -Way Permit. Page 1 of 3 Revised 4/4/03 Date Permit No. (5 (D -b 3 st Florida Departmen. A Charlie ru Governstor Environmental Protection JeffKottkamp Lt. Governor Bob Martinez Center 2600 Blair Stone Road Michael W. Sole Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400 Secretary October 21, 2009 CERTIFIED MAIL #7004 2510 0006 2438 6994 OT -; RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, Property Owner St. Lucie County Road & Bridge Department 2300 Virginia Ave Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Subject: In the Matter of Establishing a Temporary Point of Compliance for: Fina Kim #403-7092-109 3212 Orange Avenue Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County FDEP Facility ID# 568520364 To Whom It May Concern: This letter will serve as notice that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) plans to authorize the establishment of a Temporary Point of Compliance (TPOC) beyond the property boundary of the source of contamination for certain petroleum contamination resulting from operations at the above -referenced facility. A TPOC is one or more monitoring wells located beyond the groundwater contamination. The name and address of the responsible party for this site is as follows: Mrs. Ho Kyung Kim, 9200 Short Chip Circle, Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986. Based on the Remedial Action Plan Modification (RAP Mod) dated October 13, 2009, submitted by Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. pursuant to Rule 62-770.700, Florida Administrative Code, and other file information available to the FDEP, it has been determined that active remediation is the best strategy for the rehabilitation of this site. To this end, the FDEP intends to issue a letter approving the RAP Mod and establishing a TPOC beyond the facility property boundary. Although this TPOC has been determined to extend into, or beyond, the property which you own, its establishment will not subject you to liability for the contamination which is the subject of this notice. A copy of the site map showing the area of contamination and proposed TPOC on your property is attached. During the review of the information utilized to select the TPOC, the FDEP has determined that human health, public safety and the environment are adequately protected, and will additionally require continued monitoring of the contamination to ensure that this protection is maintained during the course of site rehabilitation. Please contact me at (850) 245-8873 for further information or to inspect the facility file. Persons receiving this notice shall have the opportunity to comment on the FDEP's proposed action within 30 days of receipt of this notice commencing on the delivery date stamped on the "More Protection, Less Process" www.dep.state.fl.us/wasteleategories/pcpidefault.htm �.1 TPOC Notice RAP Mod-102009.doc This instrument prepared by: Janet LiCausi under the direction of Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 34982 REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered this day of 2010, by and between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, 34982 (the "County") and IMPERIAL TESTING LABORATORIES, INC., 3905 Kidron Road, Lakeland, FL 33811 ("IMPERIAL"). WHEREAS, the County is the owner of the property described as: THAT PORTION OF A COUNTY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, KNOWN AS ANGLE ROAD, LYING IN SECTION 08, TOWNSHIP 35 SOUTH, RANGE 40 EAST, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. at Parcel #2408-604-0002-010/9 WHEREAS, "IMPERIAL" has submitted a remedial action plan (RAP) which has been approved by the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Bureau of Petroleum Storage Systems (BPSS), Petroleum Cleanup (PC) Section to clean-up this area that has been impacted by petroleum contamination from former onsite underground storage tanks. "IMPERIAL" is proposing to install air sparge (AS) wells and soil vapor extraction (SVE) wells in the ROW of Angle Road. WHEREAS, "IMPERIAL" will post all boreholes and hand augered from land surface to approximately six feet to verify utility location at that have been previously located. Once verified, "IMPERIAL" staff advances the remedial well bore hole with a drill rig to the specified depths addressed on Figures 2 through 5. The air sparge wells are a conduit to allow air at 4-cfm and approximately 7-psig to sparge the groundwater and transfer the hydrocarbons in the groundwater from the dissolved liquid phase to the free vapor phase. The sparged vapors are collected by the soil vapor extraction wells. WHEREAS, "IMPERIAL's" cleanup time is estimated to be from six to nine months to remove volatile and semi -volatile hydrocarbons from the impacted groundwater and soil. Once, cleanup target levels have been achieved, the remedial system will be shut off and the site will be monitored for four quarters. If contaminate levels remain below clean up target levels the site is eligible for a site rehabilitation completion order (SRCO) authorized by the FDEP BPSS PC Section. Upon receipt of the SRCO, the wells are properly abandoned per Water Management District requirements. WHEREAS, the County has agreed to allow the installation of air sparge (AS) wells and soil vapor extraction (SVE) wells subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Revocable License Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The County agrees to grant "IMPERIAL" a limited Revocable License Agreement for the purpose of installing air sparge (AS) wells and soil vapor extraction (SVE) wells as indicated on the attached Figures "1-5". This license shall extend only to the above -referenced locations (Figure 1-5) and shall not extend to the construction and/or installation of any other encroachment. 2. This license shall be binding on future successors and assignees of "IMPERIAL". "IMPERIAL" agrees to provide the County with notice of any change in ownership pursuant to Paragraph seven (7) of this Agreement. 3. The County shall have the right, at the discretion of the County Engineer or the Road and Bridge Manager, to terminate this Agreement with or without cause and require removal of the encroachment at "IMPERIAL'S" sole expense upon thirty (30) days written notice to "IMPERIAL". The County Engineer or Road and Bridge Manager may, in lieu of termination, request that "IMPERIAL" perform certain alterations to the monitoring wells at "IMPERIAL'S" sole expense. However, if such alteration is not performed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer or Road and Bridge Manager, the County shall be entitled to exercise its right to terminate this Agreement. "IMPERIAL" shall, at all times, maintain the wells locations so as not to be a detriment to the traveling public, and any damage to the right-of-way, pavement, or roadbed during installation or maintenance operations shall be immediately corrected to the satisfaction of the County Engineer or Road and Bridge Manager. 4. "IMPERIAL" shall construct the monitoring wells in accordance with all applicable building and highway codes and safety regulations of the County and State of Florida, and shall be maintained solely at the expense of "IMPERIAL". 5. "IMPERIAL" agrees to allow County employees access to the location of the monitoring wells for County purposes as determined by the County Engineer. 6. "IMPERIAL" agrees to provide copies of the results of the monitoring wells located in the travelway of Angle Road to the County Engineer. 7. All notices, requests and other communications dealing directly or indirectly with this license shall be in writing and shall be (as elected by the person giving such notice) hand delivered by messenger or carrier service, telecommunicated, or mailed by registered or certified mail (postage prepaid) return receipt requested, addressed to: As to County: County Engineer Engineering Division 2300 Virginia Avenue, 2nd Floor Fort Pierce, FL 34982 As to: With Copies to: County Attorney Administration Building Annex 2300 Virginia Avenue, 3`d Floor Fort Pierce, FL 34982 Imperial Testing Laboratories, Inc. St. Lucie County Administrator 3905 Kidron Road Administration Building Annex Lakeland, FL 33811 2300 Virginia Avenue, 3`d Floor Fort Pierce, FL 34982 or to such other address as any party may designate by notice complying with the terms of this Section. Each such notice shall be deemed delivered (a) on the date delivered if by personal delivery, (b) on the date upon which the return receipt is signed or delivery is refused or the notice is designated by the postal authorities as not deliverable, as the case may be, if mailed. 8. As consideration for the County agreeing to allow the encroachment of the monitoring wells as set forth herein, "IMPERIAL" agrees to indemnify and hold the County harmless from and against all claims, liability, demands, damages, expenses, fees, fines, penalties, suits, proceedings, actions and costs of actions, including reasonable attorneys fees of 2 any kind or nature arising or in any way connected with the use, occupation, management, or control of the above right-of-way by IMPERIAL or their agents, servants, employees, patrons, or invitees, or resulting in injury to persons or property, or loss of life or property of any kind or nature whatsoever, sustained during "IMPERIAL -s" use of the property. 9. IMPERIAL shall promptly record this Revocable License Agreement in the Official Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. IMPERIAL shall pay any document excise taxes and the cost of recording this Revocable License Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year above first written. ATTEST: DEPUTY CLERK WITNESSES: STATE OF Florida COUNTY OF Polk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA CHAIRMAN APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: COUNTY ATTORNEY IMPERIAL TESTING LABORATORIES, INC By: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 20 day of May , 2010 by Michael H. Stillineer AS VP-Eng. of IMPERIAL TESTING LABORATORIES, INC. who produced Personal l v (type of identification) and who did take an oath. Known WITNESS my hand and official seal, this 20 day of MaY 2010. My commission expires: . DONNA D. JACOBS ' MY COMMISSION k DD801284 a.. EXPIRE$; July 29. 2012 t•wN�•�•N07ARY F1. Nota ry Discount Assoc. Co. 5;\ACQ\WP\Janet\Licenseagree\Angle Rd Kim's Fina\LicenseAgreement.docx Signature of Notarypioblic Donna D. Jacobs Name of Notary Public Typed, Printed 3 cLL ( _j ( b k Llj [ 0 \ Z �< 0 / = 0< © j ( j w I ± j etc 2 j $ 7tk § > CL E\ m [ u@ 7f}oa a_ u\ � } o/ \//� o (�D UJk f \ k UJ UJ< _ ®UJ f \ g E \ . m ■� § » 4# Mm4 0 )#§ cr < / k ƒ 2 §§< u «S § - / CO ° b \k|�\ o § C,4 i ) q \ Ana � | }g � 0 0 �0 0 § ,m a 5 _ kl § o § § °� 00 � | �k LO 00 ` \/ ofk0 \ ? j ° M �j I @ ' Lj co q } 2 . / %0LiJCL/ k » k $ ( 0 \ J �$ W) / .Ld o I z CD§ I �0 � 7 ...:: .. �F.:.:. �c � �0 I0 �/ �o oz @� zm o e . � e / { c @ §$ § § § ($# 8 °ƒ 2 g Ld �J j Aden -§ B _ S1 \ ƒ Wi (A e « < 04 § a Ix 2 \» k » BLa a § z § ((� o § 2cn� IL § LLJJ e§ a 3L3a @2 z' o o 0 0 0 0@ w o e /o LLJ §6 I� e 0 m $ e§ | I 3� e2 I ----------------------i S'$ SOO 7L , ) } � b §§ in Ik §2 ) z 2 to a & � W U./ § 2 ( En (n 0 ` 0 (n 0 b�I o2e d z CL \Q M w W) to 6 z 2 E $ ` s 2 � - w � M z \ 0 2 V) o $Li S LO§ - C14 in, oZm l |�« �k■ 't L■ I« « 22 2 2 � L -i z O LL i w m m J = J J, O l,,l J � ¢ K r w w U J Q W 3 Or ~ O> NJ Ntn ~ I Li z I � Z w Q' Z L;j N Z Z m En ¢ W 0 a �+ �� O< N d� i W J �w W Z NS (� a p w w Ow <¢ i�j Orr 3 o F W U li N Z 2 0 O O vdi.� �> �> p I� W Q NZ p N 0 d0 o = ON :a ....VI 0 Q m M O z X li d d d ¢ N fn 1m d W 0~ l0 O W LLJ I I N < I0 W {\ 00 J Off ® « !D Q N� M w0 I � O Cz OO o �NIl a 3S w < z �U CL Q n O > J d O N 3 } I Ile 23.LyM`Nfa01S a 25 I a QLU ¢ ¢ a z I cn . c IZ pJXzty En W Z WJ W :.7 I 1� O W � ¢ J U I aN 3 U a 1 Z O C m U 2 = 1 3Nn ey �N ¢ 1 IO 01 aD 0 co L I !' O 0 0 0 4 3NIl N 3S _ w GF�F' ? Y pn �t.IgJ I' Goa Z pn 0 Oi W 3 mI n I W¢ N a Q dal I ¢ U m I N No (V W O� I rn oW 3 ¢ °��� wig ZZ II Q3 J (A ^}> ~ Q m S La I O M Um W O <z 0 W NO Lo w Q d O I a c ¢ CV w Q 0 I w cn ¢En L w 1� Z J O - OQ Z CO'M Z= I =:uj U � M J/ N W U- oI�> > N ?O.RM - Z ¢ LL 5 P� � v N da ¢oZ g \ G < ¢ o z w z ° g'm a ly— z Li C �� wi in Z z L) z -Zoo ¢ two v Z cn 3 w= rn¢ in -uol �¢ ro I 1f OwCh tO o �n s�cL w w w — U) � N rn c� pO On X o a s C Z W J RO Q Q a >w w ._ a} Z = mow¢ OJy W Z�ji NfUni 5' JNG ;BACKFILL 1.4'. 20.0' 9.1' 6.6' 5.8'- I--4.1' MW-19D VE_� AS-3 ,; i -- - 1 • �; �- LINE -I - I 7.5' ' I1 FIBER ! OPTIC �-AND I ELECTRIC LINES ! - -- -- j STORMWATER VAULT-- t NATIVE SOIL !---! -- I- , CONCRETE --CURB i I- ANGLE ROAD _, i -- I ; I II I �i I (EXISTING WELL ! 7--1 NOTES: MW-19D IS AN EXISTING MONITOR WELL. AS-3, �- VE-4 AND HEW-4 ARE PROPOSED REMEDIATION WELLS. GIVEN THE REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES INCLUDE A =1 I j I III SHORT TERM (6-9 MONTHS) AS/SVE TREATMENT / - -- SYSTEM, PROPOSED TRENCHES WILL BE SHALLOW`- E W TO AVOID EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (SEE FIGURES 3, 4 AND 5 FOR WELL DETAILS) ` � � ' ` C D SCALE: 2FEET 4 IMPERIAL FINA #403-7092-109 KIMS DATE OF 3905 KIDRON ROAD FDEP FACILITY N0. 56/8520364 DRAWING ROW CROSS SECTION LAKELAND FL 33811 3212 ORANGE AVENUE, FORT PIERCE, FL 4-13-10 PROJ. N0. 8763 FIGURE N0. 2 NOTE: DW-2 IS SCREENED FROM 27 TO 32 FEET BLS AND IS IMPACTED ABOVE NADCs PAD (3000 psi) NOTE: DEPTH SUBJECT TO BOTTOM OF SPARGE POINT CHANGE BASED ON : 9.5' LITHOLOGY. c 30/40 SAND BEGINS FROM WELL BOTTOM AND ' ANNULUS FILLED TO +/- 0' TO 6' ABOVE �a ' THE TOP OF SCREEN FINE SAND BEGINS +/- 0' TO 6' ABOVE THE l(I TOP OF SCREEN AND ANNULUS FILLED TO +/- 6' TO 12' ABOVE THE TOP OF SCREEN AIR SPARGING POINT AIR SPARGING POINT GROUT SEAL BEGINS +/— 6' TO 12' PROFILE VIEW ABOVE THE TOP OF SCREEN AND / 'j ! PLAN VIEW ANNULUS FILLED TO BELOW THE TEE OF THE DISTRIBUTION PIPE NOT TO SCALE I [ 1 smaw.vm aorom wAL . %-t2 DATE OF DRAWING: 4-13-10 FINA #403-7092-106 KIMS AIR SPARGING IMPERIAL FDEP FACILITY NO. 56/8520364 WELL DETAIL (TYPICAL) 3905 KIDRON RD., LAKELAND, FL 33811 3212 ORANGE AVENUE, FORT PIERCE, FL PROD. NO. 8763 1 FIGURE NO. 3 NOTES: VERTICAL WELL IS CHOSEN TO MINIMIZE SHORT— CIRCUITING IN VADOSE ZONE PAD (3000 psi) SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION POINT NOTE: DEPTH SUBJECT TO BOTTOM OF WELL PLAN VIEW CHANCE BASED ON LITHOLOGY. -; 30/40 SAND BEGINS FROM WELL BOTTOM AND ANNULUS FILLED TO +/— 0' TO 3' ABOVE THE TOP OF SCREEN FINE SAND BEGINS +/— 0' TO 3' ABOVE THE TOP OF SCREEN AND ANNULUS FILLED TO +/- 3' TO 6' ABOVE THE TOP OF SCREEN SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL GROUT SEAL BEGINS +/— 3' TO 6' PROFILE VIEW 7 �f ABOVE THE TOP OF SCREEN AND ANNULUS FILLED TO BELOW THE TEE OF THE COLLECTION PIPE r // NOT TO SCALE r+sAswnse Pyre ux . '12 DATE OF DRAWING 4-13-10 / FINA #403-7092-109 KIMS SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION IMPERIAL FDEP FACILITY NO. 56/8520364 WELL DETAIL (TYPICAL) 3905 KIDRON RD., LAKELAND, FL 33811 3212 ORANGE AVENUE, FORT PIERCE, FL PROJ. NO. 8763 FIGURE NO. 4 m J N W > W as v 1 r p < z rn < F 1 N U � m < O Nv N N O• W O t-: O N W ' Q m fW9 N `. z v < •• yC p + < e J M �.. U .m t. J < N rn 0 s a ¢o 0 Z LAJ J S \y J Q O li O F- W jpWO CL �� �NNo J J W to zo 3 coo N Z O�O Z Q � X w C: �- W J > d a i < 4 a z. N_ W_` U Z / % J N0 ina N1 P . 0> L) W d1,1 .. = z x y o m 4 V < J L) ' o CIL . n p O n a< Q ILa We m . f C U C W m W O n J O m Z < > O n J W o d KZJ�~ J aCL < NW < p a M NL9 N< N4 p Z 6 N N r o U t0 LLI . 2 JJ '�tYi Vi Z O U W J Q Q M V Z 0 J 08/16/2004 12:03 56146-5 COU PAGE 02/04 J113ANNE H�Er F��MA � � r� ik' 1Fjr •1 =` ._ 43c. VIA, This instrument prepared by: Janet LiCausi under the direction of Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 34982 HE i �yrj' Un1 { 1 r�i 1i_1!', ! .J"'�_I'� 1 L!�L, i __ij_i. . Fi[!`L1K :107, y ` t'A E r ,j1 REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered this 30TH day of AUGUST 2004, by and between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, (the "COUNTY") and HANDEX of Florida, 2055 S. Congress Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, 33445 ("HANDEX"). INC. WHEREAS, the "COUNTY" is the owner of the property described as: THAT PORTION OF A COUNTY ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, KNOWN AS ANGLE ROAD, LYING IN SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 35 SOUTH, RANGE 40 EAST, ST, LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, "HANDEX" has been authorize by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to perform an environmental assessment in the vicinity of Kim's Fina located at 3212 Orange Avenue, Fort Pierce, FL. 'HANDEX" is requested provided testing reports to St_ Lucie County ("COUNTY") of their findings of the monitoring well. WHEREAS, "HANDEX" will install one(1) monitoring well, approximately fifteen (15) feet below land surface (BLS) using a drilling rig. The drilling activities will last for 1/2 day. Constructed of a two (2) inch PVC casing, with locking 2 inch expansion cap and a traffic bearing manhole cover -(See EXHIBITS 1 and 2) The monitoring well will be located within the right-of-way of Angel Road. WHEREAS, the "COUNTY" has agreed to allow the installation of one (1) monitoring well subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Revocable License Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The "COUNTY" agrees to grant "HANDEX" a limited Revocable License Agreement for the purpose of installing a monitoring well as indicated on the attached Exhibit "1 and 2." This license shall extend only to the above -referenced location and shall not extend to the construction and/or installation of any other structures. 2. This Revocable License Agreement shall be binding on future successors and assignees of "HANDEX'. 'HANDEX" agrees to provide the"COUNTY" with notice of any change in ownership pursuant to Paragraph eight (6) of this Revocable License Agreement. ro- 08/16/2004 12:03 5614621 c0U OR BOOK ?K 207't C�j' GE `f` 0 PAGE 03/04 3. The" COUNTY" shall have the right, at the discretion of the County Engineer or the Road h Bridge Manager, to terminate this Agreement with or without cause and require removal of the encroachment at 'HANDEX" sole expense upon thirty (30) days written notice to "HANDEX". The County Engineer or Road and Bridge Manager may, in lieu of termination, request that "HANDEX' perform certain alterations to the monitoring well at 'HANDEX'" sole expense. However, if such alteration is not performed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer or Road and Bridge Manager, the "COUNTY" shall be entitled to exercise its right to terminate this Agreement. "HANDEX" shall, at all times, maintain the well location so as not to be a detriment to the traveling public, and any damage to the right-of-way, pavement, or roadbed during installation or maintenance operations shall be immediately corrected to the satisfaction of the County Engineer or Road and Bridge Manager. 4. "HANDEX" is required to install the monitoring well in accordance with Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction in St. Lucie County, Florida, and FDOT Standards, together with a Maintenance of Traffic Plan for approval prior to construction and provide notice to the County Engineer with a schedule for construction. 5. 'HANDEX" shall construct the monitoring well in accordance with all applicable building and highway codes and safety regulations of the County and state of Florida, and shall be maintained solely at the expense of "HANDEX". 6. "HANDEX" agrees to allow County employees access to the location of the monitoring well for "COUNTY" purposes as determined by the County Engineer. 7. "HANDEX" agrees to carry General Liability Insurance with the certificate holder being St. Lucie County for the period of time the monitoring well is in the "COUNTY" right-of-way. 8. All notices, requests and other communications dealing directly or indirectly with this license shall be in writing and shall be (as elected by the person giving such notice) hand delivered by messenger or carrier service, telecommunicated, or mailed by registered or certified mail (postage prepaid) return receipt requested, addressed to; As to County: County Engineer Engineering Division 2300 Virginia Avenue, 2nd Floor Fort Pierce, FL 34982 As to HANDEX 2055 S. Congress Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33445 With Copies to: County Attorney Administration Building Annex 2300 Virginia Avenue, 3'd Floor Fort Pierce, FL 34982 St. Lucie County Administrator Administration Building Annex 2300 Virginia Avenue, 3^d Floor Fort Pierce, FL 34982 or to such other address as any party may designate by notice complying with the terms of this Section. Each such notice shall be deemed delivered (a) on the date delivered if by personal delivery, (b) on the date upon which the return receipt is signed or delivery is refused or the notice is designated by the postal authorities as not deliverable, as the case may be, if mailed. 2 08/16/2004 12:03 5614621 E■ PAGE 04/04 9. As consideration for the 'COUNTY" agreeing to allow the encroachment of the monitoring well as set forth herein,'HANDEX" agrees to indemnify and hold the "COUNTY" harmless from and against all claims, liability, demands, damages, expenses, fees, fines, penalties, suits, proceedings, actions and costs of actions, including reasonable attorneys fees of any kind or nature arising the negligent or intentional acts, errors or omissions of 'HANDEX" or their agents, servants, employees, patrons, or invitees. 10. "HANDEX" shall promptly record this Revocable :License Agreement In the Official Records of St. Lucie County, Florida. 'HANDEX" shall pay the cost of recording this`pievoeable License Agreement, 4 , IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement rn the. day and *r. above first written. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY•�COMWZT SI01�lEiititi5 ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL:ORTbA D TY CLERK r CHAIRMAN APPRO D AS TO FORM A D COUNTY A HANDEX OF FL DA I WILLIAM E. TABOR,- .7R' ITs SECRETARY x` (seal) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF LAKE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 30tlday of AUGUST 2004, by WILLIAM E. T30R, JR. _SFCRF.TaRy ofHANDEXofFLORID#�. INC who produced (type of identification) and who did take an oath. WITNESS my hand and official seal, this 30TH day of AUGUST 2004. My commission expires: ,,- �Inn Signature of Notary\Pyblie 3 NAULT" WCMM Exp. e10229 I IOOMW ID A l Am SR 0 �a Fi 9�e I a va c r— 2- 1 i o" TRAFFIC BEARING MANHOLE LOCKING 2" EXPANSION CAP I /- GRADE CEMENT GROUT 2' SCH 40 PVC CASING BENTONITE OR FINE SAND SEAL FILTER PACK -I III (6/20 SILICA SAND) • HANDEX' 2* SCH 40 PVC SCREEN (0.010- SLOT) EXHIBIT KIM'S FINA 3212 ORANGE AVENUE MONITORING WELL FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION DETAIL 1W AGENDA REQUEST TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney ITEM NO. VI-B- 5 Date: June 1, 2010 Regular [ ] Public Hearing[ ] Consent[X] PRESENTED BY: Heather Young Assistant County Attorney SUBJECT: Treasure Coast FRO, LLC - Assignment of Donald M. Ayres Hangar Sublease to Keith J. Snyder BACKGROUND: See C.A. No. 10-0671 FUNDS AVAIL.: (State type & No. of transaction or N/A): N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consent to the proposed Assignment and Assumption from Donald M. Ayres to Keith J. Snyder, and authorize the Chairman to sign the document. COMMISSION ACTION: [xj APPROVED [ ] DENIED [ ] OTHER: County Attorney: L/ Daniel tyre Originating Dept.: Mark Satterlee CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, M.P.A. County Administrator Coordination/Signatures Mgt. & Budget: Other : Purchasing: Other : Finance (Check for Copy only, if applicable): INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney C.A. NO: 10-0671 DATE: May 21, 2010 SUBJECT: Treasure Coast FBO, LLC - Assignment of Donald M. Ayres Hangar Sublease to Keith J. Snyder BACKGROUND: Donald M. Ayres currently subleases a hangar from Treasure Coast FBO, LLC, at the St. Lucie County International Airport. As set forth in the attached Assignment and Assumption, Mr. Ayres intends to assign the sublease to Keith J. Snyder. Staff has reviewed the document and finds it acceptable as to legal form and correctness. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Board proposed Assignment and Assumption from authorize the Chairman to sign the document. of County Commissioners consent to the Donald M. Ayres to Keith J. Snyder, and Respectfully submitted, a5 Heather Young Assistant County Attorney Attachment HY/ Copies to: County Administrator Planning and Development Services Director Airport Manager r ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION This Assignment is made effective this day of May, 2010, by DONALD M. AYRES, 87 Aqua Ra Drive, Jensen Beach, Florida 34957 ("Assignor") to KEITH J. SNYDER, 11 Harbour Isle Drive West, Unit 102, Fort Pierce, Florida 34951, as assignee ("Assignee"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Assignor, as Assignee, entered into that certain Assignment and Assumption Agreement of that certain Ground Sublease dated February 29, 2008 between Air Charter of Florida, Inc. d/b/a Jet Service Center, as Lessor, and William Fielding, as Lessee, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Sublease dated September 1, 2008, which are attached hereto as Composite Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof, demising certain premises described as Hangar 3179, with an address of 3179 Jet Center Terrace, Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 (the "Premises"); and WHEREAS, Air Charter of Florida, Inc. assigned its interest to the Sublease to Treasure Coast FBO, LLC ("Lessor"); and WHEREAS, William, Fielding assigned his interest in the Sublease to Donald M. Ayres ("Assignor"), by that certain Assignment and Assumption dated September 2, 2008 (attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof); and WHEREAS, Donald M. Ayres ("Assignor") desires to reassign all of his right, title and interest in and to the Sublease to Keith J. Snyder ("Assignee"), and Assignee desires to accept such assignment and assumes the obligations of Assignor under the terms of the Sublease, as amended, and subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and the sum of TEND AND N0/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Assignor hereby assigns and transfers to Assignee all of its right, title and interest in and to the Sublease, including all rights to payments, refunds and monies owed to Assignor before or after the date hereof, together with all his right, title and interest in and to the Sublease, including any security deposit, and subject to all the terms and conditions contained ib the Master Lease (as defined in the Sublease) and any addenda thereto. 2. Assignee hereby assumes all of the obligations of Assignor arising or accruing on or after the date hereof under the Sublease, including the applicable terms and conditions of the Master Lease, and shall make all payments and keep and perform all conditions and covenants of the Sublease in the same manner as if Assignee were the original subtenant thereunder. z 3. Assignor covenants that it is the lawful and sole owner of the interest assigned under this Assignment, that this interest is free from all encumbrances; and that it has performed all duties and obligations and made all payments required under the terms and conditions of the Sublease, or will be made as of the closing hereof. 4. Assignee hereby indemnifies and holds Assignor harmless from any and all liabilities and claims of any nature arising out of or related to the Sublease and/or Assignee's use of the premises. ??wAe d" . T—rrRA c�J Assignor: CONSENT OF LESSOR Treasure Coast FBO, LLC, successor in interest to Air Charter of Florida, Inc, d/b/a Jet Service Center, lessor named in above Sublease, consents to the above assignment. Lessor also consents to the assignment by Assignee to Assignee to assume, on and after , the payment of rent and performance of all duties and obligations as set forth in the Master Leaser and any addenda. Dated: the IfK day of May, 2010 Treasure Cost FBO, LLC -'--'-- - %I M#%jI 7L 1V.1 N/LG f.VV`YfVVY CONSENT OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY St. Lucie County, as Lessor under the Master Lease, does hereby consent to the assignment of the above Sublease by Donald M. Ayres ("Assignor") to Keith J. Snyder ("Assignee"). St. Lucie County further consents to the agreement by Assignee to assume, on and after , the payment of rent and performance of all duties and obligations as set forth in the Sublease, Master Lease and any addenda. ATTEST: DEPUTY CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA •._ 1:►0 DATE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: COUNTY ATTORNEY AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. VI-B- 6 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Date: June 1, 2010 Regular [ ] Public Hearing [ ] Consent[X] PRESENTED BY: Heather Young Assistant County Attorney SUBJECT: Volo Holding Fort Pierce, LLC - Assignment of Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. Hangar Sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc. BACKGROUND: See C.A. No. 10-0672 FUNDS AVAIL.: (State type & No. of transaction or N/A): N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consent to the proposed Assignment and Assumption from Wolf enden Enterprises, Inc. Hangar Sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc., and authorize the Chairman to sign the document. COMMISSION ACTION: APPROVED [ ] DENIED [ ] OTHER: County Attorney: CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, M.P.A. County Administrator Coordination/Signatures Mgt. & Budget: Daniel S ntyre Originating Dept.: Other Mark Satterlee Finance (Check for Copy only, if applicable):_ Purchasing: Other : INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Heather Young, Assistant County Attorney C.A. NO: 10-0672 DATE: May 21, 2010 SUBJECT: Volo Holding Fort Pierce, LLC - Assignment of Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. Hangar Sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc. BACKGROUND: Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. currently subleases a hangar from Volo Holding Fort Pierce, LLC, at the St. Lucie County International Airport. As set forth in the attached Assignment and Assumption, Wolfenden intends to assign the sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc. Staff has reviewed the document and finds it acceptable as to legal form and correctness. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION : Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consent to the proposed Assignment and Assumption from Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. Hangar Sublease to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc., and authorize the Chairman to sign the document. Respectfully submitted, Heather Young Assistant County Attorney Attachment HY/ Copies to: County Administrator Planning and Development Services Director Airport Manager --•--•-- • - • -• •- - --- ... ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION THIS ASSIGNMENT is made this day of May, 2010, by and between WOLFENDEN ENTERPRISES, INC., hereinafter referred to as "Assignor" and MARINE CONNECTION LIQUIDATORS , INC., hereinafter referred to as "Sublessee". WHEREAS, CLINTON L. TOMPKINS and BILL McMAHON had a sublease as sublessors with B&E HOUCK ENTERPRISES, INC., dated April 1,1995, for HangarE6A at the St. Lucie County International Airport as described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, on May 27, 1997, CLINTON L. TOMPKINS and DARLENE D. BR=SKY, as Temporary Administrators of the Estate of CLINTON L. THOMPKINS and BILL McMAHON did assign and convey all of their right, title and interest in and to the premises described in said sublease agreement to MAVERICK BOAT COMPANY, INC.; and WHEREAS, B&E HOUCKENTERPRISES. INC., has assigned, transferred and conveyed unto VOLO HOLDING FORT PIERCE, L.L.C., all of its rights, title. Interest and claim in the demised premises and Master Sublease Agreement, and WHEREAS, MAVERICK BOAT COMPANY, INC. has assigned, transferred and conveyed unto WOLFENDEN ENTERPRISES, INC., all of its right, title, interest and claim in and to said sublease assigned, transferred and conveyed unto it and in the demised premises therein described; and WHEREAS, WOLFENDEN ENTERPRISES, INC. (ASSIGNOR) desires to assign, transfer and convey unto MARINE CONNECTION LIQUIDATORS, INC. (ASSIGNEE), all of its right, title, interest and claim in and to said sublease assigned, transferred and conveyed unto it and in the demised premises therein described; and WHEREAS, the Master Sublease between B&E HOUCK ENTERPRISES, INC, and its sublessees and the Master Lease between B&E HOUCK ENTERPRISES, INC., as Lessee and ST. LUCIE COUNTY, successor in interest to St. Lucie County Port and Airport Authority, as Lessor, requires Lessor to consent to assignment. NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that WOLFENDEN ENTERPRISES, INC., for and in consideration of the sum of ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($125,000.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency thereof is acknowledged hereby agree as follows: ASSIGNOR does hereby transfer, convey and assign unto ASSIGNEE all of its estate, right, title, claim and interest as Sublessee in and to that certain Sublease Agreement between it and its successors and assigns and FORT PIERCE FBO, LLC, as successor and assignee of B&E HOUCK ENTERPRISES, INC and VOLO HOLDING FORT PIERCE, L.L.C., sublessor of the premises described ib Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and having the designation of Hanger E6A, subject to all of the terms, conditions and provisions thereof and the Master Lease between B&E HOUCK ENTERPRISES, INC., as Lessee and ST. LUCIE COUNTY, formerly acting by and through the St. Lucie County Port & Airport Authority, as Lessor dated April 1, 1995. ---rv. rr.v vr.vv %1 !1A/! /L-rVJ J7 CA6 f.HVVCWWW ASSIGNOR represents and warrants to be the lawful owner of the sublease and all rights and interest therein and has full rights to make this assignment; that the Sublease rent is current, that there exists no arrearage or default in the performance of any provision, no action has been taken by sublessor to avoid or declare a default in said Sublease. ASSIGNEE hereby accepts the assignment and assumes all of the obligations and responsibilities of the Sublease accruing subsequent hereto, and agrees to comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Sublease. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and date first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: M INC. President MARINE CONNECTION LIQUIDATORS, INC. By: Roland Kilrusis, President %I NRJ//G -quip .7/GL r.VV/f VVO CONSENT OF LESSOR FORT PIERCE FBO LLC successor in interest to B&E HOUCK ENTERPRISES, INC. and VOLO HOLDINGS FORT PIERCE, L.L.C., lessor named in above Sublease, consents to the above assignment. Lessor also consents to the assignment by Assignee to Assignee to assume, on and after , the payment of rent and performance of all duties and obligations as set forth in the Master Leaser and any addenda. Dated: the day of May, 2010 FORT PIERCE FBO LLC Manager r.wwuuo CONSENT OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY St. Lucie County, as Lessor under the Master Lease, does hereby consent to the assignment of the above Sublease by Wolfenden Enterprises, Inc. ("Assignor") to Marine Connection Liquidators, Inc. ("Assignee"). St. Lucie County further consents to the agreement by Assignee to assume, on and after , the payment of rent and performance of all duties and obligations as set forth in the Sublease, Master Lease and any addenda. ATTEST: DEPUTY CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Lion DATE: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: COUNTY ATTORNEY AGENDA REQUEST TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ITEM NO. VI-B-7 DATE: June 1, 2010 REGULAR[] PUBLIC HEARING [ ] CONSENT [ x ] PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Daniel S. McIntyre County Attorney SUBJECT: St. Lucie County v. State of Florida, et. al.; Validation of North Lennard Road MSBU Special Assessment Improvement Bonds BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum CA 10-0675. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the recommendations of the County's consulting engineer, staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed settlement with ExxonMobil. COMMISSION ACTION: [�Q APPROVED [ ] DENIED [ ] OTHER: Review and Approvals X Count Attorney: �'� [] Y Y Daniel S. McIntyre CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney C.A. NO.: 10-0675 DATE: May 25, 2010 SUBJECT: St. Lucie County v. State of Florida, et al.; Validation of North Lennard Road MSBU Special Assessment Improvement Bonds BACKGROUND: In 1995, several propertyowners petitioned the Countyto investigate the feasibility of creating one or more MSBU's to fund the cost of providing paving and drainage, potable water, and wastewater improvements to an area alongthe Lennard Road corridor between Kitterman Road and Silver Oak Drive. On June 6, 2000, the Board created three separate MSBU's and authorized the County Engineer to proceed with the final design, property acquisition, permitting and bidding of the projects. That portion of the contemplated roadway improvements comprising the Prima Vista Boulevard extension east of U.S. Highway 1 was constructed in 2004-2005 by certain developers involved in order to expedite completion and therefore enable development of the surrounding propertyfor its contemplated use. The Prima Vista Boulevard extension, which has been part of the proposed roadway improvement plan since inception of the project, was constructed pursuantto road construction and contribution agreementswhich provided that the developers would deliver that improvement consistency of excess capacity in exchange for impact fee waivers or credits. Over the next several years, the County continued its efforts in furtherance of the contemplated improvement projects and expended considerable resources — approximately $1.3 million to date - on engineering, design, permitting and other preliminary costs. The design is now complete and all necessary permits and rights -of -way have been obtained. The Board conducted the public hearings required by Chapter 1-13.5 of the County's Code of Ordinances (the "MSBU Ordinance")as noticed on February 2, 2010. During the course of the public hearings, the Board received comments, support and/or objections from all interested parties in attendance as to the propriety and advisability of the respective projects and the related imposition of special assessments, all in accordance with the MSBU Ordinance. At the conclusion of the public hearings, the Board voted unanimouslyto adopt Resolution Nos. 10-046, 10-047 and 10-048 and thereby determined to proceed with the projects and to levy special assessments upon the real property located within the respective MSBUs. The resolutions also included the Board's legislative determinations that the real property located within the MSBUs will be specially benefitted by the projects and that the respective apportionment methodologies were fair and reasonable. The proposed road assessments were apportioned among affected property on the basis of trips. DISCUSSION: On February 17, 2010, the County filed an action for validation of the bonds and special assessments described above, pursuant to Chapter 75, Florida Statutes. On February 24, 2010, the State of Florida, as Defendant, filed an Answer to the Complaint for Validation declaring that it had no knowledge of any defects or illegality in the Complaint for Validation, but nevertheless demanding strict proof of all allegations contained therein. On April 6, 2010, the Court issued an Amended Notice and Order to Show Cause whythe relief requested bythe County should not be granted, scheduling a hearingfor May 13, 2010. Since entry of the Amended Order to Show Cause, ExxonMobile Corporation ("Exxon Mobil") contacted the County and expressed concerns with the roadway assessment levied within the North Lennard Road1 MSBU. ExxonMobil holds a lease interest in certain real property located therein which is owned by Xenon, S.A. ("Xenon"). ExxonMobil was assessed approximately $618,000 for the roadway improvements. ExxonMobil filed pleadings with the Court and argued that the proposed road improvements conveyed no benefit to the Xenon parcel leased by ExxonMobil and that the assessment was not fairly apportioned among the benefitting properties. ExxonMobil also suggested that they should have received a credit of approximately $130,000 for road impact fees paid by ExxonMobil. ExxonMobil provided traffic data from an independent traffic consultant retained by ExxonMobil that questioned whether the correct Institute of Transportation Engineers designation was used for ExxonMobil, whether the proposed trip distribution rate was correct and whether the correct percentage of pass by traffic was used. The data submitted by ExxonMobile's traffic consultant suggested an assessment amount of approximately $100,000, a reduction of more than $500,000 from the County's proposed assessment. The County requested that the County engineering consultant for the project, Stef Matthes, P.E., of Culpepper & Terpening, review the traffic information submitted by ExxonMobil's traffic consultant. Mr. Matthes concluded that the information submitted could justify an equalization of the assessment from $617,999.78 to $448,291.21. Mr. Matthes also agreed that ExxonMobil should receive a credit for the $130,573.00 paid by ExxonMobil (the fees were actually paid by ExxonMobil's contractor but were passed through to ExxonMobil). A copy of Mr. Matthes' May 26, 2010 letter outlining his recommendations is attached. Based on this information, County staff proposed to ExxonMobil, subject to Board approval, that the proposed assessment be reduced from $617,999.78 to $317,717.76, including the impact fee credit applied to reduce the assessment. County staff and consultants have determined thatthe proposed reduction, if approved bythe Board, would not increase any assessments to other property owners above the amounts previously noticed and approved by Resolution No. 10-046 and the County would not lower the proposed project construction cost contingency amount. Under the proposed settlement, ExxonMobil would stipulate to the entry of a final judgment validating the secial assessment bonds which would allow the projects to go forward at this time barring an appeal by a third party during the thirty day period following entry of the Final Judgment. This proposed settlement offers financial and practical advantages by preserving the existing and favorable constructions bids and avoiding costly delays and protracted litigation. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION: Based on the recommendations of the County's consulting engineer, staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed settlement with ExxonMobil. Respectfully submitted, Daniel`5. Mcl County Attor DSM/cb Attachment CULPEPPER & TERPENING, INC CONSULTING ENGINEERS I LANO SURVEYORS May 26, 2010 VIA: HAND DELIVERY Mr. Daniel S. McIntyre, Esq. County Attorney St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 34982 RE: North Lennard Road MSBU SLC Parcel ID No. 3422-801-0003-000/5 Xenon/ExxonMobil Assessment Recommended Adjustment C&T Project No. 00-84.02.03 Dear Mr. McIntyre: Project No. 00-84.02.03 MSBU Correspondence Sendees Email: sn-atthes ct-cmCOrn Culpepper & Terpening, Inc. has reviewed the information provided by the transportation consultants engaged by ExxonMobil with respect to the above referenced property located within the North Lennard Road MSBU No. 1 boundary. Although we maintain that the apportionment methodology utilized by the County is fair and reasonable, our review of the submitted information leads us to conclude that such information could justify an equalization of the preliminary noticed assessment amount for that property. The equalization, which we support and recommend, is based upon the unique history and circumstances surrounding the parcel which do not apply to any other parcel within the assessment boundary and is premised upon refined assumptions underlying the trip generation rate and trip distribution amount utilized to calculate the assessment attributable to that property. Application of the refined assumptions yields a revised preliminary assessment amount as follows: Original Preliminary Assessment Revised Preliminary Assessment Number of Gas pumps 16 16 Trips/Pump 168.56 152.84 Percent Distribution 55% 44% Total Benefiting Trips 1,483.33 1075.99 Assessment amount $617,999.78 $448,291.21 The above adjustment to the trip rate and distribution results in a new preliminary assessment for the parcel of $448,291.21 Additionally, the commercial developments along Prima Vista Boulevard that participated in the extension of the roadway in advance of the formation of the MSBU were entitled to credits against St. Lucie County road impact fees pursuant to certain road contribution and construction agreements. It is our understanding roadway impact fees were paid to St. Lucie County in the amount of $130,573.45 as a condition precedent for the construction of the gas station currently situated upon the above referenced parcel. We further recommend that this amount be credited to the revised preliminary assessment amount referenced above. The additional reduction will result in a final adjusted preliminary assessment of $317,717.76. C:\DOCUME—I\smatthcs\LOCALS—INTemp\ELF20100526-094540\Mg4.02 SLC AWmey, 001, McIntyre, Xenon E&I recommendation (Gnal).doc A LEGACY OF EXPERTISE AND EXCELLENCE 2980 SOUTH 25TH STREET ( FT. PIERCE. FL 34981 (772) 464-3537 1 FAX: (772) 464-9497 ti . ... «--�aam9'..�-�<x. The recommended adjustments described above are justifiable solely on the basis of the unique circumstances surrounding the property, its usage and location. No information has been brought to our attention which would justify a further reduction in the assessment amount for this or any other property located within the North Lennard Road MSBU No. 1. In fact, our independent research leads us to conclude that no further reduction is warranted. We trust that this recommendation is of assistance. As always, should you have any qucstions, please feel do not hesitate to contact me at (772) 464-3537 x 114 or the email address listed above. Sincerely, CULPEPPER & TERPENING, INC. St a es, P.E. nior Vice s es, -- (X- C.\D000ME-Ibmanhea\LOCALS-I\Temp\FLF20100526 094809W044.02 SLC Attomey, 001, McIntyre. Xenon M recommendation (6mq.doc ` ' - __ _.. -� •a -a .max _ � _ .-� .-.,,?��' �.. . �;:,� 1-.v _ �, ' F.'. , . _. x_ � �,... - _ _. - , AGENDA REQUEST TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBMITTED BY: Grants/Disaster Recovery Department SUBJECT: Severe Repetitive Loss Program — Contracts ITEM NO. VI-C DATE: 6/1 /10 REGULAR ( ) PUBLIC HEARING ( ) LEG. ( ) QUASI -JD ( ) CONSENT (X) PRESENTED BY: Roberta Breene Grants/Resource Developer BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: See attached memorandum. RECOMMENDATION: Board approval of one Severe Repetitive Loss grant contract with the Florida Department of Emergency Management as outlined in the attached memorandum. COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: APPROVED ( ) DENIED ( ) OTHER —� Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Coordination/Sinnatures County Attorney (X) OMB Director Daniel McIntyre Budget Analyst Originating Dept. (X) ERD Director William Hoeffner Central Services Central Services Property Acquisition (X) Marie Gouin (X) <_�) Robert O'Sullivan (X) Kiiwfi Smith (X) Roger Shinn Don McLam (X) 1L J Ann Riley Grants/Disaster Recovery MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: William Hoeffnerlo Grants/Disaster Recovery Director FROM: Roberta Breene /& Grants/Resource Developer DATE: 6/1 /10 SUBJECT: Severe Repetitive Loss Program — Contract ITEM NO. VI-C Background: Applications have been submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to mitigate seven residential properties that qualify under the Severe Repetitive Loss Pilot Program. This program was designed to provide funding to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to severe repetitive loss structures insured under the National Flood Insurance Program. Under various conditions and qualifications, the program will: • Elevate the structure, or • Acquire and relocate or demolish the structure. If acquired, the land must remain as open space in perpetuity and be maintained by a government entity, or • Demolish and reconstruct the home. Subject to the program limitations, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management, provides 90% of the mitigation cost. The homeowner is responsible for the remaining 10%, but must pay for the costs and seek reimbursement through the County from the State of Florida Department of Emergency Management (FLDEM). A contract has been received from the FLDEM for the sixth of the seven applications. The remaining one application is still pending. The grant does not require a cash contribution from the County and allows 5% of the total project cost for administration and project management to be paid to the County. Should the County's administrative costs exceed 5%, the overage would not be reimbursed. The Board approved funding of $24,000 needed for technical studies to develop all of the grant applications. Only $8,020 of the $24,000 allocation was needed to complete the technical studies. Therefore, the fund was closed at the end of the 2008-2009 fiscal year. This $8,020 in costs has been added to the cost of the mitigation projects, and should be reimbursed to the County when reimbursement through the grant is requested. The estimated project cost for this one acquisition property is $255,391, which would result in a 5% administrative fee to the County of $12,769. The annual maintenance cost by the County's Environmental Resources Department is estimated to be $400. The following acquisition project will require project management by the Grants/Disaster Recovery Department with assistance from the Property Acquisition Manager and the Central Services Department Project Manager: Property Owner Mitigation Open Estimated Space Benefit Acres Ms Lorraine Holmes Acquisition 0.94 $ 255,391 3768 Wild Orchid Lane Fort Pierce, FL 34981 Previous Action May 5, 2010 — BOCC approval to accept and execute five contracts with the Florida Department of Emergency Management. November 3, 2009 - BOCC approval to submit additional data for elevation and reconstruction projects. October 20, 2009 - BOCC approval to withdraw and re -submit three acquisition applications. May 26, 2009 - BOCC Board approval of $24,000 for technical services needed to complete applications. May 13, 2008 - BOCC approval to submit eight applications. Recommendation: Board approval to accept and execute one Severe Repetitive Loss contract with the Florida Department of Emergency Management as outlined in the attached memorandum. TO: SUBMITTED BY: SUBJECT: AGENDA REQUEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Public Works - Engineering ITEM NO. VII-A-D DATE: 6/1 /2010 REGULAR ( ) PUBLIC HEARING (X) LEG. ( ) QUASI -JD ( ) CONSENT ( ) PRESENTED BY: Barbara Guettler MSBU Assistant f6 Sunland Gardens, Harmony Heights 1, Harmony Heights 2, and Sunrise Park Street Lighting Districts BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: See attached memorandum. RECOMMENDATION: Board adoption of Item No. VII-A Resolution No. 10-163, Item No. VII-B Resolution No. 10-164, Item No. VII-C Resolution No. 10-165, and Item No. VII-D Resolution No. 10-166 as outlined in the agenda memorandum. COMMISSION ACTION: APPROVED ( ) DENIED ( ) OTHER VII-A Approved 5-0 VII-C Approved 5-0 VII-B Approved 5-0 VII-D Approved 5-0 CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Coordination/Signatures County Attorney (X) OMB Director 11� 61, %rH Budget Analyst Daniel McIntyre Originating Dept. ( X) W County Engineer Dorfpld West 11 "PI 01jaNa"w (X) MV Michael Powley Department Name MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Donald B. West, Public Works Director "kA_ FROM: Barbara Guettler, MSBU Assistant Engineering DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Sunland Gardens, Harmony Heights 1, Harmony Heights 2, and Sunrise Park Street Lighting Districts ITEM NO. VII-A-D Backaround: The County has 19 Street Lighting Districts (SLDs). Two of the districts were created in 2000 and are funded by non -ad valorem special assessments based upon equivalent dwelling units ("EDUs") whereby the cost of providing the street lighting services are allocated on a pro rata basis among the parcels which benefit from each district. The 17 other SLDs which were created prior to 1996 are funded by ad valorem assessments based on property value. As a result of recent decreases in property value and increases in the cost of electricity, however, the proceeds of the ad valorem assessments are no longer sufficient to fund the cost of providing street lighting services to the properties within these districts. Therefore, the Board is considering converting the method of assessment for these 17 districts to one based on EDUs and the actual cost of providing the service as in the last two districts created. The uniform method for collection of non -ad valorem assessments as set forth in Florida Statute 197.3632, is a fair and reasonable way to fund street lighting improvements. If the Board chooses to adopt the attached resolutions, the revised assessment methodology would commence beginning with the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year. Special assessment amounts may vary from year to year depending on fluctuations in the actual cost of the providing the service (electricity, etc.). Each year the Board will adopt an annual assessment resolution approving the amount of the assessment. However, the assessment shall not increase in any subsequent year more than five percent (5%) from the previous year or more than a total of ten percent (10%) above the maximum assessment amount as indicated in the attached corresponding resolution unless the Board gives notice and conducts an additional public hearing. Over the next few months, a public hearing will be held for each of the 17 SLDs for the Board to consider comments from property owners before deciding whether to convert the method of assessment from ad valorem assessments to non -ad valorem special assessments. June 1, 2010 Item No. VII-A-D Page 2 Below is a summary of the first four districts which are being considered at separate public hearings during this Board meeting. Agenda Item No. SLD Name Reso. No. No. of Units 2009/2010 Average Assessment Per Unit 2010/2011 Annual Assessment Per Unit Max Annual Assessment Per Unit Max Assessment Monthly Per Unit VII-A Sunland Gardens 10-163 604 $9.94 $23.68 $26.05 $2.17 VII-B Harmony Heights 1 10-164 219 $18.19 $26.66 $29.33 $2.44 VII-C Harmony Heights 2 10-165 467 $17.31 $27.21 $29.93 $2.49 VII-D Sunrise Park 10-166 190 $10.71 $18.82 $20.70 $1.73 On May 12, 2010, property owners were notified by mail of their tentative assessment amounts and of these public hearings. This meeting was also advertised on May12, 2010. Previous Action: September 7, 1971 — Board approved Resolution No. 71-93, creating the Sunland Gardens SLD. November 25, 1975 — Board approved Resolution No's. 75-119 and 75-120 creating Harmony Heights 1 and Harmony Heights 2 SLDs. June 27, 1978 — Board approved Resolution No. 78-63 creating the Sunrise Park SLD. December 8, 2009 — Board approved Resolution No's. 09-334, 09-331, 09-332, and 09-335, stating its intent to use the uniform method of collection for non -ad valorem special assessments levied by the Sunland Gardens, Harmony Heights 1, Harmony Heights 2, and Sunrise Park SLDs. May 4, 2010 — Board authorized advertising these public hearings. Recommendation: Board adoption of Item No. VII-A Resolution No. 10-163, Item No. VII-B Resolution No. 10-164, Item No. VII- C Resolution No. 10-165, and Item No. VII-D Resolution No. 10-166 as outlined in this agenda memorandum. RESOLUTION NO.10-166 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF STREET LIGHTING SERVICES, IMPROVEMENTS AND FACILITIES IN THE SUNRISE PARK STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT AND THE FUNDING THEREOF THROUGH THE IMPOSITION OF NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 78-79; DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WILL BE SPECIALLY BENEFITED BY THE STREET LIGHTING SERVICES; APPROVING THE METHOD OF ASSESSING THE COST OF SUCH SERVICES AGAINST THE REAL PROPERTY SPECIALLY BENEFITTED THEREBY, APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION THEREOF TO THE TAX COLLECTOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY. This resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Article VI, Chapter 1-17 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances (the "Ordinance"), County Resolution No. 78-79, Sections 125.01, 125.66 and 197.3632, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law. SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. This resolution constitutes the Annual Assessment Resolution as defined in the Ordinance. All capitalized words and terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Ordinance. Unless the context indicates otherwise, words imparting the singular number, include the plural number, and vice versa. Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution SECTION 3. FINDINGS. It is hereby ascertained, determined, and declared as follows: (A) On August 22, 1978, the Board of County Commissioners (the 'Board") of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County") adopted Resolution No. 78-79 which established the Sunrise Park Street Lighting District (the "District") as a special improvement service district and provided for the imposition of special assessments to fund the cost of providing street lighting services, improvements and facilities therein. A map describing the boundary of the District is attached hereto as Appendix A. (B) On May 11, 2010, the Board enacted the Ordinance to revise the procedure by which special assessments are imposed within special improvement service districts for purposes of funding street lighting services. Such revised procedure requires adoption of an Annual Assessment Resolution each Fiscal Year approving the Assessment Roll for the District. (C) The Ordinance further provides that in the event the Board desires to implement an alternative apportionment methodology for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property specially benefited thereby, the Board shall provide notice and conduct a public hearing prior to adoption of the Annual Assessment Resolution. (D) As required by the terms of the Ordinance, notice of a public hearing has been published and mailed to each property owner proposed to be assessed notifying 2 Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution such property owner of the opportunity to be heard; the proof of publication and an affidavit of mailing are attached hereto as Appendices B and C respectively. (E) The Assessment Roll for Fiscal Year 2010-11 has heretofore been filed and made available for public inspection at the offices of the Assessment Coordinator. (F) A public hearing has been duly held and comments and objections of all interested persons have been heard and considered as required by law. (G) The parcels of real property located within the District and described in the Assessment Roll are hereby found to be specially benefited by the provision of Street Lighting Services. Street Lighting Services specially benefit such parcels by enhancing the safety, aesthetics, identification and recognition thereof and access thereto, thus protecting and enhancing the value, use and enjoyment of affected parcels. (H) The special benefits derived from the Street Lighting Services programs contemplated herein exceed the dollar amount of the Assessments to be levied and imposed hereunder. The Assessment for any parcel of property within the District does not exceed the proportional benefits that such parcel will receive compared to any other parcel therein subject to the Assessment. (I) The apportionment methodology approved herein bears a reasonable relationship to the cost of providing Street Lighting Services and is hereby approved. a) The Assessments to be imposed in accordance with this Resolution provide an equitable method of funding the Street Lighting Services by fairly and 3 Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution reasonably allocating the estimated cost of providing such services among specially benefited property SECTION 4. APPORTIONMENT METHODOLOGY. (A) The following apportionment methodology was utilized in preparing the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Assessment Roll for the District and is hereby approved as the basis for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property described therein: (1) The District is substantially composed of similarly -sized single family residential parcels. Accordingly, each single family residential parcel shall constitute one equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for purposes of allocating the cost of providing the Street Lighting Services therein. (2) Individual multifamily units within the District are specially benefitted by Street Lighting Services in the same manner and to substantially the same extent as single family residential parcels, such that each multifamily unit shall constitute one EDU. Individual tax parcels which contain multifamily units shall be assigned one EDU per multifamily unit. (3) The amount of the Assessment per EDU shall be calculated by dividing the total estimated cost of providing the Street Lighting Service by the number of EDUs in the District. (4) As of the date hereof, there are 190 EDUs located within the District. 4 Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution (5) For the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010, the estimated cost of providing Street Lighting Services in the District is $3,575.80. Such estimated cost includes a component to fund or otherwise reimburse the County for costs incurred in administering and maintaining the Assessment program as authorized by Section 1-17- 82 of the Ordinance. (6) The maximum amount of the Assessments to be assessed and apportioned among the parcels of real property within the District is hereby established in the amount of $18.82 per EDU for the Fiscal Year 2010-11. (B) Annual Assessment Resolutions for subsequent Fiscal Years may approve annual cost of living or inflationary increases in the amount of the Assessment by a cumulative total of not to exceed 10% of the amount approved hereunder, or a total annual Assessment of $20.70, without requiring additional notice and public hearing prior to adoption of such Annual Assessment Resolutions, as authorized by Section 1- 17-79 of the Ordinance. (C) The apportionment methodology approved herein shall be utilized in preparing the Assessment Roll for the District for subsequent Fiscal Years. SECTION 5. RATIFICATION AND CONFIRMATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARY AND RESOLUTION NO.78-79. The legal description of the boundary of the District as set forth in Resolution No. 78-79, including any amendment thereto, 5 Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution is hereby ratified, confirmed and incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise modified herein, Resolution No. 78-79 is hereby ratified and confirmed. SECTION 6. IMPOSITION OF ASSESSMENTS. (A) Assessments for Street Lighting Services in the amounts set forth in the Assessment Roll are hereby levied and imposed on all parcels of property described in such Assessment Roll for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010. (B) Assessments shall constitute a lien upon the parcels of real property subject thereto equal in rank and dignity with the liens of all state, county, district or municipal taxes and other non -ad valorem assessments. Except as otherwise provided by law, such lien shall be superior in dignity to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. SECTION 7. APPROVAL OF ASSESSMENT ROLL. The Assessment Roll, which is on file with the Assessment Coordinator and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved. The Assessment Roll as herein approved shall be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector for collection pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. The Board has previously adopted its Resolution No. 09-335 expressing its intent to collect non -ad valorem assessments pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act. Such resolution constitutes the Resolution of Intent required by the Ordinance. The Assessment Roll, as delivered to the Tax Collector shall be accompanied by a Certificate 2.1 Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution to Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll in substantially the form attached hereto as Appendix D. SECTION 8. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments shall be collected pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided for in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. SECTION 9. EFFECT OF RESOLUTION. The adoption of this Annual Assessment Resolution shall be the final adjudication of the issues presented herein (including, but not limited to, the special benefit conveyed to assessed property by the Street Lighting Services, the apportionment methodology by which the Assessments are calculated, the Assessment Roll and the levy and lien of the Assessments), unless proper steps are initiated in a county of competent jurisdiction to secure relief within twenty (20) days from the adoption date hereof. SECTION 10. SEVERABILITY. If any clause, section, or other part of this resolution shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part shall be considered as eliminated and in no way affection the validity of the other provisions of this resolution. SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Annual Assessment Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. DULY ADOPTED this 1st day of June, 2010. 7 (SEAL) ATTEST: Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA LIZ Chair Approved as to Form: Deputy Clerk County Attorney �:3 Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAP OF THE DISTRICT Street Lighting District: 0 Sunrise Park Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX B PROOF OF PUBLICATION Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX C AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING This is to certify that on May 12, 2010, a total of 162 notices of "Non -Ad Valorem Assessments" for the Sunrise Park Street Lighting District were mailed duly notifying the affected property owners of the Public Hearing to be held on June 1, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the St. Lucie County Commission Chambers, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, whereas the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approved the 2010 Assessment Roll. A sample copy of the notice is hereby attached. Barbara Guettler St. Lucie County Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of , 2010, by Barbara Guettler who is personally known to me. Notary Public, State of Florida Sunrise Park Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX D FORM OF CERTIFICATE TO NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida or authorized agent of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County"); as such I have satisfied myself that all property included or includable on the Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for such county is properly assessed so far as I have been able to ascertain; and that all required extensions on the above described roll to show the non -ad valorem assessments attributable to the property listed therein have been made pursuant to law. I FURTHER CERTIFY that, in accordance with the Uniform Assessment Collection Act, this certificate and the herein described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll will be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector by September 15, 2010. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed this certificate and directed the same to be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector and made part of the above described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll this day of 2010. ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Authorized Agent S: \ ENG \ MSBU \ WORD \ StLightDistricts \ SLDs \ Sunrise Park \ Resolution Sunrise Park (CBR) (00438326).DOC RESOLUTION NO.10-164 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF STREET LIGHTING SERVICES, IMPROVEMENTS AND FACILITIES IN THE HARMONY HEIGHTS 1 STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT AND THE FUNDING THEREOF THROUGH THE IMPOSITION OF NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 75-119; DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WILL BE SPECIALLY BENEFITED BY THE STREET LIGHTING SERVICES, APPROVING THE METHOD OF ASSESSING THE COST OF SUCH SERVICES AGAINST THE REAL PROPERTY SPECIALLY BENEFITTED THEREBY; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION THEREOF TO THE TAX COLLECTOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY. This resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Article VI, Chapter 1-17 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances (the "Ordinance"), County Resolution No. 75-119, Sections 125.01, 125.66 and 197.3632, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law. SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. This resolution constitutes the Annual Assessment Resolution as defined in the Ordinance. All capitalized words and terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Ordinance. Unless the context indicates otherwise, words imparting the singular number, include the plural number, and vice versa. Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution SECTION 3. FINDINGS. It is hereby ascertained, determined, and declared as follows: (A) On November 25, 1975, the Board of County Commissioners (the 'Board") of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County") adopted Resolution No. 75-119 which established the Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District (the "District") as a special improvement service district and provided for the imposition of special assessments to fund the cost of providing street lighting services, improvements and facilities therein. A map describing the boundary of the District is attached hereto as Appendix A. (B) On May 11, 2010, the Board enacted the Ordinance to revise the procedure by which special assessments are imposed within special improvement service districts for purposes of funding street lighting services. Such revised procedure requires adoption of an Annual Assessment Resolution each Fiscal Year approving the Assessment Roll for the District. (C) The Ordinance further provides that in the event the Board desires to implement an alternative apportionment methodology for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property specially benefited thereby, the Board shall provide notice and conduct a public hearing prior to adoption of the Annual Assessment Resolution. (D) As required by the terms of the Ordinance, notice of a public hearing has been published and mailed to each property owner proposed to be assessed notifying 2 Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution such property owner of the opportunity to be heard; the proof of publication and an affidavit of mailing are attached hereto as Appendices B and C respectively. (E) The Assessment Roll for Fiscal Year 2010-11 has heretofore been filed and made available for public inspection at the offices of the Assessment Coordinator. (F) A public hearing has been duly held and comments and objections of all interested persons have been heard and considered as required by law. (G) The parcels of real property located within the District and described in the Assessment Roll are hereby found to be specially benefited by the provision of Street Lighting Services. Street Lighting Services specially benefit such parcels by enhancing the safety, aesthetics, identification and recognition thereof and access thereto, thus protecting and enhancing the value, use and enjoyment of affected parcels. (H) The special benefits derived from the Street Lighting Services programs contemplated herein exceed the dollar amount of the Assessments to be levied and imposed hereunder. The Assessment for any parcel of property within the District does not exceed the proportional benefits that such parcel will receive compared to any other parcel therein subject to the Assessment. (I) The apportionment methodology approved herein bears a reasonable relationship to the cost of providing Street Lighting Services and is hereby approved. G) The Assessments to be imposed in accordance with this Resolution provide an equitable method of funding the Street Lighting Services by fairly and 3 Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution reasonably allocating the estimated cost of providing such services among specially benefited property SECTION 4. APPORTIONMENT METHODOLOGY. (A) The following apportionment methodology was utilized in preparing the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Assessment Roll for the District and is hereby approved as the basis for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property described therein: (1) The District is substantially composed of similarly -sized single family residential parcels. Accordingly, each single family residential parcel shall constitute one equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for purposes of allocating the cost of providing the Street Lighting Services therein. (2) Individual multifamily units within the District are specially benefitted by Street Lighting Services in the same manner and to substantially the same extent as single family residential parcels, such that each multifamily unit shall constitute one EDU. Individual tax parcels which contain multifamily units shall be assigned one EDU per multifamily unit. (3) The amount of the Assessment per EDU shall be calculated by dividing the total estimated cost of providing the Street Lighting Service by the number of EDUs in the District. (4) As of the date hereof, there are 219 EDUs located within the District. 4 Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution (5) For the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010, the estimated cost of providing Street Lighting Services in the District is $5,838.54. Such estimated cost includes a component to fund or otherwise reimburse the County for costs incurred in administering and maintaining the Assessment program as authorized by Section 1-17- 82 of the Ordinance. (6) The maximum amount of the Assessments to be assessed and apportioned among the parcels of real property within the District is hereby established in the amount of $26.66 per EDU for the Fiscal Year 2010-11. (B) Annual Assessment Resolutions for subsequent Fiscal Years may approve annual cost of living or inflationary increases in the amount of the Assessment by a cumulative total of not to exceed 10% of the amount approved hereunder, or a total annual Assessment of $29.33, without requiring additional notice and public hearing prior to adoption of such Annual Assessment Resolutions, as authorized by Section 1- 17-79 of the Ordinance. (C) The apportionment methodology approved herein shall be utilized in preparing the Assessment Roll for the District for subsequent Fiscal Years. SECTION 5. RATIFICATION AND CONFIRMATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARY AND RESOLUTION NO. 75-119. The legal description of the boundary of the District as set forth in Resolution No. 75-119, including any amendment thereto, is hereby ratified, confirmed and incorporated herein by 5 Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution reference. Except as otherwise modified herein, Resolution No. 75-119 is hereby ratified and confirmed. SECTION 6. IMPOSITION OF ASSESSMENTS. (A) Assessments for Street Lighting Services in the amounts set forth in the Assessment Roll are hereby levied and imposed on all parcels of property described in such Assessment Roll for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010. (B) Assessments shall constitute a lien upon the parcels of real property subject thereto equal in rank and dignity with the liens of all state, county, district or municipal taxes and other non -ad valorem assessments. Except as otherwise provided by law, such lien shall be superior in dignity to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. SECTION 7. APPROVAL OF ASSESSMENT ROLL. The Assessment Roll, which is on file with the Assessment Coordinator and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved. The Assessment Roll as herein approved shall be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector for collection pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. The Board has previously adopted its Resolution No. 09-331 expressing its intent to collect non -ad valorem assessments pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act. Such resolution constitutes the Resolution of Intent required by the Ordinance. The Assessment Roll, as delivered to the Tax Collector shall be accompanied by a Certificate 2 Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution to Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll in substantially the form attached hereto as Appendix D. SECTION 8. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments shall be collected pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided for in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. SECTION 9. EFFECT OF RESOLUTION. The adoption of this Annual Assessment Resolution shall be the final adjudication of the issues presented herein (including, but not limited to, the special benefit conveyed to assessed property by the Street Lighting Services, the apportionment methodology by which the Assessments are calculated, the Assessment Roll and the levy and lien of the Assessments), unless proper steps are initiated in a county of competent jurisdiction to secure relief within twenty (20) days from the adoption date hereof. SECTION 10. SEVERABILITY. If any clause, section, or other part of this resolution shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part shall be considered as eliminated and in no way affection the validity of the other provisions of this resolution. SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Annual Assessment Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. DULY ADOPTED this 1st day of June, 2010. 7 (SEAL) ATTEST: Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Chair Approved as to Form: Deputy Clerk County Attorney P Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAP OF THE DISTRICT Street Lighting District: 0 Harmony Heights 1 Api7 2010 a wn m ■District Boundary Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX B PROOF OF PUBLICATION Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX C AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING This is to certify that on May 12, 2010, a total of 219 notices of "Non -Ad Valorem Assessments" for the Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District were mailed duly notifying the affected property owners of the Public Hearing to be held on June 1, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the St. Lucie County Commission Chambers, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, whereas the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approved the 2010 Assessment Roll. A sample copy of the notice is hereby attached. Barbara Guettler St. Lucie County Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ day of , 2010, by Barbara Guettler who is personally known to me. Notary Public, State of Florida Harmony Heights 1 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX D FORM OF CERTIFICATE TO NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida or authorized agent of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County"); as such I have satisfied myself that all property included or includable on the Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for such county is properly assessed so far as I have been able to ascertain; and that all required extensions on the above described roll to show the non -ad valorem assessments attributable to the property listed therein have been made pursuant to law. I FURTHER CERTIFY that, in accordance with the Uniform Assessment Collection Act, this certificate and the herein described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll will be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector by September 15, 2010. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed this certificate and directed the same to be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector and made part of the above described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll this day of 2010. ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA LIM Authorized Agent S: \ ENG \ MSBU \ WORD \ StLightDistricts \ SLDs \ Harmony Heights 1 \ Annual Assessment Resolution (HH1) (00421045-2).doc RESOLUTION NO.10-165 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF STREET LIGHTING SERVICES, IMPROVEMENTS AND FACILITIES IN THE HARMONY HEIGHTS 2 STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT AND THE FUNDING THEREOF THROUGH THE IMPOSITION OF NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 75-120, DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WILL BE SPECIALLY BENEFITED BY THE STREET LIGHTING SERVICES; APPROVING THE METHOD OF ASSESSING THE COST OF SUCH SERVICES AGAINST THE REAL PROPERTY SPECIALLY BENEFITTED THEREBY; APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION THEREOF TO THE TAX COLLECTOR; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY. This resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Article VI, Chapter 1-17 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances (the "Ordinance"), County Resolution No. 75-120, Sections 125.01, 125.66 and 197.3632, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law. SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. This resolution constitutes the Annual Assessment Resolution as defined in the Ordinance. All capitalized words and terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Ordinance. Unless the context indicates otherwise, words imparting the singular number, include the plural number, and vice versa. Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution SECTION 3. FINDINGS. It is hereby ascertained, determined, and declared as follows: (A) On November 25, 1975, the Board of County Commissioners (the 'Board") of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County") adopted Resolution No. 75-120 which established the Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District (the "District") as a special improvement service district and provided for the imposition of special assessments to fund the cost of providing street lighting services, improvements and facilities therein. A map describing the boundary of the District is attached hereto as Appendix A. (B) On May 11, 2010, the Board enacted the Ordinance to revise the procedure by which special assessments are imposed within special improvement service districts for purposes of funding street lighting services. Such revised procedure requires adoption of an Annual Assessment Resolution each Fiscal Year approving the Assessment Roll for the District. (C) The Ordinance further provides that in the event the Board desires to implement an alternative apportionment methodology for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property specially benefited thereby, the Board shall provide notice and conduct a public hearing prior to adoption of the Annual Assessment Resolution. (D) As required by the terms of the Ordinance, notice of a public hearing has been published and mailed to each property owner proposed to be assessed notifying 2 Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution such property owner of the opportunity to be heard; the proof of publication and an affidavit of mailing are attached hereto as Appendices B and C respectively. (E) The Assessment Roll for Fiscal Year 2010-11 has heretofore been filed and made available for public inspection at the offices of the Assessment Coordinator. (F) A public hearing has been duly held and comments and objections of all interested persons have been heard and considered as required by law. (G) The parcels of real property located within the District and described in the Assessment Roll are hereby found to be specially benefited by the provision of Street Lighting Services. Street Lighting Services specially benefit such parcels by enhancing the safety, aesthetics, identification and recognition thereof and access thereto, thus protecting and enhancing the value, use and enjoyment of affected parcels. (H) The special benefits derived from the Street Lighting Services programs contemplated herein exceed the dollar amount of the Assessments to be levied and imposed hereunder. The Assessment for any parcel of property within the District does not exceed the proportional benefits that such parcel will receive compared to any other parcel therein subject to the Assessment. (I) The apportionment methodology approved herein bears a reasonable relationship to the cost of providing Street Lighting Services and is hereby approved. Q) The Assessments to be imposed in accordance with this Resolution provide an equitable method of funding the Street Lighting Services by fairly and 3 Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution reasonably allocating the estimated cost of providing such services among specially benefited property SECTION 4. APPORTIONMENT METHODOLOGY. (A) The following apportionment methodology was utilized in preparing the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Assessment Roll for the District and is hereby approved as the basis for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property described therein: (1) The District is substantially composed of similarly -sized single family residential parcels. Accordingly, each single family residential parcel shall constitute one equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for purposes of allocating the cost of providing the Street Lighting Services therein. (2) Individual multifamily units within the District are specially benefitted by Street Lighting Services in the same manner and to substantially the same extent as single family residential parcels, such that each multifamily unit shall constitute one EDU. Individual tax parcels which contain multifamily units shall be assigned one EDU per multifamily unit. (3) The amount of the Assessment per EDU shall be calculated by dividing the total estimated cost of providing the Street Lighting Service by the number of EDUs in the District. (4) As of the date hereof, there are 467 EDUs located within the District. 4 Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution (5) For the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010, the estimated cost of providing Street Lighting Services in the District is $12,707.07. Such estimated cost includes a component to fund or otherwise reimburse the County for costs incurred in administering and maintaining the Assessment program as authorized by Section 1-17- 82 of the Ordinance. (6) The maximum amount of the Assessments to be assessed and apportioned among the parcels of real property within the District is hereby established in the amount of $27.21 per EDU for the Fiscal Year 2010-11. (B) Annual Assessment Resolutions for subsequent Fiscal Years may approve annual cost of living or inflationary increases in the amount of the Assessment by a cumulative total of not to exceed 10% of the amount approved hereunder, or a total annual Assessment of $29.93, without requiring additional notice and public hearing prior to adoption of such Annual Assessment Resolutions, as authorized by Section 1- 17-79 of the Ordinance. (C) The apportionment methodology approved herein shall be utilized in preparing the Assessment Roll for the District for subsequent Fiscal Years. SECTION 5. RATIFICATION AND CONFIRMATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARY AND RESOLUTION NO. 75-120. The legal description of the boundary of the District as set forth in Resolution No. 75-120, including any amendment thereto, is hereby ratified, confirmed and incorporated herein by 5 Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution reference. Except as otherwise modified herein, Resolution No. 75-120 is hereby ratified and confirmed. SECTION 6. IMPOSITION OF ASSESSMENTS. (A) Assessments for Street Lighting Services in the amounts set forth in the Assessment Roll are hereby levied and imposed on all parcels of property described in such Assessment Roll for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010. (B) Assessments shall constitute a lien upon the parcels of real property subject thereto equal in rank and dignity with the liens of all state, county, district or municipal taxes and other non -ad valorem assessments. Except as otherwise provided by law, such lien shall be superior in dignity to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. SECTION 7. APPROVAL OF ASSESSMENT ROLL. The Assessment Roll, which is on file with the Assessment Coordinator and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved. The Assessment Roll as herein approved shall be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector for collection pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. The Board has previously adopted its Resolution No. 09-332 expressing its intent to collect non -ad valorem assessments pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act. Such resolution constitutes the Resolution of Intent required by the Ordinance. The Assessment Roll, as delivered to the Tax Collector shall be accompanied by a Certificate 3 Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution to Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll in substantially the form attached hereto as Appendix D. SECTION 8. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments shall be collected pursuant to the Uniform. Assessment Collection Act as provided for in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. SECTION 9. EFFECT OF RESOLUTION. The adoption of this Annual Assessment Resolution shall be the final adjudication of the issues presented herein (including, but not limited to, the special benefit conveyed to assessed property by the Street Lighting Services, the apportionment methodology by which the Assessments are calculated, the Assessment Roll and the levy and lien of the Assessments), unless proper steps are initiated in a county of competent jurisdiction to secure relief within twenty (20) days from the adoption date hereof. SECTION 10. SEVERABILITY. If any clause, section, or other part of this resolution shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part shall be considered as eliminated and in no way affection the validity of the other provisions of this resolution. SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Annual Assessment Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. DULY ADOPTED this 1st day of June, 2010. 7 (SEAL) ATTEST: Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Chair Approved as to Form: Deputy Clerk County Attorney 9 Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAP OF THE DISTRICT Street Lighting District: 0 Harmony Heights 2 April 20t0 V. m r .M A Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX B PROOF OF PUBLICATION Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX C AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING This is to certify that on May 12, 2010, a total of 467 notices of "Non -Ad Valorem Assessments" for the Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District were mailed duly notifying the affected property owners of the Public Hearing to be held on June 1, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the St. Lucie County Commission Chambers, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, whereas the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approved the 2010 Assessment Roll. A sample copy of the notice is hereby attached. Barbara Guettler St. Lucie County Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ day of , 2010, by Barbara Guettler who is personally known to me. Notary Public, State of Florida Harmony Heights 2 Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX D FORM OF CERTIFICATE TO NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida or authorized agent of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County"); as such I have satisfied myself that all property included or includable on the Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for such county is properly assessed so far as I have been able to ascertain; and that all required extensions on the above described roll to show the non -ad valorem assessments attributable to the property listed therein have been made pursuant to law. I FURTHER CERTIFY that, in accordance with the Uniform Assessment Collection Act, this certificate and the herein described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll will be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector by September 15, 2010. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed this certificate and directed the same to be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector and made part of the above described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll this day of 2010. ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Authorized Agent S: \ ENG \ MSBU \ WORD \ StLightDistricts \ SLDs \ Harmony Heights 2 \ Annual Assessment Resolution (HH2) (00421045-2).doc RESOLUTION NO.10-163 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF STREET LIGHTING SERVICES, IMPROVEMENTS AND FACILITIES IN THE SUNLAND GARDENS STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT AND THE FUNDING THEREOF THROUGH THE IMPOSITION OF NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING THE BOUNDARY OF THE DISTRICT AS PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED; DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WILL BE SPECIALLY BENEFITED BY THE STREET LIGHTING SERVICES; APPROVING THE METHOD OF ASSESSING THE COST OF SUCH SERVICES AGAINST THE REAL PROPERTY SPECIALLY BENEFITTED THEREBY, APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION THEREOF TO THE TAX COLLECTOR, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY. This resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Article VI, Chapter 1-17 of the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances (the "Ordinance"), Sections 125.01, 125.66 and 197.3632, Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law. SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. This resolution constitutes the Annual Assessment Resolution as defined in the Ordinance. All capitalized words and terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Ordinance. Unless Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution the context indicates otherwise, words imparting the singular number, include the plural number, and vice versa. SECTION 3. FINDINGS. It is hereby ascertained, determined, and declared as follows: (A) The Board of County Commissioners (the 'Board") of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County") previously established the Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District (the "District") pursuant to Resolution No. 71-93, as amended and supplemented, and Ordinance No. 77-3, and provided for the imposition of special assessments to fund the cost of providing street lighting services, improvements and facilities therein. A map describing the boundary of the District is attached hereto as Appendix A. (B) On May 11, 2010, the Board enacted the Ordinance to revise the procedure by which special assessments are imposed within special improvement service districts for purposes of funding street lighting services. Such revised procedure requires adoption of an Annual Assessment Resolution each Fiscal Year approving the Assessment Roll for the District. (C) The Ordinance further provides that in the event the Board desires to implement an alternative apportionment methodology for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property specially benefited thereby, the 2 Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution Board shall provide notice and conduct a public hearing prior to adoption of the Annual Assessment Resolution. (D) As required by the terms of the Ordinance, notice of a public hearing has been published and mailed to each property owner proposed to be assessed notifying such property owner of the opportunity to be heard; the proof of publication and an affidavit of mailing are attached hereto as Appendices B and C respectively. (E) The Assessment Roll for Fiscal Year 2010-11 has heretofore been filed and made available for public inspection at the offices of the Assessment Coordinator. (F) A public hearing has been duly held and comments and objections of all interested persons have been heard and considered as required by law. (G) The parcels of real property located within the District and described in the Assessment Roll are hereby found to be specially benefited by the provision of Street Lighting Services. Street Lighting Services specially benefit such parcels by enhancing the safety, aesthetics, identification and recognition thereof and access thereto, thus protecting and enhancing the value, use and enjoyment of affected parcels. (H) The special benefits derived from the Street Lighting Services programs contemplated herein exceed the dollar amount of the Assessments to be levied and imposed hereunder. The Assessment for any parcel of property within the District does not exceed the proportional benefits that such parcel will receive compared to any other parcel therein subject to the Assessment. 3 Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution (I) The apportionment methodology approved herein bears a reasonable relationship to the cost of providing Street Lighting Services and is hereby approved. (J) The Assessments to be imposed in accordance with this Resolution provide an equitable method of funding the Street Lighting Services by fairly and reasonably allocating the estimated cost of providing such services among specially benefited property SECTION 4. APPORTIONMENT METHODOLOGY. (A) The following apportionment methodology was utilized in preparing the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Assessment Roll for the District and is hereby approved as the basis for allocating the cost of Street Lighting Services among the parcels of real property described therein: (1) The District is substantially composed of similarly -sized single family residential parcels. Accordingly, each single family residential parcel shall constitute one equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for purposes of allocating the cost of providing the Street Lighting Services therein. (2) Individual multifamily units within the District are specially benefitted by Street Lighting Services in the same manner and to substantially the same extent as single family residential parcels, such that each multifamily unit shall constitute one EDU. Individual tax parcels which contain multifamily units shall be assigned one EDU per multifamily unit. 4 Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution (3) The amount of the Assessment per EDU shall be calculated by dividing the total estimated cost of providing the Street Lighting Service by the number of EDUs in the District. (4) As of the date hereof, there are 604 EDUs located within the District. (5) For the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010, the estimated cost of providing Street Lighting Services in the District is $ 14,302.72. Such estimated cost includes a component to fund or otherwise reimburse the County for costs incurred in administering and maintaining the Assessment program as authorized by Section 1-17- 82 of the Ordinance. (6) The maximum amount of the Assessments to be assessed and apportioned among the parcels of real property within the District is hereby established in the amount of $23.68 per EDU for the Fiscal Year 2010-11. (B) Annual Assessment Resolutions for subsequent Fiscal Years may approve annual cost of living or inflationary increases in the amount of the Assessment by a cumulative total of not to exceed 10% of the amount approved hereunder, or a total annual Assessment of $26.05, without requiring additional notice and public hearing prior to adoption of such Annual Assessment Resolutions, as authorized by Section 1- 17-79 of the Ordinance. (C) The apportionment methodology approved herein shall be utilized in preparing the Assessment Roll for the District for subsequent Fiscal Years. R Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution SECTION 5. RATIFICATION AND CONFIRMATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARY.. The legal description of the boundary of the District as set forth in Ordinance No. 77-3, including any amendment thereto, is hereby ratified, confirmed and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 6. IMPOSITION OF ASSESSMENTS. (A) Assessments for Street Lighting Services in the amounts set forth in the Assessment Roll are hereby levied and imposed on all parcels of property described in such Assessment Roll for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010. (B) Assessments shall constitute a lien upon the parcels of real property subject thereto equal in rank and dignity with the liens of all state, county, district or municipal taxes and other non -ad valorem assessments. Except as otherwise provided by law, such lien shall be superior in dignity to all other liens, titles and claims, until paid. SECTION 7. APPROVAL OF ASSESSMENT ROLL. The Assessment Roll, which is on file with the Assessment Coordinator and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved. The Assessment Roll as herein approved shall be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector for collection pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. The Board has previously adopted its Resolution No. 09-334 expressing its intent to collect non -ad valorem assessments pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act. Such Z Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution resolution constitutes the Resolution of Intent required by the Ordinance. The Assessment Roll, as delivered to the Tax Collector shall be accompanied by a Certificate to Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll in substantially the form attached hereto as Appendix D. SECTION 8. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments shall be collected pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act as provided for in Section 1-17-81 of the Ordinance. SECTION 9. EFFECT OF RESOLUTION. The adoption of this Annual Assessment Resolution shall be the final adjudication of the issues presented herein (including, but not limited to, the special benefit conveyed to assessed property by the Street Lighting Services, the apportionment methodology by which the Assessments are calculated, the Assessment Roll and the levy and lien of the Assessments), unless proper steps are initiated in a county of competent jurisdiction to secure relief within twenty (20) days from the adoption date hereof. SECTION 10. SEVERABILITY. If any clause, section, or other part of this resolution shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part shall be considered as eliminated and in no way affection the validity of the other provisions of this resolution. SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Annual Assessment Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. 7 DULY ADOPTED this 1st day of June, 2010. (SEAL) ATTEST: Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA 0 Chair Approved as to Form: Deputy Clerk County Attorney 0 Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAP OF THE DISTRICT Street Lighting District: 0 Sunland Gardens Npnl 201C 0 ■�' MINI 11111■ _ ■ ■11■NINE �� � 11■■■ ■1111■=111111■ ■I■■■111 _� - �■ n1 ■ 1■ ■ ■■■ ■ ■ �■ ■ ■■■1111 ■■■■■ ■ ■■NONE ■■■ ■1 ! �11 1 i� �■ ■ ■11111■111■■111 ■ i 1■■11 N ■ 1■11 ■11111 ■ 111111■ ■ ■ /�� ! � uu �� i= ■ D 11 111 ■1 QDistrict Boundary = Parcel Boundary Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX B PROOF OF PUBLICATION Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX C AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING This is to certify that on May 12, 2010, a total of five hundred and ninety-five (595) notices of "Non -Ad Valorem Assessments" for the Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District were mailed duly notifying the affected property owners of the Public Hearing to be held on June 1, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the St. Lucie County Commission Chambers, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida, whereas the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approved the 2010 Assessment Roll. A sample copy of the notice is hereby attached. Barbara Guettler St. Lucie County Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of , 2010, by Barbara Guettler who is personally known to me. Notary Public, State of Florida Sunland Gardens Street Lighting District Annual Assessment Resolution APPENDIX D FORM OF CERTIFICATE TO NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT ROLL I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida or authorized agent of St. Lucie County, Florida (the "County"); as such I have satisfied myself that all property included or includable on the Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll for such county is properly assessed so far as I have been able to ascertain; and that all required extensions on the above described roll to show the non -ad valorem assessments attributable to the property listed therein have been made pursuant to law. I FURTHER CERTIFY that, in accordance with the Uniform Assessment Collection Act, this certificate and the herein described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll will be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector by September 15, 2010. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed this certificate and directed the same to be delivered to the St. Lucie County Tax Collector and made part of the above described Non -Ad Valorem Assessment Roll this day of 2010. ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Authorized Agent S: \ ENG \ MSBU \ WORD \ StLightDistricts \ SLDs \ Sunland Gardens \ Annual Assessment Resolution (SG). DOC AGENDA REQUEST TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ITEM NO. MT- E DATE: June 1, 2010 REGULAR[] PUBLIC HEARING [XX] CONSENT[] PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Daniel S. McIntyre County Attorney SUBJECT: Resolution No. 10-113-TVC Municipal Services Taxing Unit - BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution No. 10- 113 and authorize the Chairman to sign the Resolution. COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: �] APPROVED [ ] DENIED [ ] OTHER: County Attorney: P Daniel 5. McIntyre Originating Dept. Finance: (Check for copy only, if applicable) Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Review and Approvals Management d Budget n Growth Mgmt Dir: .}� ark Satterlee Public Works Dir: t� U Planning Mgr: D-1.4west I a Wood Eff. 5/96 INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney C.A. NO.: 10-0486 DATE. April 28, 2010 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 10-113 - TVC Municipal Services Taxing Unit BACKGROUND: On May 1, 2007, the County entered into a Stipulated Settlement Agreement with the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs and others concerning the Towns, Villages and Countryside comprehensive plan amendments which were adopted in Ordinance No. 06-19 on May 16, 2006. One of the provisions of new Policy 3.1.9.16 provides that "[w]ithin 12 months from the effective date of this policy, the County shall create a special taxing district and/or a municipal services taxing or benefit unit (MSTU/MSBU) to fund capital improvement programs within the NSLC SAP to the extent necessary beyond developer contributions in the form of impact fees, proportionate fair share contributions and other developer contributions. "The geographic boundaries of such special district and/or MSTU/MSBU shall encompass not less than the entire area subject to the TVC land use designation as of the effective date of this policy provided that such special district and/or MSTU/MSBU may establish sub -districts as authorized by law." Attached to this memorandum is a copy of Resolution No. 10-113, which, if adopted, would create a municipal service taxing unit. Staff recommends that the Board create the unit but not levy any taxes or assessments at this time or in the foreseeable future due to economic conditions and the pending litigation. Permission to advertise the public hearing was granted on April 27, 2010, and notice was published in the Tribune on May 7 and May 27, 2010. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION : Staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution No. 01-113 and authorize the Chairman to sign the Resolution. Respectfully 1 Daniel S. County A D5M/caf Attachment RESOLUTION NO. 10-113 A RESOLUTION TO BE KNOWN AS THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY TVC MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT RESOLUTION; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS AND FINDINGS; CREATING THE TVC MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT; AUTHORIZING SUCH UNIT TO ANNUALLY LEVY AD VALOREM TAXES AND NON -AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS; AUTHORIZING OTHER GENERAL POWERS OF SUCH UNIT; DECLARING THE EXCLUSION FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, that: islllARTICLE I, If"RO tN Section 1.01. Definitions. Menusedin kils l�es tion, th�Following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly requires otherwise: "Board" shall mean the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida. "County" shall mean St. Lucie County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida. "Essential Facilities" shall mean public or municipal facilities and services including but not limited to roads, streets, sidewalks, parking facilities, all other forms of transportation facilities including bike paths and mass transit, water control and management facilities including flood control, drainage, and all related surface water facilities, potable water supply, 5; \ATTY\RE50LTN\2010\10-113.wpd 1 wastewater facilities including reclamation and reuse projects, and open space and recreational facilities defined in Section 125.01(1)(q). "TVC shall mean "Towns, Villages and Countryside" "TVC area" shall mean the property described in the Appendix. "Unit" shall mean the TVC Municipal Service Taxing Unit as created by Section 2.01. Section 1.02. Findings. It is hereby ascertained, determined and declared that: A. Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1 of the Florida Constitution, and Sections 125.01 and 125.66, Florida Statutes, the Board has all the powers of local self-government to perform county functions and to render services in a manner not inconsistent with general law and such power may be exercised_by the enactment_of coin , ordinances. B. Section 125.((1)(;date provides legislative authorization for �- 9 counties to establish a municipal service taxing unit for any part or all of the unincorporated areas within its boundaries within which may be provided essential facilities and municipal services. C. The purpose of this resolution is to create the TVC Municipal Service Taxing Unit for the purpose of providing for the construction, maintenance and operation of essential facilities and municipal services to residents within the TVC area. The Board determines that the creation of this municipal service taxing unit will be of benefit to the real and personal property within the unit. The Board shall determine each year the estimated cost of providing such services for the ensuing County fiscal year within the 5; \ATTY\RE50LTN\2010\10-113.wpd 2 boundaries of the unit. The unit will serve as a financing mechanism to assist in the construction, maintenance, and operations of essential facilities under the unit. Funding from new development in the form of developer contributions such as impact fees, proportionate fair share contributions and other developer agreements will serve as the primary sources of revenue to construct essential facilities. D. The Board hereby determines that the provision of facilities within the TVC area is an essential municipal service within the meaning of Article VII, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution and Section 125.01(1)(q), Florida Statutes. ARTICLE II NC MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT Section 2.01. Creation PFi ith&iby ct ltec the TVC unicipal Service Taxing Unit �, a WA, lk pursuant to Section 125.01 - . Fl6�ida"5fdtut4�s. the boundaries of the Unit shall include the TVC area as indicated in the boundaries set forth and described in the Appendix, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The purpose of the Unit is to provide for the construction, maintenance and operation of essential facilities within the Unit as set out in Section 1.02C of this Resolution. The Board of County Commissioners shall be the governing board of the Unit. The Board may establish sub -units as authorized by law. Section 2.02. Governing Board Powers. The Governing Board shall have the power to: A. Levy annually an ad valorem tax as authorized by Section 125.01(1)(q) Florida Statutes upon taxable real and personal property for the provision of and operation of 5: \ATTY\RE5OLTN\2010\10-113.wpd 3 essential facilities and municipal services within the Unit in the same manner as other county ad valorem taxes are levied; B. Levy non -ad valorem assessments as defined in Section 197.3632 Florida Statutes for the purpose of planning, construction and maintenance of essential facilities and services. C. Adopt a budget for the Unit to implement construction, maintenance, and operations of essential services at the same time and in the same manner as the Board prepares and adopts its annual county budget and levies ad valorem taxes or non -ad valorem assessments as provided by law. Additional funding sources such as Development Agreements, federal, state,or local funds, and impact fees dedicated for essential facilities within the unit will also be donsid r��as past this annual adoption process; D. Maintain a separate account from the funds obtained from the levy of any taxes or assessments. Those funds obtained from the levy of the ad valorem taxes or assessments shall be used solely for the purpose of providing and operating essential facilities and services within the boundaries of the Unit, including but not limited to land acquisition, planning, facility construction, equipment, and other costs; E. Appropriate and expend revenue of the Unit; F. Borrow money and issue bonds and other evidences of indebtedness to fund essential facilities and the operation of the Unit to the extent permitted by law. 5: \ATTY\RE50LTN\2010\10-113.wpd 4 G. Contract to receive and expend money, to sue and be sued, and generally to perform all other acts necessary or incidental to the powers and duties granted by this resolution. ARTICLE III MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 3.01. Declaration of exclusion from Administrative Procedures Act. Nothing contained in this resolution shall be construed or interpreted to include the Unit in the definition of agency contained in Section 120.52, Florida Statutes, or to otherwise subject the Unit to the application of the Administrative Procedures Act, Chapter 120, Florida Statutes. This declaration of intent and exclusion shall apply to all proceedings taken as a At - result of or pursuant to th luon Section 3.02. Severability►..1f ahy cruse,#sectio or provision of this resolution shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason or cause, the remaining portion of said resolution shall be in full force and effect and be valid as if such invalid portion thereof had not been incorporated herein. Section 3.03. Effective date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows: Chairman Charles Grande XXX Vice Chairman Doug Coward XXX Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky XXX Commissioner Paula A. Lewis XXX Commissioner Chris Craft XXX 5: \ATTY\RE50LTN\2010\ 10-113.wpd 5 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 1st day of June 2010. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: 5: \ATTY\RE50LTN\2010\10-113.wpd 6 County Attorney APPENDIX TOWNS, VILLAGES, COUNTRY BOUNDARY LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTIONS 3, 4, 5, 8, 9,10, 17,19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, AND 36, T-34-5, R-39-E, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGIN AT THE N.W. CORNER OF SECTION 5, T-34-5, R-39-E; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTIONS 5, 8, AND 17, T-34-5, R-39-E TO THE S.W. CORNER OF THE N.W.1/4 OF SECTION 17, T-34-5, R-39E; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE N.E. 4 OF SECTION 18 T-34-5, R-39-E 1356.54' TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 76.00' TO A POINT; THENCE WEST 1356.70' TO THE WEST LINE OF THE S.E.1/4 OF SECTION 18, T-34-5, R_39-E; THENCE SOUTH �5�6, TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 182.E EME SS A POINT OR THE CENTERLINE OF THE M FORT PIERCE FARMS WA R C N L D tIC DIKE ASiREFERENCED WITHIN ORB 287 AT PAGE 1830 OF THE'= --IC-RECORDS 60 ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) CALLS; 1. THENCE SOUTH 1980.10' TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 18, T-34-5, R-39-E; 2. THENCE SOUTH 2697.26' MORE OR LESS TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE N.W. 4 SECTION LINE OF SECTION 19, T-34-5, R-39-E; 3. THENCE SOUTHEAST 886.31' MORE OR LESS TO A POINT; 4. THENCE SOUTH 1946.51' TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 19, T-34-5, R-39-E; THENCE RUN WEST DEPARTING SAID CENTERLINE A DISTANCE OF 58' MORE OR LESS TO THE N.W. CORNER OF THE EAST 1 OF SECTION 30, T-34-5, R-39-E; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 30 TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SUNSHINE STATE PARKWAY; THENCE EAST AND SOUTH EAST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SUNSHINE STATE PARKWAY TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT CANAL C-25; THENCE EAST ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID C-25 CANAL TO A 5: \ATTY\RE50LTN\2010\10-113.wpd 7 POINT ALONG THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF KEEN ROAD; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF KEEN ROAD TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ST. LUCIE BOULEVARD; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ST. LUCIE BOULEVARD TO A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF KINGS HIGHWAY; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF KINGS HIGHWAY TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE S.W.1/4 OF SECTION 25, T-34-5,R-39-E; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF THE S.W.1/4 OF SECTION 25 TO THE S.W. CORNER OF THE EAST z OF THE N.E. 4 OF SECTION 26, T-34-5, R-39-E; THENCE RUN NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST I OF THE NE 4 OF SECTION 26, T-34-5,R-39-E TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 14, T-34-S, R-39-E; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTIONS 14 AND 13, T-34-5, R-39-E TO THE S.E.CORNER OF THE S.W. 4 OF THE S.W. 4 OF SECTION 13, T- 34-5, R-39-E; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE S.W.1/4 OF THE S.W.1/4 OF SECTION 13, T-34-5, R-39-E TO THE N.E. CORNER OF SAID S.W.1/4 OF THE S.W.1/4; THENCE EAST TO A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAYLOR DAIRY ROAD; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAYLOR DAIRY ROAD TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INDRIO ROAD; THENCE WEST ON THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INDRIO ROAD TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 14, T-34 ,S,, R-39-E;.THE ICE NORTH-, ALONG THE WEST LINE t • u �=k OF SECTIONS 14,11, AND ,�f'=34-S, R 9-E TIE W CflRNER OF SECTION 2, T-34- S, R-39-E; THENCE WEST ILOh46-00 N LIEF OF SECTIONS 3, 4, AND 5, T-34-5, R-39-E TO THE N.W.COR k O 515C-T-rON 5, T-34-5, R=39-E AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 5: \ATTY\RESOLTN\2010\10-113.wpd 8 AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. VII-F DATE: 06/01 /10 REGULAR PUBLIC HEARING (X) LEG. (X) QUASI -JD ( ) CONSENT ( ) TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: Britton Wilson SUBMITTED BY: Planning and Development Services Senior Long Range Planner Department, Planning Division SUBJECT: Transmittal hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report -Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: See attached memorandum. RECOMMENDATION: Board approval to transmit the Evaluation and Appraisal Report -Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs. COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: APPROVED ( ) OTHER County Attorney (X) ( ) DENIED Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Coordination/Signatures County Surveyor Daniel S. McIntyre County Engineer (X) Michael Powley Originating Dept. (X) Mark Sat terlee Purchasing ( ) Melissa Simberlund Ron Harris ERD ( X ) q�� �_ / ` Kar n Smith OMB ( ) Marie Gouin Planning and Development Services Department MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Mark Satterlee, AICP, PDS Direct FROM: Britton Wilson, Senior Long Range Planner ,A%yr Planning Division DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Transmittal hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report -Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan. ITEM No.: VII-F Background: Florida Statutes require local governments to adopt an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) once every seven years assessing progress in implementing their Comprehensive Plan. The EAR identifies how the Plan should be revised to better address community objectives, changing conditions and trends affecting the community and changes in state requirements. Counties are also required to amend their Comprehensive Plan based upon the EAR and submit EAR -based amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). St. Lucie County adopted the EAR in October 2008 and the report was found sufficient by DCA in January 2009. Once approved it becomes incumbent upon the local government to enact changes included within the EAR. This process allows local governments to update their Comprehensive Plan to ensure it meets current community requirements. As information changes over time (population, funding sources, and infrastructure needs) it may be necessary to update data and analysis referenced in the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the County is adopting only the Goals, Objectives, and Policies by ordinance to allow the opportunity to accommodate needed updates in data and analysis as they occur. All revisions are contained within the draft document delivered to the Board of County Commissioners approximately three weeks prior to today's meeting. Along with the draft Comprehensive Plan Update, Commission members were provided a copy of a memo from Calvin Giordano & Associates, dated May 3, 2010, that summarizes the proposed changes, a memo from Michael Brillhart identifying County adopted economic development incentives and public comment documentation with responses from staff where appropriate. Previous Action: February 8, 2010 — A public workshop was held. February 15, 2010 — A public workshop was held. March 8, 2010 — A public workshop was held. March 18, 2010 — A workshop with the Planning & Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency was held. April 15, 2010 — Public hearing with the Planning & Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency was held and voted 5:2 in favor of recommending adoption of the proposed amendments to the Board of County Commissioners. May 25, 2010 — Board of County Commissioners informal meeting was held. Recommendation: Board approval to transmit the Evaluation and Appraisal Report -Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs. Growth Management Department MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Mark Satterlee, AICP, PDS Directg FROM: Britton Wilson, Senior Long Range Planner, Planning Division /lb-_ DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Staff Report - Transmittal Hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan ITEM NO.: VII-F On March 18, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the Local Planning Agency (LPA) held a workshop on the proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff presented a general overview of the proposed changes and gathered feedback from Board members, which are summarized below. Also during this workshop was an opportunity for the public to comment. Prior to the LPA workshop, the Planning & Development Services (PDS) Department hosted three public workshops, which provided for the collection of valuable input from St. Lucie County citizens. All comments and input from the public have been itemized in the attached matrix with responses from staff where appropriate. All material has been posted on the PDS website. On April 15, 2010, the LPA held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and voted 5:2 in favor of recommending transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs and final adoption by the Board of County Commissioners. During the workshop and public hearing, the LPA provided the input below. Concerns Provided by the Planning and Zoning Commission: • Vagueness in the language. • Open concept of definitions, which leads to staff, board and developer interpretation to differ. • Deletion of water bodies, river names and boundaries. • Island and Shoreline restorations. • Western Land sustainability. • Sidewalks in rural areas that lead to nowhere. • Imposing new requirements on the County (cost). • The requirement of Community Development Districts (CDDs). Suggestions Provided by the Planning and Zoning Commission: • Well-defined definitions and directions. • Provide provisions for Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). • Create a TDR bank to be used in the Urban Service Area rather than being forced to use only in Unincorporated Areas. • Enhance the availability of industrial, light industry and commercial areas. • Do not rely on construction (home building) as St. Lucie County industry. • Flexibility in all areas of the County especially TVC areas. • Creatively expand disaster preparation and supplies for developments and Mobile Home Communities. Environmental Resources Department !COUNTY Agenda Item Companion Report TO: Board of County Commissioners ` THROUGH: Karen L. Smith, Environmental Resources Department Director6 FROM: Amy Griffin, Environmental Regulations and Lands Division Manager DATE: May 20, 2010 SUBJECT: Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Department Coordination Environmental Resources Department (ERD) has been working closely with Growth Management on the review of the Comprehensive Plan EAR Based Amendments. ERD's comments on the Comprehensive Plan EAR Based Amendments have been included in the attached staff report. Recommendations ERD supports Growth Management's position to transmit the EAR Based Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs. - 1 - Engineering Construction Engineering & Inspection Municipal Engineering Transportation Planning & Traffic Engineering Surveying & Mapping Planning Landscape Architecture & Environmental Services Construction Services Indoor Air Quality Data Technologies & Development 1 Boo Eller Drive, Suite 600 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316 Phone. 954.921.7781 Fax: 954.921.8807 www.ca)vin-giordano.com Calvin, Giordano & Associates, Inc. E X C EP T 1 0 N A L S 0 L U T 1 0 N S TO: - Mark Satterlee, AICP Growth Management Director Britton Wilson, Senior Planner FROM: Lorraine Tappen, AICP, Senior Planner DATE: May 3, 2010 (Revised) RE: Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Comprehensive Plan Amendments Background: Florida Statutes require local governments to adopt an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) once every seven years assessing progress in implementing their Comprehensive Plan. The EAR identifies how the Plan should be revised to better address community objectives, changing conditions and trends affecting the community and changes in state requirements. Counties are also required to amend their Comprehensive Plan based upon the EAR and submit EAR -based amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). St. Lucie County adopted the EAR in October 2008 and the report was found sufficient by DCA in January 2009. Once approved it becomes incumbent upon the local government to enact changes included within the EAR. This process allows local governments to update their Comprehensive Plan to ensure it meets current community requirements. As information changes over time (population, funding sources, infrastructure needs, etc.), it may be necessary to update data and analysis referenced in the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the County is adopting only the Goals, Objectives, and Policies by ordinance to allow the opportunity to accommodate needed updates in data and analysis as they occur. All revisions are contained within the accompanying binder. The EAR -based Amendments were reviewed during public workshops in February and March 2010. Then in April 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, reviewed the EAR -based Amendments and recommended Board of County Commissioners transmit the amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. If the Board approves transmittal of the amendments to DCA for formal review, DCA will issue an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report which gives input potentially resulting in revisions to the proposed amendments. Once revised, the Board may consider adoption of the amendments in order to complete the EAR process. Fort Lauderdale West Palm Beach Orlando Fort Pierce Homestead May 2010 Page 2 Summary: EAR recommendations provide the basis for the EAR -based Amendments. The following provides a summary of significant sections of the Data Inventory and Analysis and significant changes to the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of each Comprehensive Plan Element. Additionally, the Elements were renumbered in some cases for better organization of the Comprehensive Plan document as a whole. Recommendations from the EAR are shown in italics with the corresponding amendment listed. Future Land Use Element 1) Address intensity standards for non-residential uses (a floor area ratio or a combination of floor area (in square feet) and height or number of floors). (See table in revised Policy 1.1.1.1 (p. 1-15)) 2) Incorporate new objectives, policies and data as required by 2008 legislation regarding greenhouse gas reduction strategies and energy -efficient land use patterns. (See new Objective 1.1.4 (p.1-23) and new Goal 1.4 and related objectives and policies (p. 1-43)). Also Policy 1.1.5.13 was added to explore minimum densities within urban service boundary. 3) Incorporate future revisions to the Airport Master Plan into the Comprehensive Plan. (The County adopted an ordinance in 2007 to include Airport Master Plan as sub - element of the Transportation element. No change was made for this recommendation.) 4) Incorporate the recommendations of the FAR 150 noise study into the Comprehensive Plan. (See new Policy 1.1.15.5 (p. 1-39)) 5) Revise the Land Development Regulations to update the Airport Overlay District and the section referencing the 1984 Clear Zone Plans, which are no longer applicable to the Airport. (See new Policy 1.1.15.7 regarding runway protection zones (p. 1-39)). 6) Determine best planning strategies for rural lands with DCA and with public participation as part of the EAR -based amendments process. Such efforts should include initiating the review of a transfer of development strategies and amendments to the Rural Land Stewardship program. (See new Objective 1.4.1 (p. 1-43). Also note that the County has initiated the Western Lands Study to determine the future of western lands. The Comprehensive Plan will be amended upon completion of the study.) 7) Explore other innovative techniques for preservation of agricultural and rural lands including additional action steps in the Committee for a Sustainable Treasure Coast — Final Report. (See new Policy 1.4.1.1 (p. 1-43)) 8) Consider innovative partnerships between urban areas, local and regional governmental entities, and rural landowners that take advantage of the services and benefits that rural lands can provide to urban areas and the region as a whole. Examples might include compensating rural landowners to support CERP, IRL South Plan, and research on biofuels. (See new Policy 1.4.1.2 (p. 1-43)) May 2010 Page 3 9) Incorporate new objectives and policies which specifically address incorporation of green development standards. (See new Objective 1.4.2 (p. 1-43)) Other Changes to the Future Land Use Element: 10) New Policy 1.1.1.2 was added to include the Future Land Use designations formerly in the Data Inventory and Analysis. The original language in Ag-5 and Ag-2.5 regarding activity on areas greater than 200 acres was revised to eliminate the requirement for creating a Community Development District. 11) Original Policy 1.1.4.3 was relocated and renumbered Policy 1.1.7.1 under Objective 1.1.7 regarding planned unit developments. 12) Policy 1.1.4.7 was added to state that Future land use map amendment applications that increase residential development must demonstrate a numerical population need unless the amendment enhances urban infill, redevelopment or affordable housing projects. 13) Original Policy 1.1.5.6 was struck as it duplicates policies in the Infrastructure and Transportation Elements. 14) Original Policy 1.1.5.10 was struck. The language is expressed in existing Policy 1.1.11.2. 15) Original Policy 1.1.5.11 struck. Policy 1.1.12.4 regulates on -site sew age in all types of development. Also removed incorrect reference to statutes. 16) Policy 1.1.9.7 was amended to allow the Land Development Code to define geographically the St. Lucie River, Five Mile Creek, Ten Mile Creek and the Indian River Lagoon to allow the County flexibility in redefining these water bodies in the future. 17) North Fork of the St. Lucie River - from the Martin County line to the confluence 18) New Policy 1.1.10.4 added to fulfill statutory requirement for coastal counties to preserve working waterfronts. 19) Language from the Data Inventory and Analysis regarding mining/industrial extraction was relocated to new Policy 1.1.11.4. 20) Figures for Mixed Use Development (MXD) areas were added at the end of the Future Land Use Element. MXD areas no longer lying within unincorporated St. Lucie County were removed. 21) Policy 1.1.15.5 and Policy 1.1.17.8 were added to meet 2009 statutory requirements for compatible land uses adjacent to airport. May 2010 Page 4 Transportation Element 1) Update all data in Inventory, Data and Analysis Section and the County's Concurrency Management System. (The Data Inventory and Analysis was completely updated in the EAR -based Amendments process.) 2) Review and consider revision of the Transportation Element's objectives and policies to better understand and evaluate the impacts of the current land use pattern on the transportation system. (The Goals, Objectives and Policies were thoroughly reviewed considering current land use conditions. Various minor modifications were made to encourage multimodal transportation and reduce automobile dependency.) 3) Include data, analysis and suggested improvements from the TVC area traffic study. (See Data Inventory and Analysis. (p. 2-36 and 2-50)) 4) Address 2008 legislation that requires Transportation Elements to address greenhouse gas reduction strategies. — (See new Data Inventory and Analysis (p. 2-22), revised Goal 2.1 (p.2-57) and new Policy 2.1.1.9 (p.2-58)) 5) Adopt level of service standards (LOS) designated by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) and Strategic Intermodal System (SIS). (See revised Policies 2.1.1.6, 2.1.1.7 (p. 2-58) and Policy 2.1.2.6 (p.2-59)) 6) Review adopted levels of service standards (LOS) for arterials and other classified roadways within the County to ensure they are consistent with the needs of the County and the ability to fund, construct and maintain these facilities. Moreover, these LOS standards should be reviewed with the understanding that the current single -occupant auto -oriented land use pattern upon which they are founded may be unsustainable. — (The Data Inventory and Analysis provides extensive information of current and future level of service standards and roadway performance. Also, see revised table in Policy 2.1.2.6 (p 2-59)) 7) Adopt Traffic Demand Management (TDM) measures and explore related land use alternatives reduce traffic congestion, improve levels of service reduce single occupant automobile trips, reduce fossil fuel consumption and emissions, and reduce the need to fund, construct and maintain additional lane -miles of roadway capacity within the County. See new Policy 2.1.2.14 (p. 2-62)) 8) Review and consider revision of the Transportation Element's objectives and policies to support the tools used by the County that help shift the burden for funding and constructing roadway capacity improvements away from taxpayers towards new development using Proportionate Fair Share, and impact fees as further implemented by the Land Development Code. — (See new Policy 2.1.2.10 (p.2-61)) 9) Include a policy to utilize TRIP funds where appropriate to finance projects with regional impacts. (See new Policy 2.1.2.13 (p. 2-62)) 10) Include policies requiring incorporation of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) guidelines into the Land Development Code. (See revised Policy 2.2.1.4 (p.2-63)) May 2010 Page 5 11) Consider including the results and recommendations from the 2030 LRTP and more fully participate with establishing and implementing the recommendations of the 2035 RLRTP. See revised Policy 2.2.2.1 (p 2-64)) 12) Add policies that guide the implementation and update of the November 2007 Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways & Trailways Master Plan. (See new Policy 2.3.1.1 (p. 2-65)) 13) Continue to work towards the implementation of St. Lucie TPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. (See revised Policy 2.3.2.3 (p. 2-65)) 14) Include the policies for coordination on trails and greenways with the FDOT. (See revised Policy 2.3.2.6 (p.2-66)) 15) Include policies that support the Transit Development Plan (TDP) update such as: Pursue funding sources for transit through the South Florida Commuter Service, Florida Department of Transportation and Federal Transit Administration. (See policies related to Objective 2.6.1 (p. 2-68)) 16) Actively pursue federal funding and grants for transportation transit, travel demand management, transit oriented design, and other innovative strategies to reduce the need to fund, construct and maintain additional lane -miles of roadway capacity. (See new Policy 2.6.1.7 (p. 2-69)) Other Changes to the Transportation Element: 17) Added new Policy 2.2.17 regarding access management on major thoroughfares and near environmentally sensitive areas. Housing Element 1) Estimates of need for rural and farm worker households in the County should be revisited. (See Data Inventory and Analysis (p. 3-14)) 2) Develop a program to work with employers to utilize existing programs or develop specialized programs to assist employers who desire to participate in making housing in reasonable proximity to the workplace affordable and attainable. (See revised Policy 3.1.1.5 (p. 3-17)) 3) Review housing affordability based upon decreasing property values to ensure efficiency of the workforce and affordable housing delivery system. (See revised Policy 3.2.1.2 (p.3-18)) 4) Develop guidelines for an inclusionary housing program that will provide an incentive for private development to include a portion of residential units as certified affordable when feasible. (See new Policy 3.2.1.3 (p.1-18)) 5) Encourage rehabilitation rather than demolition, whenever feasible. (See revised Policy 3.2.3.2 p. 3-19) 6) Establish a Community Land Trust. (See new Policy 3.2.3.5 (p. 3-19)) May 2010 Page 6 7) Adopt Land Banking guidelines as deemed appropriate. (See new Policy 3.2.3.5 (p. 3- 19)) 8) Form a Housing Trust Fund that will be the depository for any funds donated or received for mitigation or other fees that are to be dedicated to meeting affordable housing needs. (See new Policy 3.2.3.6 (p. 3-19)) 9) Create public -private partnership via formation of locally based private nonprofit housing development corporation. (See new Policy 3.2.3.7 (p. 3-19)) 10) Continue support for the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. (Stated in Objective 3.2.4.1 and related policies (p.3-19)) 11) Include policies to ensure adequate sites for affordable workforce housing. (See revised Objective 3.1.1. (p. 3-17) and new Policy 3.2.5.2 regarding required workforce housing in the TVC (p.3-21) 12) Affordable housing should be constructed using green building practices. (See new Policy 3.2.7.5 (p.3-22)) Other Changes to the Housing Element: 13) Included information on foreclosures in the Data Inventory and Analysis. (p.3-2). 14) Added statutory requirements for Affordable Housing Advisory Committees to Policy 3.2.4.1. 15) Objective 3.2.7 and related policies were added meet statutory requirements for Housing Elements to include policies on energy efficiency. Infrastructure Element Potable Water Sub -element 1) Schedule an update to the Wellfield Protection Ordinance. (This recommendation was completed with amendments to the Potable Water Sub -element completed in conjunction with the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan adopted in 2008.) 2) Promote water conservation and encourage the use of reclaimed water. (This recommendation was completed with amendments to the Potable Water Sub -element completed in conjunction with the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan adopted in 2008.) Solid Waste Sub -Element 3) Recycle waste to the fullest extent possible and provide economic opportunities through recycling and reuse of the existing and future waste stream. (This recommendation was completed with the adoption of the amendments to the Solid Waste Sub -element in 2007.) May 2010 Page 7 Other Changes to the Infrastructure Element: 4) Added new Policies 4A1.1.3 and 4D.1.1.3 stating that no new water or sewer utility companies within the unincorporated areas of the County. 5) Added new Policies 4A.1.2.6 and 4D.1.2.5 stating new development in the unincorporated areas requiring utilities must obtain water or sewer utility service from 1. St. Lucie County Water and Sewer Utility District 2. Fort Pierce Utility Authority 3. City of Port St. Lucie Utility 6) Added new Policies 4A.3.2.2 and 4D.2.2.4 that impacts on potable water and sanitary sewer infrastructure shall be funded by the new customers in advance. 7) Policy 4B.1.1.1 revised to reflect levels of service standards in County landfill capacity analyses. 8) Policy 4C.3.1.6 was added to state that the County shall evaluate the financial feasibility of incorporating of Low Impact Design (LID) stormwater management techniques in conjunction with South Florida Water Management and Florida Department of Environmental Protection criteria by December 2013. 9) Added level of service for FPUA wastewater service to Policy 4D.1.2.2. 10) Policy 4D.1.4.5 was added to state that the County shall coordinate with FDEP to encourage small package treatment plants to connect to a central sewer system when feasible. Coastal Management Element 1) As a part of the EAR -based amendment process the data section can be updated to reflect current information on marine turtle nesting activity, hurricane activity, beach erosion and nourishment programs. (See Data Inventory and Analysis (p. 5-4)) 2) As part of the EAR -based amendment process the Integration of the Local Mitigation Strategy into the Local Comprehensive Plan report should be reviewed in its entirety and the recommendations the County feels are most applicable and would balance community vulnerability against potential economic and social costs should be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. (See Data Inventory and Analysis, (p. 5-10)) 3) Incorporate policies to ensure the removal of invasive exotic vegetation on coastal systems with any development or redevelopment proposal as well as criteria to ensure appropriate re -vegetation and long-term exotic maintenance control. Stabilization measures for areas impacted by exotic removal should be included for the period before re -vegetation is established. (See new Policy 5.1.1.8 (p. 5-17)) 4) Incorporate a policy to establish a restoration program on public beach and dune lands for effective exotic vegetation control measures with viable replanting and maintenance plans. (See new Policy 5.1.5.9 (p. 5-23)) 5) Incorporation of a policy to identify that the County shall monitor the characteristics of the dune and other natural resource systems through the development review process and that any indications of changes shall be examined and current conservation May 2010 Page 8 management policies shall be refined as needed in order to remain responsive to evolving problems and issues. (See new Policy 5.1.1.8 (p. 5-17)) 6) Incorporate a policy to consider scientifically -based sea level rise data when planning long-term infrastructure and capital improvement activities, and in future land use decisions. (See new Policy 5.1.1.10 (p. 5-17)) 7) Incorporate a policy to consider and evaluate, when reviewing redevelopment applications, the feasibility of and whether any benefits may accrue through the removal/remediation of previously existing manmade alterations on the shorelines and dunes as part of the redevelopment project. (See new Policy 5.1.5.7 (p. 5-23)) 8) Incorporate a policy to indicate that the County shall support a program in coordination with the Local Mitigation Strategy committee to educate home and business owners on mitigation techniques for protecting their coastal structures. (See new Policy 5.2.1.7 (p. 5-26)) 9) Include a policy for post -disaster redevelopment. (See new Policies 5.2.4.10-13, (p. 5- 29-30)) Other Changes to the Coastal Management Element: 10) Added data regarding the CBRA zone and current County concerns. 11) Policy 5.1.1.7 updated to reflect statutory requirement for preservation of working waterfronts for commercial and recreational uses. 12) Policy 5.1.1.11 added to direct inappropriate future land uses away from the coastal planning area and ensure non -compliant uses are addressed. 13) Policy 5.1.2.4 updated to remove potential conflict with Land Development Code. 14) Policy 5.1.4.5 modified to reflect the limits of regulatory jurisdiction of the County. 15) Policy 5.2.1.1 updated to reflect the new statutory definition of Coastal High Hazard Area. 16) Policy 5.2.1.5 addressed limiting the type of uses and to directing population away from the CHHA. (The original policy is struck since it is a duplication of policy 7.4.1.1.) 17) Goal 7.5 and associated policies relating to the port are struck. The Port Sub -element provides goals, objectives and policies for the Port of Ft. Pierce. Conservation Element 1) Incorporate information on large water quality restoration projects into the data section of the Comprehensive Plan. (See the Data Inventory and Analysis section (p. 6-8-10)). May 2010 Page 9 2) Incorporation of updated data from the 2004 county -wide native habitat inventory. (This recommendation was re-evaluated during the EAR -based Amendments process. The inventory was an informal study and not inclusive of all native habitats. The Conservation Element does provide information on habitats in Table 6-3 (p. 6-11.)) 3) Include data on energy conservation as required in 2008 legislation for Conservation Elements. (See the Data Inventory (p. 6-16)). 4) Provide support and effective coordination with the SFWMD, ACOE and other applicable organizations to facilitate the development of the CERP Indian River Lagoon South Plan (IRL - South Plan) and the implementation of the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) initiative. (See new Policy 6.1.2.4 (p. 6-20)) 5) Ensure that surface water management systems be designed and operated consistent with state, federal, and regional standards and the County's adopted level of service. (See new Policy 6.1.2.14 (p.6-21)). 6) Support the County Mosquito Control District programs for reconnection, restoration and management of impoundment areas. (See new Policy 6.1.2.13 (p. 6-21)) 7) Incorporate policies to establish the base -line and benchmarks for future habitat protection goals. (Existing Objective 6.1.4 provides for no net loss of wetlands. (p. 6-22) New Policy 6.1.8.14 provides for protection of native upland vegetative communities (p.6-30. )) 8) Continue the acquisition of properties for the preservation and restoration of the IRL system. (See existing Objective 6.1.12 supported by revised Policy 6.12.3 (p. 6-33)) 9) Continue the acquisition, conservation and preservation of native habitats. (Several existing Objectives and policies provide continued acquisition of native habitats.) 10) Include objectives and policies to ensure continued compatibility of future land use designations. (Policy 6.12.13 (p. 6-35)) 11) Incorporate updated data on the status of threatened, endangered and species of special concern. (Appendix 6C provides a list of endangered species.) 12) Include policy to facilitate energy conservation in existing public buildings. (See Future Land Use Element Policy 1.4.2.1 (p. 1-43)). Other Changes to the Conservation Element: 13) Policy 6.1.1.4 has been replaced by policy supporting and implementing alternative transportation. (Original policy was a duplication of 6.1.1.3) 14) Policy 6.1.1.5 was replaced with greenhouse gas emissions reduction policy. (Original policy deleted to reflect deferment to jurisdictional authority of the FDEP) 15) Policy 6.1.2.12 added policy to support FDEP monitoring of Port activities as it relates to surface water quality. May 2010 Page 10 16) Policy 6.1.4.4 was revised to reflect the land development regulations regarding wetland buffers. 17) Policy 6.1.4.9 was amended to strike reference to "environmentally sensitive" due to uncertainty of definition and replaced with high quality/high functional value which is reflective of the adopted UMAM system to quantitatively evaluate wetlands. 18) Policy 6.1.4.10 and is now replaced with a wetland mitigation criteria policy. (Original policy addressing surface water was relocated to 6.1.2.15) 19) Policy 6.1.4.11 was amended to reflect setbacks from wetlands instead of from open water. 20) Policy 6.1.4.12 was revised to reflect the standardized procedure to assess the qualitative functionality of wetlands is determined through the application of the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Methodology (UMAM) adopted in Chapter 62-345 of the F.A.C. 21) Policy 6.1.6.6 was added policy to adopt regulations addressing BMP's for soil to meet 9J-5 requirements. 22) Objective 6.1.15 was added to state that the BOCC shall consider the Wetland Inventory and Evaluation Study initiated by the Environmental Resources Department to facilitate the development of policies and procedures to improve the protection of the existing wetlands in the County. 23) In some other cases, policies were relocated under Objectives based upon the subject area: wetlands, surface water, etc Recreation and Open Space Element 1) Review and revise definitions for neighborhood, community, and regional parks, as well as passive and active recreation. Florida's 2000 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) provides recommended standards and definitions. (A new parks classification system suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department has been added to the Data Inventory and Analysis (p. 7-1)) 2) Provide updated inventory and map when Comprehensive Plan is amended. (An updated inventory has been included in the Data Inventory and Analysis (p. 7-4). An updated map has been included in the map series (REC-1)) 3) These new classifications can be applied to an updated parks inventory, which will provide for a more appropriate LOS measurement. (The park classifications suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department were applied to the inventory. (p. 7-7)) 4) Incorporate the County's focus on regional parks and the feasibility of future regional parks. (See Policy 7.1.4.2 (p. 7-10)) 5) Create an interagency parks and recreation facility task force to maximize partnerships. (This EAR recommendation was reconsidered during the EAR -based Amendment process. It was determined that existing coordination mechanisms are in place for park facilities. No change was made based upon this recommendation.) May 2010 Page 11 6) Add policies that guide the implementation and update of the November 2007 Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways & Trailways Master Plan. (See new Policy 7.1.3.3. (p.7-9)) 7) Continue management plans for the purchase of ESLs, and plan for sustainable recreation opportunities. (See revised Objective 7.1.6 (p. 7-10)) Other Changes to the Recreation and Open Space Element: 8) The Regional Parks LOS in the April 2010 version was lowered to reduce the deficit in Regional Parks and align the need with the Parks Master Plan. 9) The level of service for Resource -based Parks was adjusted to ensure the level of service could be met through the long range planning timeframe without requiring additional acreage. Intergovernmental Coordination Element 1) Update Policy 10.1,10 to current joint planning issues between St. Lucie County and the municipalities. (See revised Policies 8.1.1.10, 8.1.1.11 and new Policy 8.1.1.12 (p. 8-12)) 2) Coordination with the regional policy plan. (See new Policy 8.1.1.13 (p. 8-12)) 3) Provide for opportunities to engage in agreements for transfer development rights with municipalities. (Policy 8.1.1.14 (p. 8-12)) 4) Recognition of campus master plans prepared pursuant to Section 240.155, F.S., and procedures for coordination of the provisions of the campus master development agreement. (See new Policy 8.1.2.9 (p.8-14)) 5) Include policy to ensure adoption of interlocal agreements within one year of adoption of the amended intergovernmental coordination element per 163.3177(6)(h)2. (The County maintains interlocal agreements with the municipalities and the St. Lucie School District. New Policy 8.1.3.6 (p.8-15) was added to highlight the interlocal agreement on school concurrency with the St. Lucie School District.) 6) Adopt a policy to involve the navigation and inlet districts and other appropriate state and federal agencies and the public in providing for or identifying dredge spoil disposal sites for the counties and municipalities in the coastal area with spoil disposal responsibilities. (See new Objective 8.1.6 and related policies (p. 8-15)) 7) Adopt a policy to resolve conflicts between a coastal local government and a public agency seeking a dredge spoil disposal site through the Coastal Resources Interagency Management Committee's dispute resolution process. (New Policy 8.1.6.2 was added (p. 8-16)) Capital Improvement Element 1) Incorporate timing requirements from 163.3180 regarding public facilities. (The timing requirements in existing Policy 9.1.4.3 (p.9-31) are more stringent and require for capital improvements to be installed earlier in the development process than statutory requirements. No change was made for this recommendation.) May 2010 Page 12 2) Ensure land development code regarding Adequate Public Facilities reflects new school concurrency requirements. (See Policy 9.1.1.14 (p. 9-20)) 3) Determine a level of service standard for Policies 11.1.1.24; 11.1.1.25; and 11.1.1.26. (See new Policy 9.1.15 (p. 9-20) regarding new Level of Service standards for Mosquito Control, and the Airport. No level of service was set for the Port.) 4) Establishment of a LOS standard for mass transit Policy 11.1.1.13. (The County is currently considering the Regional Transit Development Plan for the Port St. Lucie Urbanized Area Policy which provides seven alternatives for future transit. It is premature to set a level of service until implementation plans are in place. Policy 9.1.1.13 (p.9-20) was added to state that the County shall consider the financial feasibility of setting a mass transit level of service by December 2014.) 5) Include a schedule to provide for the annual update of the CIE. (See new Policy 9.3.5 (p. 9-30)) 6) Consider the feasibility of creating and implementing a concurrency and capacity database. (See new Policy 9.1.4.12 (p. 9-37)) Other Changes to the Capital Improvement Element: 7) Added schools to Category A Public Facilities in Policy 9.1.2. Also, public facility categories were consolidated into two categories: Category A for public facilities considered in concurrency reviews and Category B for public facilities not considered in concurrency reviews, but essential to economic development and quality of life in St. Lucie County. 8) New Policy 9.1.1.17 was added to state that the County shall explore the financial feasibility of preparing a Library Master Plan by December 2014 to determine County library needs and funding sources. 9) New Policy 9.1.1.18 was added to state that the County shall maintain the provision of Administrative and Maintenance space as the county grows. Because Administrative and Maintenance Space is not related to concurrency reviews, the numerical level of service was struck. 10) Policy 9.1.2.10 regarding debt policy was added to meet Florida Administrative Code requirements for Capital Improvement Elements. 11) Original Policies 11.1.3.5. through 11.1.3.7 were relocated under Objective 9.1.4 regarding the timing of capital improvements. Economic Development Element 1) Create a policy to provide a target ratio for jobs/housing balance. (See new Policy 10.1.1.7 which states that the County will monitor jobs/housing balance. (p. 10-13)) 2) Provide for the identification of desired sites consistent with the County's growth management and land use strategies for each targeted industry as well as for other May 2010 Page 13 desired contributory business users with the potential for significant employment. (Policy 10.2.1.3 amended for this recommendation p. 10-13)) 3) Coordinate with local and regional job creation and retention efforts that support and improve job skills. (See new 10.1.1.6 (p.10-13) and Policy 10.2.1.8 regarding participation in the Research Coast marketing efforts (p. 10-14)) 4) Monitor business creation including for -profit status, which cluster the business supports, salaries, number of employees, and related higher learning programs needed to support the business. Create timeline to establish the database(s). (See new Policy 10.2.2.4 (p.10-14)) 5) Monitor existing businesses including for -profit status, which cluster the business supports, salaries, number of employees, and related higher learning programs needed to support the business. Create timeline to establish the database(s). (See new Policy 10.2.2.4 (p.10-14)) 6) Create GIS database tracking clusters by examining the location of related businesses. (See new Policy 10.2.2.4 (p.10-14)) 7) Continue to monitor the particular incentives that were utilized for business recruitment and track the long-term financial value of the incentives. (See Policy 10.2.2.4 (p. 10-14)) 8) Continue to monitor new and existing businesses recruitment of employees from local colleges and universities. (See Policy 10.2.2.4 (p. 10-14)) 9) Promote and identify internships and training for green sector jobs. (See Policy 10.2.3.5 (p. 10-15)) 10) Continue to establish grant opportunities for the sustainable re -use of agriculture land. Find a means of achieving continued bone fide agriculture operations through innovative land use alternatives such as TDRs and cultivation of alternative energy forms. (Policy 10.3.1.5 (p. 10-16)) 11) Promote the expansion of eco-tourism by encouraging existing and new hotels to participate in the Florida Green Lodging Program. (See new Policy 10.4.1.4 (p. 10-16)) 12) Monitor the origination of international tourists, to determine in which areas marketing should be focused. (See Policy 10.4.2.9 (p.10-17)) 13) Continue to provide incentives for economic development such as expedited review of development applications and impact fee waivers. Set timeline for the creation of an expedited application review program and interagency point person. (Policy 10.5.1.3 amended for this recommendation. (p.10-17) 14) Promote the expansion of commercial service at the airport. Create specific timelines to achieve the various components of this goal. (See Policy 10.6.1.5 (p.10-18)) 15) Identify need to coordinate educational programs and economic development policy with Growth Management. (This recommendation was reevaluated during the EAR - based Amendment process. St. Lucie County Administration will coordinate economic development.) 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ORDINANCE NO. 10-020 Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO APPROVE AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL BASED AMENDMENTS; PROVIDING FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature intends that local planning be a continuous and ongoing process; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, Ordinance No. 90-01 on January 9, 1990; and WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to adopt needed amendments to ensure that the plan provides appropriate policy guidance for growth and development; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the designated Local Planning Agency has reviewed the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments, held an advertised public hearing on April 15, 2010, provided for participation by the public in the process, and rendered its recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has reviewed the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments, held an advertised public hearing on , 2010, while providing for comments and public participation and approved transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has reviewed and addressed the Department of Community Affairs issued Objections, Recommendations and Comments report, and held a second advertised public hearing on 2010 while providing for comments and public participation; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENTS The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, attached here as Exhibit A. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 B. CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Board of County Commissioners does hereby state its intention to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments. C. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County Ordinances and County Resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby superseded by this Ordinance to the extent of such conflict. D. SEVERABILITY If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this Ordinance. If this Ordinance or any provisions thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstance. E. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraphs A and B. F. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS The Planning and Development Services Director shall send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. H. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty-one (31) days after adoption. If the Ordinance is challenged within thirty (30) days after adoption, the Ordinance shall not be effective until the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission respectively issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10), Florida Statutes. Ordinance No. 10-020 Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 I. ADOPTION After motion and second, the vote on this Ordinance was as follows: Charles Grande, Chairman XXX Doug Coward, Vice -Chair XXX Chris Dzadovsky, Commissioner XXX Chris Craft, Commissioner XXX Paula Lewis, Commissioner XXX PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this day, 2010. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: County Attorney Ordinance No. 10-020 Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Exhibit "A" EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT BASED AMENDMENTS Ordinance No. 10-020 Page 4 St. Lucie County EAR -Based Amendments Responses to Public Workshop Comments February R. 2010 - Comments Response 1. Imbalance of commercial, Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a MXD or SD industrial to residential Future Land Use designation that may be developed into a non - development residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Many of the current Future Land Use designations were identified in the late 1980's. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential or agricultural. 2. What data used on sea level "Sea Level Rise in the Treasure Coast Region" by the Treasure rise? Coast Regional Planning Council, December 2005 www.tcrpc.org As part of an ongoing program evaluating global climate change, the EPA has initiated a nationwide project promoting planning for and awareness of sea level rise. In 2000, the EPA issued a grant to the SWFRPC to participate in this program and coordinate the study of sea level rise throughout the State of Florida. In 2002, the TCRPC entered into a contract with SWFRPC to conduct a study of sea level rise within the Treasure Coast Region. The ultimate goal of this project is to diminish losses to life and property from coastal hazards, such as erosion and inundation, and to ensure the long- term survival of coastal wetlands. 3. Concern about potable water, Provisions provided for in the infrastructure element and respective drainage, and stormwater runoff subelements. 4. What is sustainability and is Sustainability: Development that meets the needs of the present there a link between the EAR- without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their based Amendments and the UN own needs. There is no direct link between the SLC Comprehensive Agenda 21? Plan and the UN Agenda 21. Committee fora Sustainable Treasure Coast —Final Report is reference in the EAR -based amendments. 5. Too much emphasis on high (EAR p. 1-28) Adopted targeted industry list. Since 1992, SLC has tech jobs and not enough attracted over 20 new businesses and created 4,900 new jobs emphasis on job creation for through the authorization of economic development incentives. existing folks Branding SLC as Florida's research coast. This list is composed of manufacturing, research, and distribution sectors that complement each other and would encourage the creation of industry clusters. Cluster theory is based on the concept that businesses and research centers want to be located in close proximity to similar institutions so that they may take advantage of a skilled workforce, access to specialized higher learning institutions, and adjacency to specialized customers and suppliers. The County has demonstrated the cluster concept with the recruitment of three major life sciences institutes - Torrey Pines Institute, Mann Research Center and the Vaccine and Gene Therapy Institute. St. Lucie County has also recognized its natural assets as a rich source of economic development. These include the vast opportunities for ecotourism and tourists interested in outdoor activities, such as golf and fishing. The existing plan identified tourism as an economic development tool. The Comp Plan contains the optional Economic Development Element. The Ad Valorem Tax Abatement and job Growth Investment Grants (JGIG) incentives have been especially successful in creating new jobs within the County. 6. Too much emphasis on I Florida Administrative Code, State mandated elements: Coastal EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 2 of 17 environmental protection. Too Management Element (9J-5.012), Conservation Element (9J-5.013) sensitive to land preservation. 7. There has been too much Population in St. Lucie County is expected to grow by 64% in the population growth next 30 years BEBR 2009 8. How will Housing Data be New data provided by the 2010 census will be incorporated into the reviewed again after Census? data and analysis of the Housing Element as appropriate. 9. What is jobs/housing balance The jobs/housing balance ratio of 1.5 is suggested by the American and how will that be used as an Planning Association. In an ideal world, there would be one job per indicator? resident. More realistically, a standard of 1.5 jobs to each housing unit could be developed and a range of 1.3 to 1.7 or 1.4 to 1.6 could be adopted as a target. (Weitz, Jerry, "Jobs -Housing Balance," Planning Advisory Service, American Planning Association, 2003.) The jobs/housing balance in St. Lucie County for 2007 is 0.56 based upon the number of households and labor force totals. This low ratio may partially be due to the large retirement community. The County would like to utilize a jobs/housing balance ratio as a barometer of economic success, like a litmus test for the County's progress on balancing jobs and housing. 10. There is no existing Transfer A TDR program currently exists in the TVC and Rural Land of Development rights program Stewardship programs. The Western Lands Study is currently right now. exploring the applicability of TDRs in western SLC. 11. How can supporting biofuels HB 7053 amending FS 163.3177 addresses the necessity of rural in the Comp Plan actually help agricultural industrial centers for the efficiency of biofuels production develop biofuels? which may require a Future Land Use Map Amendment (FLUMA) for siting, if so this bill prevents the denial of such a FLUMA based on findings that it promotes urban sprawl. A policy supporting biofuels will ensure that land development regulations do not get in the way of biofuels production. 12. It seems that the County has Zoning for mobile homes is RMH-5 and are permissible under the a policy of not allowing mobile following land use designations: RU, RM, RH and MXD. There are homes. existing mobile home parks identified as a conditional use under HIRD zoning. Currently the following language is present in the Comp Plan: Objective -53.2.6: The County shall continue to provide regulations that permit mobile homes in the county. Policy 53.2.6.1 - The RMH-5 zoning or a similar classification shall be retained in the Land Development Regulations. 13. Osceola County has a transfer Osceola County Comp Plan (adopted in 2007) Policy 1.1.3: of development rights program Urban Infill and Urban Expansion Areas. worth reviewing including options The UGB (Urban Growth Boundary) is divided into two (2) for buying down density. development areas — an Urban Infill Area and an Urban Expansion Area. To encourage development that can be efficiently served with public facilities and services, while discouraging the proliferation of urban sprawl, new residential development within these areas shall be meet the following minimum net densities: Urban Infill Area — 3.0 dwelling units per acre Urban Expansion Area — 5.0 dwelling units per acre Developing at less than the established minimum net densities will be permitted where the County's TDR program is used to buy down the density. Net density is defined as the total number of units divided by the developable area. The developable area consists of the residential land area less land for regional, public recreation and EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 3 of 17 open space areas in excess of the County's minimum requirements, stormwater systems designated by a water management district as "works of the district," natural water bodies and wetlands 14. County Commission has say County commissioners constitute the elected legislative body of the over development of land and can county and as a group are responsible for taxation, appropriations, limit your opportunities? What is ordinances, and other general functions. The State requires all the purpose? counties and cities to have a Comp Plan including regulations for land use. Generally, the purpose of land use and zoning regulations is to protect property values and quality of life which could be adversely impact neighboring uses. 15. Will St. Lucie County Citizens are afforded several opportunities to challenge decisions reconsider their decisions based that they feel may be inconsistent with the Growth Management Act on this erroneous data? and local government comprehensive plans. Your comment is a part (comment provided via email after of the official record. workshop) February 15. 2010 Comments Response 1. What is the source of information for the The Evaluation and Appraisal Report adopted by the amendments? Is there a global connection? BOCC in October 2008 is the basis for the amendments. This document is available online for download and review at: http://www.stlucieco.gov/growth/EAR.htm One of the documents used as a resource is the Committee for a Sustainable Treasure Coast Report. 2. What is Amendment 4/Hometown An initiative on the 2010 ballot. Florida residents will Democracy? have the option to require that all comprehensive plan amendments are approved by referendum during the November 2010 election. 3. Will you consider a petition to stop this This request is a part of the official record and as such project? has been sent to the Board members as an attachment to the March 18, 2010 P&Z agenda item. The EAR - based Amendments are a requirement of Florida statutes. 4. The work done in this plan is questionable. Growth Management (Ch. 163 Part II F.S.) Local It is based upon unfounded science. Government Comprehensive Planning and Development For example, Phil Jones's statement Regulation Act, AKA Florida's Growth Management Act regarding climate change science. Green and passed in 1985 requiring all 67 counties and 410 smart growth are buzz words from a global municipalities to adopt a Comprehensive Plan. plan putting Agenda 21 in place. In light of Comprehensive plans contain chapters or "elements" recent news, can we back out of this project that address future land use, housing, transportation, and reconsider the County's strategy? infrastructure, coastal management, conservation, recreation and open space, intergovernmental coordination, and capital improvements. A key component of the Act is its "concurrency" provision that requires facilities and services to be available concurrent with the impacts of development. The EAR -based amendments are State mandated with an associated timeframe for completion. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction and energy efficiency policies have been added to meet statutory requirements. The policies related to GHG reduction EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 4 of 17 and energy efficiency reflect the County's adopted sustainabilit policy, the "Greenprint." 5. Pay more attention to people- not just Growth Management (Ch. 163 Part II F.S.) Local roads, plants and dirt. Too much time on this Government Comprehensive Planning and Development and not people. Regulation Act, AKA Florida's Growth Management Act passed in 1985. Sustainability and environmental protection has been an interest of St. Lucie residents for a number of years. An important part of sustainability is economic development job creation. 6. Cost of studies in EAR -based amendments Any policy that might require a study or large project a concern includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of" or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 7. This will add to cost of development. HB 697 passed in 2008 requiring that Future Land Use Development pays in advance. Green and Transportation Element be amended to address construction adds costs. Cost of permits a urban sprawl, energy efficient land use patterns and concern. strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The state requires that all new public buildings be built to green standards. Private buildings are not required to build to green standards. Many new private buildings are voluntarily building to green standards because of the lonq term cost savings. 9. Using free money for green building. Why HB 697 calls for energy efficiency in the design and are we adding costs? construction of new housing, the use of renewable energy resources. Green buildings are a benefit for the owner/builder in that there will be reduced energy usage and costs. 10. Putting fear in people about greenhouse HB 697 provides for new requirements regarding gases greenhouse gas reduction strategies, strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emission from the transportation sector. 11. Tradition has rotten copper pipes. People Tradition is located in the city of Port St. Lucie. are sufferin . 12. Can County help local folks go green? County is looking at ways that code and regulation may Won't it cost money to go green? unintentionally hinder green initiatives by the public and remove these obstructions. The County may choose to offer incentives to builders going green. Green buildings are generally more expensive to build, but owners may save money in the lonq term due to reduced energy usage. 13. Slides 10, 13, and 14 regard reducing No. There will be no new County taxes on drivers. The single occupant automobile use. Are there Comprehensive Plan does not offer provisions for going to be new taxes for drivers? taxation. 14. What is the cost difference between roads, There is no equivalent cost comparison between the bike trails, and transit? three. It's like comparing apples to oranges. By example, roadway costs are per lane mile and are dependent upon specific drainage, right-of-way and infrastructure design requirements. The cost for transit service is based upon the cost per specific bus unit (whether it be large bus or small bus/van) and on -going operational costs (drivers, fuel, insurance etc.) in consideration of the service area. There is no cost equivalent for bike trails or sidewalks. Each jurisdiction, EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 5 of 17 though, can use an equivalent cost per area (ie. $40/linear foot for a 5 foot wide sidewalk; $75/linear foot for a 10 feet paved recreational trail 15. Not practical to use bicycles in this It is important for all income types and ages that weather. transportation choices are available. Florida bicycle association: www.floridabicVcle.org Bike Florida: www.bikeflorida.org Florida cycling: www.floridacycling.com South Florida Bike Coalition: www.southfioridabikecoalition.or 16. How about the mercury in compact What to Do if a Fluorescent or Other Mercury -Containing fluorescent light bulbs? Need a safety suit to Light Bulb Breaks: clean up broken bulbs. Mercury can get into http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index.htm#fluorescent New and old style fluorescent light bulbs must be our water. disposed of carefully and in designated solid waste facilities. The Home Depot and other hardware stores offer recycling for compact fluorescent bulbs. 17. Government helps to ruin our lives and Government provides a number of functions including environment. The more you help us, the more parks, hospitals, roadways, and EMS, and law you hurt us. enforcement. 18. How about loss of taxes from less utility All government tax base is decreasing. use? 19. You promised that if there was a nuclear You may want to contact FPL. FPL Customers To Get power plant, we would get cheap energy. Fuel Rebate In January; Lowest Bills In State Will Drop In 2010 (Nuclear Power Industry News). FPL residential customers using 1,000 kilowatt-hours will receive a credit of $44.46 on their January electric bills. The fuel charge credit would normally have been spread out over the course of 12 months. FPL does not profit on the fuel it buys to generate electricity. 20. $14,000 for a water pipe in front of my US Representatives and Senators should be contacted house in Indian River Estates. Please don't regarding the health care issue. help me anymore. Electric bill over $300. No more health care. 21. Don't want energy efficiency. You will ruin Some private companies are choosing to build with the economy. Shipping jobs overseas green building standards to reduce their long term costs. because you will regulate us to death. 22. Slide 17. Policy 3.1.1.5. Assist employers Proposed Policy: Policy 3.1.1.5 Explore existing and to provide homes near employment. Unfunded mandate. Funding will come from new programs by 2013 to assist employers who desire to participate in making housing in reasonable proximity to the workplace. The proposed language originates taxpayers. from the Evaluation and Appraisal Report.The Affordable Housing Committee is a made up of citizens who volunteer their time to recommend policy to the County Commission. The term "assistance" has a very broad application. For instance, Resolution 10-060 was recently adopted that provided for expedited permit review for qualifying County sponsored affordable housing projects. Generally, employers want to ensure housing is available near their place of employment. If an employer is desirous of creating housing for employees, the County or EDC may be able to provide technical support. 23. Why will government buy and sell houses? I One method of developing home ownership for people EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 6 of 17 This is a capitalist society. Government has with disabilities is through the establishment of trusts. nothing to do with the economy. Since 1985, the number of housing trusts has increased more than fivefold in response to the growing demand for housing resources (Center for Community Change, 1989). Housing trust funds are dedicated sources of revenue (e.g., real estate tax sales, interest on real estate escrow accounts) committed to the purpose of providing low and moderate income housing. They are generally established by local, county, or state government and are usually ongoing and permanent. Some housing trusts have been created on the state level through a budget allocation rather than an ongoing commitment of revenue (Center for Community Change, 1989). Families of people with disabilities can "buy into" these trusts. In addition, private trusts, established for the benefit of individuals or groups, may also include a housing component. 24. Stop the American Reinvestment and The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act is a Recovery Act. federal program. It may be best to contact your US Reprehensive or Senator. 25. Recovery Act will limit our freedom. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act is a Mandate on that will force banks to loan to federal program. It may be best to contact your US people who cannot afford it. Reprehensive or Senator. 26. Government will pay to fix problems that they created. 27. Not a goal or encouragement. This will be law, a requirement. 28. Research on sea level rise- EPA/global The EAR -based Comprehensive Plan Amendments do warming wrong. Making major zoning not change land use or zoning on any property in St. changes. Look at factual sciences. Lucie County. 29. Commercial/Industrial Future Land Uses. Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a Percentage is too small. What is an MXD or SD land use designation that may be developed appropriate percentage for each of these? into a non-residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential and agricultural. 30. County makes it impossible to develop. Impact fees have become the most important method in Impossible to develop commercial property. infrastructure financing and an essential part of local Concern about connection to sewer system. governments to fund infrastructure or public services. Impact fees are an outrage. Fees get in the Impact fees may help to assist in the development of way. This is where the economy goes into a needed parks, schools, roads, sewer, water treatment, downward spiral. Impact fees have obliterated utilities, libraries, and public safety buildings to the newly development in the county. developed area. In most cases impact fees are used in new development. Most states recognize and allow the EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 7 of 17 use of impact fees as a way to regulate land use. The cost of an impact fee can vary from state to state. Generally, area in the Western United States charge higher fees than other places in the country. They can also vary depending on the type of need by a community with school facilities causing the greatest cost of an impact fee. Today, impact fees have become a popularly used method. About 60% of all cities with over 25,000 residents along with 40% of metropolitan counties use impact fees on new developments for public services or infrastructure. In some cities or states such as Florida, 90% of communities use Impact Fees. Impact fees have been in place in St. Lucie County since 1986 and were in place during the construction boom in the 2000's. The purpose is to ensure that development pays for its impact on infrastructure rather than relying on existing residents and taxpayers for related development improvements. 31. Erosion of individual rights. If some can Coastal Barrier Resources Act or COBRA enacted build a house on beach, they should have to October 18, 1982, designated various undeveloped deal with the consequences. Insurance coastal barrier islands, depicted by specific maps, for companies should be able to say "no." inclusion in the Coastal Barrier Resources System. People should have a right to do stupid things. Areas so designated were made ineligible for direct or indirect Federal financial assistance that might support development, including flood insurance, except for emergency life-saving activities. The purpose is to protect property owners in the long term. The developer may not own the property for life. Protecting the dunes protects all future owners of a building. 32. Solar panels on roof. Wind generation Use of solar power is an individual choice. facilities are built by Nexterra. Wind generation would not be economical because wind energy is not reliable. Not enough comparable megawatts. Solar power is for the politicians. Hot water heaters are a waste. 33. Talk to legislators and Tom Pelham at The state legislature and the Florida Department of DCA about comprehensive plan requirements. Community Affairs are responsible for setting Mark and Lorraine are not responsible for comprehensive plan requirements. requirements. 34. Why not statewide programs for water? In 2008, the County included a Water Supply Facilities Work Plan which includes long term plans for water supply. Statewide water programs are implemented through the water management districts. 35. Candidate for County Commissioner. Not SLC provides for an Economic Development Element, enough done for economic development. which is an optional element and not required by the State. Beginning in 1985, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted various economic development incentives to attract targeted industries and create jobs within St. Lucie County. These incentives of create targeted industry jobs through employer relocation and local business retention/expansion EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 8 of 17 efforts. The Ad Valorem Tax Abatement and Job Growth Investment Grants (JGIG) incentives have been especially successful. Since 1992, St. Lucie County has attracted over 20 new businesses and created 4,900 new jobs through the authorization of economic development incentives for targeted industries. In April of 2009, the Board of County Commissioners also adopted a Local Stimulus Ordinance (Ordinance No. 09- 008) as a means of enhancing job creation as a result of a significant downturn in the local economy. A "local economic emergency" was declared by the Board in light of a national recession that has resulted in significantly high home foreclosure and unemployment rates for the County. The stimulus Ordinance requires that 75% of the labor for each project be local residents and 75% of the materials used for each improvement project be acquired from local vendors through competitive bids to assist in stimulating the local economy. 36. Set positive environment. Don't set impact The County will need to review the cost of an impact fee fees in down economy. Is there an economic before the adoption of one. Current impact fees are impact analysis for the amendments? Should being implemented in phases. Any policy that might be upfront about costs. require a study or large project includes the language People are concerned about adding costs. "explore the financial feasibility of or "if funding is Process in economic development is a available." This gives the County Commission the process of elimination. Why set impact fees in option to review implementation of the policies based a down economy? upon available funding. 37. Incentives for green buildings and transfer The Comp Plan makes provision for general policy of wealth. Policy is now a suggestion. People guidelines, not regulation. on podium will set it into law. 38. Living close to employment subjugates The County and the Comprehensive Plan have no free will. People should have a choice. requirement that an individual live near their Spain is a leader in green jobs and their employment. Many individuals many choose to live near unemployment rate is 20%. employment to save money on gas and for other quality of life reasons. 39. TDRs like cap and trade. Failed policy. Generally, private rural land owners support a transfer of Setting up an agency to make a lot of money. development rights program. 40. Job/housing balance will be controlling Generally, the benefit of having a green local businesses. Government involvement in free government is overall cost savings. The FGBC Green market capitalism. What is actual benefit of Local Government Standard designates Green Cities being a "green local government"? PSL is and Green Counties for outstanding environmental green and they have high unemployment and stewardship. It is expected that certified green city and foreclosures. 20 years of development and county governments will not only gain recognition and three years of failure. Government picking publicity, but also function in a more efficient manner winners and losers. Government should not through better internal communication, cost reductions, be in this business. and effective risk and asset management. http://www.floridagreenbuilding.org/local-governments The jobs/housing balance is a method for monitoring economic sustainability. The state and others developed an interest in the jobs/housing balance indicator after overgrowth of residential development. 41. How did EAR come to its conclusions? The EAR was reviewed during many public meetings / hearings and approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 42. Public is due an idea of costs. The County budget process is open to public EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 9 of 17 participation. The amendments reflect existing County policies on sustainability and green practices. Any policy that might require a study or large project includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of" or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 43. Lived here since 1972. Who will provide utilities to Wal-Mart Distribution Center? Unacceptable to create situation where Wal- Mart decided to pull out. 44. Home Depot wanted to relocate to Jensen Jensen Beach is located in Martin County. Beach and decided to pull out because impact fees are too high. County government is deleterious to real development. 45. County money and government money is It is important that residents participate in elections to our money. People have lost trust in our ensure they choose an elected official that represents government. their ideas and values. 46. Should be done at the polls. Florida residents will have the option to require that all comprehensive plan amendments are approved by referendum during the November 2010 election. 47. America has woken up. County It is important that residents participate in elections to Commission -watch your back. ensure they choose an elected official that represents their ideas and values. March 8. 2010 - Workshop Comments Response 1. This is a model for Agenda 21, UN Agenda 21 The County is not implementing Agenda 21. One World Governance, which would strip away The Overall Goal of this Plan is to ensure the best US sovereignty. Smart Growth, Charrettes and living environment and community possible, built on Comprehensive Plans are a euphemism for the needs and desires of the residents of St. Lucie Agenda 21. The Maryland Pathways Plan County. The purpose of this Plan is to protect and established in 1976 reshuffled land rights in the enhance the health, safety, and welfare of St. Lucie name of defending farm land including downzoning County's citizens and of our county's natural and agricultural lands, upzoning remainder and man-made resources. The following Objective requiring inclusionary housing and multifamily supports the Overall Plan Goal. housing. In the South side of Chicago with no Objective: To Improve St. Lucie County's economy representation, public housing was located there while retaining it's cultural and natural resources. increasing drugs, crime, etc. Richard Rothschild mentioned that Smart Growth is social reengineering, urbanizing rural towns, gerrymandering and housing subsidies. This shifts voting patterns from right to left to a Democratic blue vote. I am against this. 2. We just woke up. Things would have been different if we were involved earlier. 3. What is the cost? Everything in Congress goes The amendments reflect existing County policies to the Congressional Budget Office. on sustainability and green practices. Any policy Will County provide costs of projects? Looks that might require a study or large project includes expensive. What is the source for paying for these? the language "explore the financial feasibility of or Will businesses pay for these projects? "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 4. With 18,000 more unemployed, why isn't' job growth more important? Dirt and critters are not important. Turtle and dunes are important in the Plan, not people. Nothing about education. Most science behind data is from EPA. Most proven faulty. (ie, IPCC and CRU). The have been almost completely discredited. Is it time to stop and rethink the plan based upon science, not political science? There is no adjustment for new information in the plan. 5. Greenhouse reduction -is it required by the state? Is there a ratio of maintaining land use and population? Anything that stifles supply and demand is not our goal. Let people decide where people should go. Not practical to suggest where business should go. Let business do what they have to do. 6. Is there a bike route map? What is the cost of putting in sidewalks? Is it specific to schools or commercial areas? Encourage County to install sidewalks by schools and hospitals. Don't put sidewalks in existing developments. Government is doing a good job of spending people's money. In the future, can you show what is required by the state and what is not so we know what to fight at the local level or the state level? Over -burdensome to individual taxpayers. 7. Are we above or below pollution levels/Greenprint? How is that measured? This is not an engine for job growth. It is a hurdle for job growth. Industrial and commercial properties have been reduced 36%. List of animals that call PSL home (endangered species, etc.) is another way to clamp down on development. 8. Seems like a tough job ahead. What are ideal land use percentages? State is requiring certain policies. If state is misdirected and is the problem, what is the recourse to go after state policy? What is sea level rise in St. Lucie County since 1988? These issues could be pointed out to the EAR -Based Amendments - Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 10 of 17 It is important to note that the Comprehensive Plan includes an optional Economic Development Element because of the importance of job creation. See response to No. 37 on page 7 in regards to economic stimulus efforts. The Comprehensive Plan includes a Public School Facilities Element adopted in 2008 that is not being reviewed with the EAR -based Amendments. GHG reduction and energy efficiency policies have been added to meet statutory requirements. The policies related to GHG reduction and energy efficiency reflect the County's adopted sustainability policy, the "Greenprint." HB 697 provides for new requirements regarding greenhouse gas reduction strategies, strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emission from the transportation sector. Maps TRN-7 and TRN-9 show existing and future bike lanes along major roadways and safe routes to school (Transportation Planning Org.). The County budget process is open to public participation. Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a MXD or SD land use designation that may be developed into a non-residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential and agricultural. Data on ideal land use percentages is not available. EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix County Commission. Recommend job balance. What are sustainable land use percentages? Optimal jobs need houses. What is ideal percentage of industrial and commercial uses? Jobs are an important part of sustainable development. 9. Unemployment is 15.3%. Current jobs housing balance is 0.5. Business Retention Plan — is this organized by the Economic Development Council? 10. Incentives to lure companies- job creation developing high wage high skill jobs, but if applied to jobs/housing balance will weaken balance. The problem with high tech is existing unemployed here need jobs. Will need to bring in talent from outside. Current barriers to business are zoning, licenses, and permits. Can't use natural resources like the Port. Port would make a lot of money. Encourage residential uses around the Port. Use port for original purpose. 11. What kind of public transit is anticipated? Trains? How about the cost? High tech jobs ideal, but need to get existing population employed. TDRs may be a benefit for Western Lands. How about supporting agriculture. Current foreclosure crisis dues to economic boom/construction industry. Now many unemployed because of change in trend. 12. Will the study impact the affordability of homes? Placing limits on higher densities increases property values and costs. People cannot afford higher rates. Cost so high, people will move away. Substandard housing- what is the standard? When required improvements are made to substandard housing, residents are forced to move out. Jeff Furst say values will settle in between. People will be priced out. 13. Since January 2007, S million people have lost their jobs in the US. It is good that the County is cutting jobs. Who is the Florida Green Building Coalition? Have you considered new data? Exploration of TDRs in Western Lands Study. Until there are TDRs will property owners lose their agricultural tax benefit? How about their rights. Why spend time and energy on Western Lands Study? Much ado about nothing. 14. County has not designated any area as having slum or blight. 15. Economic Development Element mentions on page 7 major employers. Public sector provides April 15, 2010 Page 11 of 17 That is correct. New employees from St. Lucie County or from outside St. Lucie County will benefit the jobs/housing balance. The Comprehensive Plan includes the Port Master Plan. See No 35 on page 7 regarding economic incentives by the County. The EAR -based Amendments supports agriculture by supporting biofuels production and TDR programs. The EAR -based amendments recommend adding a minimum density. There is no change in maximum densities. The building official determines substandard housing. Home improvement grants do not require residents to move out. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments will have no effect on agricultural tax benefits. Counties may designate certain areas meeting state qualifications for slum and blight. This is usually done as a precursor for development a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) where there are targeted redevelopment programs. There are no CRAs in the County, several exist in Ft. Pierce. The public sectors employees include state and federal employees. Table 10-1 in the Economic EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix 12,000 employees while the private sector has 11,000 employees. How are the 11,000 supposed to support the 12,000? Are the numbers correct? 16. How can you assist government and developers in informed decision -making? They are usually at opposite ends of the table. Protecting real estate is fabulous. Should be focused on large swath of regulation and hurdles for development - even regulating outhouses. Get like Texas where there is no zoning. Texas does not have downturn in housing like rest of the country. Dig into regulatory fee structures. Went to City Council, upland development could have been traded for $15,000 per acre. In the end, it was $110,000 per acre. These were due with the pro forma in development projects. 17. No clear economic data for the Plan. No study on the economic direction of the Plan. High number of foreclosures. 18. Doesn't Census data only include household size? 19. Port not being used. We disagree with high skill, and high tech jobs. Look at ground level and proceed. No tax for driving vehicles. Plan is lopsided. 20. 73% of land uses will be controlled by Comp Plan. Work is contracted out. County staff also involved. Layers of bureaucracy in the document. Unfunded mandates. Concern that single-family will not be the norm. What about providing transit and fees in lieu. Seeing a change in government by government. America loves life, liberty, and happiness. 21. Policies get in the way of using TDRs. Can't be used unless there are buyers. Population need analysis will put responsibility on developers. High tech is a long term, great strategy. Many cars pass by on 1-95 and the Turnpike. We should have techniques to lure people off the highway to St. Lucie. Support existing businesses. Take advantage of growth in other countries. Economic development should look to growth overseas for local economic advantages. Support local schools. 22. Port and Inland Port are important. A green building was proposed in the Port. What specific green standard will be required? Mark Young at Maritime Advisors, LLC can give you financial information regarding the Port. 23. Mobility Fee- How do you determine the distance in trips? Recommend all new development should state the impact fees to the buyer. Require April 15, 2010 Page 12 of 17 Development Element identifies 7.8% of the workforce in 2009 as public administration. The Florida Building Code provides minimum building requirements. All local governments must adhere to the Florida Building Code. Houston does not have a zoning code, however, they have other land use controls and most properties have deed restrictions. The Census has a variety of demographic information including household income, ethnicity, age, and information about buildings such as The Comprehensive Plan includes the Port Master Plan. A mobility fee is being considered that would be paid for by the developer like other impact fees to reimburse the County for infrastructure improvements. The state requires all Counties and cities to have a comprehensive plan that regulates land use. There is no proposal to change existing single family home areas. TDRs should be developed with the appropriate stakeholder to ensure success. Attracting folks from 1-95 and the Turnpike to visit St. Lucie County is a great economic development idea. International economic development opportunities should be explored as suggested. The Comprehensive Plan includes a Public School Facilities Element adopted in 2008 that is not being reviewed with the EAR -based Amendments. Local governments may not choose one green standard for buildings and may not require green standards for private buildings. Existing traffic data is available with information on trip distance. Requiring builders to disclose impact fees imposes an additional burden on builders who EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 13 of 17 impact frees to be disclosed so people know what currently may voluntarily provide such information. fees were charged. Impact fees paid are also public information and may be requested from the County. 24. Real life experience- While at the PX in Saigon, Developers continue to advertise residential appliances and General Development Corporation development for sale in the County. The lots in Port St. Lucie for sale. Everything in the plan Comprehensive Plan does not prohibit advertising. works a ainst this scenario. 25. Have cost/benefit analyses been performed on Some benefits such as increased park space are EAR -based Amendments? difficult to quantify. 26. Remember that cap and trade was invented by Thank you. Enron. 27. What about the bridge at the County FDOT widening of SR 70 because FDOT had fairgrounds? previously approved the construction of the Multi - Purpose Path on the north side of SR 70 in their project. County paid $150,000 and FDOT funded the rest. It is intended to provide access between the Fairgrounds and the path. March 15. 2010 — P&Z Workshoo Comments Response 1. The Planning & Zoning Commission is acting as Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, Local Planning Agency - See Paragraph (4)(b) the Land Planning Agency per FS 163 and as such the LPA is to review and approve the document (4) The local planning agency shall have the prior to sending to the BOCC. general responsibility for the conduct of the comprehensive planning program. Specifically, the local planning agency shall: (a) Be the agency responsible for the preparation of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment and shall make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment of such plan. During the preparation of the plan or plan amendment and prior to any recommendation to the governing body, the local planning agency shall hold at least one public hearing, with public notice, on the proposed plan or plan amendment. The governing body in cooperation with the local planning agency may designate any agency, committee, department, or person to prepare the comprehensive plan or plan amendment, but final recommendation of the adoption of such plan or plan amendment to the governing body shall be the responsibility of the local planning agency. 2. Staff has not given the Commission sufficient time to review the document as state law requires. The draft document has been available to the public since January 2010. As noted above, the requirement is for at least one public hearing by the LPA. There will be two, possibly three public hearings by the LPA for this item. There will be a minimum of one workshop with the BOCC and two public hearings. 3. Requested that the Amendments be reviewed page by page. Schedule more time for review. 4. Document is not adding anything positive; changing the language in the document is adding unnecessary complications and fuzziness to the process, which adds uncertainty (cost) to the process, which will drive away developers. Not addino anvthina positive to the Countv. 5. Requirement adding any project over two hundred acres to form a Community Development District (CDD). This is a business decision, should not be a govt. mandate. Financing vehicle for developers to finance infrastructure. 6. Definitions of water bodies and rivers are omitted (referenced Ten Mile Creek). This is not based on a recommendation from the EAR. 7. Water and Sewer connection outside the Urban Service Boundary language changed, (you could not pull a building permit outside the Urban Service Boundary, or get a project developed). 8. Wetlands Mitigation Issues - Two large mitigation banks in the County. Existing wetland policy being added to "to the maximum extent possible" County owes a duty to the privately funded mitigation banks that they are putting them out of business. 9. Make font larger in graphs (slide 6). EAR -Based Amendments - Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 14 of 17 All mention of Community Development Districts (CDD) comes from existing Comp Plan language defining a Future Land Use designation, which have been relocated from the data analysis to the GOPs. The requirement of a CDD is proposed for removal. Page 4-22 of the adopted EAR provides the following recommendation for Policy 1.1.9.7 - Revise Policy to include entire waterways. It may be best to allow for a strict definition in the LDC only to prevent inconsistencies among documents. Proposing the following language as an alternative to original proposed change: Policy 1.1.9.7 - Enforce Section 6.02.02 of the Land Development Regulations to protect the watercourses identified below: North Fork of the St. Lucie River - Those portions in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the Martin County line to the confluence with Five and Ten Mile Creeks. Five Mile Creek - Those portions of Five Mile Creek in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River toRailFead, Glades Gut -Off E3FaRGh Lias Orange Ave. Ten Mile Creek - Those portions of Ten Mile Creek and the Eleven Mile Creek tributary in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to MGGa4y Shinn Road. Update to read: Policy 4A.1.2.6: Development requiring central utility services within the unincorporated areas of the County will only be permitted when such development ties into or makes provision for obtaining water or sewer utility service from the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer Utility District, the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority or the City of Port St. Lucie Utility within their respective service areas. This phrase was relocated from Policy 6.1.4.13 to 6.1.4.2 Thank 10. Controlling travel to and from job. 11. Controlling where you live in relationship to your job. Concern about housing close to employment. 12. Too comprehensive and far reaching, presented without an equal balance of economic benefit. Only two mentions of jobs and are made in reference to controlling where you live in relation to your job. Nothing about creating economic environment to be conducive to the economic resurgence needed, From the government down not up. You will be very unhappy with yourself if you do not give due diligence to what is being presented here before you made a recommendation. Praying for wisdom on your part. 13. Lack of job creation (.56 jobs per household, insufficient). 14. Unfunded mandates (Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways and Trail Study). What is the cost of one mile of bike trail? EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 15 of 17 The focus is not about controlling travel to and from work but to provide alternative modes of transportation and also recognize that the distance (vehicle miles traveled) development is from urbanized areas should be addressed in the impact fee structure. Generally, employers want to ensure housing is available near their place of employment. If an employer is desirous of creating housing for employees, the County or EDC may be able to provide technical support. The Economic Development issue is addressed in No. 35 on page 7 above. Please see the Economic Development Element and the memo from Michael Brillhart dated March 15, 2010 (www.stiucieco.gov/qrowth/EAR.htm) on economic development incentives adopted by the BOCC. The jobs/housing balance ratio as a barometer of economic success. Goal of 1.5 jobs per household. The current low ratio may be attributed to the large retirement community. St. Lucie County Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways & Trails Master Plan was adopted by the BOCC in 2008. The St. Lucie County Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways &Trails Master Plan inventoried all the existing sidewalks, bike paths, missing sidewalks, and provided suqqestions to improve the system. 1 15. Lavers of bureaucracy to implement. I I 16. Encourage mass transit, plasma arc gasification, however all items presented in this plan will increase impact fees and scare away potential employers instead of enticing them to come. 17. No tangible benefit to being labeled a Green County. Don't know what the tax burden would be to being labeled green county. 18. Past study groups chaired by Betty Lou Wells spent years putting together the elements of the plan with a vision for the future. Having no plan ai The County will need to review the cost of an impact fee before the adoption of one. The current impact fee schedule is being implemented in phases. The Florida Green Local Government Certification process provides a systematic way for your local government to assess its level of sustainability and to incorporate multiple environmental, ecological and sustainability features throughout its operations to reduce consumption and increase efficiency; saving taxpayer dollars and the environment! It is expected that certified green city and county governments will not only gain recognition and publicity, but also function in a more efficient manner through better internal communication, cost reductions, and effective risk and asset management. The policy below is existing language in the Comp Plan; the element number has been changed. all is a disaster. People are concerned about our fiscal resources and we are now suffering from years of uncontrolled growth causing a crisis in banking and with the local and national economy. Growth needs to pay for itself so the County citizens aren't burdened with it. Many items are called for by state legislation, this is not the place to complain about these issues. Post disaster redevelopment is a proposal that we needed after the hurricanes of 2006. Comments about no education being part of the plan, the County has many educational programs. No new untreated storm water? Protect the IR lagoon all of the St. Lucie River, all of Ten Mile Creek, this is what brings tourists and makes life livable in St. Lucie County. We have a strong Comp Plan and encourage you to keep it strong. 19. Citizens need to understand the process. 20. Uncontrolled growth EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 16 of 17 Policy 76.1.4.1: No new untreated point source discharges into coastal waters for stormwater runoff and wastewater effluent will be permitted. The Comp Plan has an entire element dedicated to education, The Public Schools Facilities Element, which was recently adopted in Dec of 2008 and therefore it is not being updated along with the rest in the EAR -based Amendments. Citizens are welcome at any time to call the Growth Management Department and schedule a meeting. Please call (772) 462 - 2822 The Growth Management Act of 1985 was instituted in response to uncontrolled growth and is the basis for requiring Comprehensive (Development) Plans. 1 21. Diminished orooertv values I I 22. United Nations Agenda 21, stripping away US sovereignty 23. In regard to the EAR, is it true that the landfill will supply us with enough capacity for thirty years? Haven't heard much about gas plasma gasification - seems to be discouraged. 24. Transfer of Development Rights is a bad idea. Ask for increasing rights rather than trading them. 25. Get back to Agriculture 26. Business will build and operate Green when it is economically feasible. Goal of any business is to earn a profit. 27. Being Green without a return on investment is not a viable business model 28. Over 18,000 people in St. Lucie County unemployed 29. Reduction of commercial and industrial land Yes, the landfill can provide appropriate level of service for the next 30 years. The County is exploring Plasma Arc Gasification to reduce the amount of the waste stream that is currently being landfilled and to extend the useful life of the Bailing and Recycling Facility (Page 4-2 in the EAR -Based Amendments). Policy 4B.1.2.3 - Continue investigation of plasma arc gasification technology as a means to potentially eliminate or reduce the need for landfill Being studied in depth during the Western Lands Western Lands St Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 17 of 17 commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. 30. Quality of life diminishing 31. Need to be more educated on this issue Citizens are welcome at any time to call the Growth Management Department and schedule a meeting. Please call 772 462 - 2822 32. Plan does not include cost analysis The County budget process is open to public participation. The amendments reflect existing County policies on sustainability and green practices. Any policy that might require a study or large project includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 33. Encouragement for plasma arc gasification. Submitted Comments Comments Response 1. Recommendation made for updating language to The RSLA is an adopted element of the Comp Plan reflect the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RSLA) that is not being updated during the EAR - Overlay. Amendment process along with other elements (Public Schools Facilities Element), however many of the points presented may be valid and included at the discretion of the BOCC or considered as a part of the Western Lands Study currently underway. 2. Suggested new Policy 1.1.16.5: Allow variance Building codes are State regulated. Amended or exclusion from applicable local building codes policy considered. and Land Development Regulations when acceptable and sustainable green or environmentally friendly building practices can be used in lieu of conventional construction (i.e.: substitute composting toilets in lieu of standard septic system, allow permeable material in the parking & driveways in lieu of pavement etc. 3. Suggested changes to new policy 1.3.1.2: Policy references partnerships with regional Policy 1.3.1.2 - Consider innovative partnerships governments. Amended policy considered. between urban areas, local and regional governmental entities, and rural landowners that take advantage of and compensation for the services and benefits that rural lands can provide to urban areas and the region as a whole. Examples might include but not limited to compensating rural landowners to support CERP, IRL South Plan, and research on biofuels provide water storage, conservation of agriculture lands or open sace. 1 St. Lucie County 2 Planning and Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency 3 Roger Poitras Annex, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor 4 April 15, 2010 Meeting 5 6:00 p.m. 6 In the event of a conflict between these written minutes and a compact disc recording, 7 the compact disc shall control. 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Mundt called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call Craig Mundt ..................................... Chairman Pamela Hammer .............................. Commission Member Edward Lounds................................ Commission Member Stephanie Morgan............................Commission Member Tod Mowery ..................................... Commission Member Barry Schrader ................................. Commission Member Kathryn Hensley ............................... Ex-Officio Member Brad Culverhouse (arrived at 6:35) .. Commission Member Members Absent Britt Reynolds (excused) .................. Vice -Chairman Susan Caron (excused) ................... Commission Member Staff Present Mark Satterlee.................................. Planning and Development Services Director Britton Wilson ................................... Senior Planner Amy Griffin ....................................... Environmental Regulations and Lands Manager Laurie Waldie................................... Utilities Director Dawn Milone.................................... Recording Secretary C. Announcements None. D. Disclosures None. Page 2 of 7 37 II. MINUTES 38 Review the minutes from the March 18, 2010 meeting for approval. 39 Mr. Lounds motioned to approve the minutes as written. 40 Mr. Schrader seconded. 41 The motion carried 5-1, Mrs. Hammer dissented because she was absent from the 42 meeting and is not permitted to abstain. 43 44 III. PUBLIC HEARING 45 A. Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Amendments to the St. Lucie 46 County Comprehensive Plan. 47 Petition for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Amendments to the St. 48 Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 49 Mr. Satterlee, Planning and Development Services Director welcomed the Commission and 50 the public to the public hearing. 51 He told the Commission under the County reorganization the department's name has changed 52 from Growth Management to Planning and Development Services so any references to Growth 53 Management will be changed as such. 54 He stated this is the fifth opportunity for public input and most comments and concerns from 55 previous meetings and workshops have been addressed. 56 He stated the EAR represents a continuum of the Comprehensive Plan that was established 57 20 years ago, and most of it is updating and "housekeeping". 58 He wanted to emphasize that although there are not many new details being incorporated into 59 the Comprehensive Plan what staff is doing what is required by the State. 60 Ms. Wilson, Sr. Planner stated the update to the Comprehensive Plan is based on the 61 recommendations identified by the EAR, which was adopted and approved by the Board of 62 County Commissioners in October 2008. 63 Many of the proposed changes being made in the Comprehensive Plan are required by House 64 Bill 697 regarding energy efficiencies and greenhouse gas reduction strategies. The data 65 inventory and analysis has been brought entirely up to date. The amendments reflect current 66 St. Lucie County practices and the work of the Smart Growth Committee. No programs are 67 included that are not a part of current or future St. Lucie County initiatives. Planning and Zoning Commission April 15, 2010 Minutes Page 3 of 7 68 Ms. Wilson stated based on the amount of feedback staff has received on the removal of the 69 waterways definition, staff is proposing to reference the definition in the Land Development 70 Code where the definitions currently remain unchanged. 71 Ms. Wilson introduced Lorraine Tappen, AICP, Sr. Planner with Calvin, Giordano & 72 Associates, Inc. 73 Ms. Tappen stated this is a state required evaluation of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive 74 Plan. This is a two-step process to update the Comprehensive Plan with current community 75 objectives and state regulations. 76 Ms. Tappen provided an overview of the Comprehensive Plan elements and sub -elements to 77 be amended. The EAR amendments will not include the Public School Facility, Towns Villages 78 Countryside, and Rural Land Stewardship. 79 She said each element consists of the data inventory analysis and the goals, objectives, and 80 policies, the content of which is largely regulated by Rule - 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative 81 Code and Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes. Ms. Tappen said the data inventory analysis of 82 each element that is being amended has been completely updated. The last update was done 83 in 2002. The EAR based amendments were adopted and in place in 2004. 84 Ms. Tappen stated one of the EAR recommendations was to fulfill a statutory requirement for 85 the Future Land Use Element to include intensity standards for the future land uses. 86 Ms. Tappen presented a power point, which included: 87 Intensity standards added for Non-residential Uses, Smart Growth Initiatives, 2009 Statutory 88 Requirement for the Airport, Greenhouse Gas Reductions, Sustainable Western Land Plan, 89 Multi -Modal Options, Transportation, Housing, Greener Living, Infrastructure, Alternate Solid 90 Waste Disposal, Coastal Management Development, Hazard Mitigation, Conservation, 91 Recreation, Intergovernmental Coordination, Capital Improvements, Economic Development, 92 and Green Technology. 93 Mr. Lounds asked if a development outside of the urban service boundary wished to install a 94 satellite water treatment facility, could they with the understanding that they would have to 95 hook up to a utility department. 96 Laurie Waldie, Utilities Director, stated currently it may be installed privately but may have to 97 be turned over to the County Utilities to operate. Ms. Waldie stated any development outside 98 the urban service boundary would need to be approved by the Board of County 99 Commissioners (BOCC), and there would be a utility service agreement set to delineate what 100 would be built for that development, the financing, and how it would be turned over to County 101 Utilities. 102 Chairman Mundt opened the public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission April 15, 2010 Minutes Page 4 of 7 103 Johnathan Ferguson, Land Use Attorney and resident, stated there are some vague policies in 104 the Comprehensive Plan. He suggested they consider whether there needs to be a reference 105 to the policies that they are self -enforcing or will have land development regulations to 106 implement them. 107 Peter Harrison, representing Adams Ranch, handed the Commission a letter regarding the 108 impact of the proposed changes to the Conservation Element to Adams Ranch, which he read 109 aloud. Mr. Harrison stated he has problems with policies that seem to prohibit, restrict, or 110 regulate agriculture. He concluded with a statement he requested the Commission add to the 111 Conservation Element before forwarding the item to the BOCC. 112 Mr. Mundt stated he discussed suggestions from Mr. Harrison's February 15 letter with staff. 113 Mr. Lounds stated his concern that he did not want to put roadblocks to inhibit future and 114 progressive agriculture as it would change in the future. 115 Mrs. Griffin, Environmental Regulations and Lands Manager, stated the Land Development 116 Code exempts existing agriculture uses from the clearing process. New agriculture operations 117 that do not currently have an agriculture exemption will have to start from scratch with their 118 initial clearing. Their agricultural operation would have to be up and running before they can 119 get their agricultural classification from the Property Appraiser. 120 The Commission continued to discuss agriculture classification with staff. 121 Mr. Harrison stated he is ok with the way the policies are currently written, but would not like to 122 see agriculture further regulated by the new situations. 123 Mr. Satterlee stated it is not our intention to do that, and staff will be addressing Mr. Harrison's 124 comments. 125 Robert Lucklow, resident, stated his appreciation that his comments have been received and 126 addressed. Mr. Lucklow stated he believes the plan being presented works against the 127 success of private enterprise. 128 Garrett Bussel, resident, stated he has a concern regarding "sustainable development" in that 129 it is a buzz -phrase for a bigger agenda. He stated it is not concerned with sustaining human 130 beings, but with sustaining the flora and fauna and environment of our state. Mr. Bussel 131 detailed his concerns for the Commission. 132 With no further comment from the public, Chairman Mundt closed the Public Hearing. 133 Mrs. Hammer provided her comments to staff, which included: 134 • Underlining or numbering (which she will give to Ms. Wilson and Ms. Tappen) Planning and Zoning Commission April 15, 2010 Minutes Page 5 of 7 135 • Add policy 1.1.7.2 floor/area ratio to Note 2 on Page 1-15 136 • Why policy 1.1.4.8 includes "or non-contiguous property" (Ms. Tappen responded so the 137 property owner may conserve land on property not contiguous to the land being 138 developed) 139 • Page 1-29 Planned Unit Development should be changed to Planned Development 140 • Page 1-32 policy 1.1.8.5 states regulations have to be amended within one year of 141 adoption, is that too short of a time? Ms. Tappen stated it is a state requirement. 142 • Page 1-41 policy 1.1.17.5 did not make sense. Asked what " School Board will ensure 143 no schools are constructed within school zones designated on the St. Lucie County 144 International Airport construction zone map" means. Ms. Tappen stated there is a 145 specific School Zone Map for airport uses where schools should not be constructed. 146 • Page 1-45 Figure 1-1 is missing. Mr. Satterlee stated we are redoing the whole map 147 series 148 0 Page 2-58 policy 2.1.1.2 refers to the MPO should it be TPO? 149 • Page 2-59 policy 2.1.1.6 should have been revised according to accompanying memo 150 • Page 3-20 policy 3.2.4.2 a question regarding the date, to which Ms. Tappen responded 151 it reflects Florida statutes 152 • Page 4-31 policy 4a.1.1.3 was there any consideration of it being considered a super 153 majority instead of just a majority vote, to which Mr. Satterlee responded that has not 154 been discussed 155 • Page 4-43 clarification on the third paragraph that says "shall be 110 gpcd" Ms. Tappen 156 clarified it stands for gallons per capita per day 157 • Page 5-33 the summary refers to goal 5.5 as being struck but some of the fives are 158 underlined, to which Ms. Tappen stated it would have been more correct to say goal 7 159 was struck. Mr. Satterlee stated some of the policies were to be retained at the request 160 of Don West, Public Works Director. 161 • A numbering sequence that didn't make sense on 9-23, 9-24, and 9-25 162 Ms. Tappen extended her appreciation for Ms. Hammer's time. 163 Mr. Mundt stated the use of acronyms was an earlier conversation and the first time the term 164 comes up staff should spell it out and put the acronym in brackets. 165 Mr. Lounds asked about the eradication of invasive species specific to coastal areas in current 166 practice. Mrs. Griffin stated Land Development Code (LDC, the Code) chapter 6.00.5 that 167 requires all category 1 and 2 invasive species as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant 168 Council need to be eradicated on any new developments. 169 Mr. Lounds asked if there is anything we could do to enhance that portion of the Code. Mrs. 170 Griffin stated there is nothing we can currently do to require an existing landowner to remove 171 invasive species unless there is new development. Planning and Zoning Commission April 15, 2010 Minutes Page 6 of 7 172 Mr. Lounds asked if there could be intergovernmental coordination with the water management 173 districts to try to enhance the protection. 174 Mr. Satterlee stated the practicality and cost of doing so would be prohibitive, though we 175 encourage intergovernmental coordination. 176 Mr. Lounds stated he believes this is a "green" factor he believes is overlooked. 177 Mrs. Griffin said it could be discussed among staff could discuss how they can reach out to 178 other agencies. 179 Mr. Lounds asked Mrs. Griffin to share what is being done with the extension of some of the 180 creeks and what will be done with 10-Mile Creek. 181 Mrs. Griffin stated the definitions are in the Land Development Code, but the Comp Plan has 182 just a general list. 183 Mr. Mowery stated his comments: 184 • Policy 1.1.1.2a. In reference to some letters and emails we have been receiving will we 185 still be requiring that CDDs be established? Mr. Satterlee stated that became an issue 186 because we had taken some of the description of the land uses out of the data and 187 analysis section and moved it into the goals, objectives, and policies, because we felt it 188 was policy. It is not really a directive but if you are developing you should consider 189 development with a Community Development District (CDD). Mr. Satterlee stated the 190 concern had been raised that it may be something the County would not want to 191 require. He said they might ask the BOCC whether they want to take that out. 192 Page 1-35 policy 1.1.9.14 would we like to add time period to when the LDRs be 193 modified. 194 • Page 1-44 policy 1.3.2.3. Has further discussion taken place requiring that new single- 195 family homes meet green standards? Ms. Tappen was going to propose taking that out 196 since you cannot ask private buildings to meet green standards. 197 • The word "conservation" had been excluded. Mr. Satterlee stated the discussions of the 198 semantic differences between the assumptions associated with what constitutes 199 "conservation" or "preservation" have not come to a resolution. 200 • Page 2-66 policy 2.3.2.5 regarding sidewalks. The new language that seems to add 201 them to all local streets in addition to major and arterial roadways. Ms. Tappen stated 202 there is flexibility and some cases with fairly low density development you may not see 203 pedestrian facilities. Mr. Satterlee stated it would be required to add it to the LDC and 204 would have to go through the public hearing process to be vetted. 205 With no further discussion Chairman Mundt asked for a motion. Planning and Zoning Commission April 15, 2010 Minutes Page 7 of 7 206 Mr. Lounds stated the last time this was done there was different staff and different public 207 comments, and stated staff has done an excellent job listening and understanding public 208 concern, and would like to see this board move this on. 209 Mr. Mowery made the motion: 210 After considering the testimony presented during the public hearing, including 211 staff comments, I hereby move that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby 212 acting as the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County forward the Evaluation 213 and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the St. Lucie County Board of 214 County Commissioners with a recommendation to transmit to the Department of 215 Community Affairs and adopt the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan based 216 upon the requirements established by state law as well as the local public 217 comments and input provided here. 218 Mrs. Hammer seconded. 219 The motion passed 5-2, Ms. Morgan and Mr. Schrader dissenting 220 Mr. Mundt extended thanks to staff, Ms. Tappen, and the Commission. 221 IV. OTHER BUSINESS 222 Mr. Satterlee stated the next draft of the EAR will be available the first week of May and we will 223 be updating the website as soon as possible. 224 Mr. Lounds asked if the Commission could get a copy of the document after it comes back 225 from Tallahassee. Mr. Satterlee said yes, and it will be on the web as well. 226 Mr. Mundt stated we are working on a new schedule for Chapters 10, 11, and 12. Mr. Satterlee 227 stated we would be continuing to pursue that. 228 V. ADJOURN 229 There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 8:00. Planning and Zoning Commission April 15, 2010 Minutes ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA JUNE 1, 2010 NOTICE OF THE PROPOSED EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT -BASED AMENDMENTS TO THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners proposes to consider the adoption of the following by ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 10-020 EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT BASED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO APPROVE AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL BASED AMENDMENTS, PROVIDING FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. APPLICANT: Board of County Commissioners, St. Lucie County PURPOSE: Transmittal hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report -based amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan update (officially called "EAR -based Comprehensive Plan Amendments") provides direction for land development, land preservation and is the basis for zoning regulations. Last year the Board of County Commissioners adopted the state -required Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the St. Lucie Comprehensive Plan that the Florida Department of Community Affairs approved in January 2009. The EAR outlines policy changes including addressing greenhouse gas reduction and green building practices. The greener Comprehensive Plan parallels the County's recent "gold level" certification as a "Green Local Government" through the Florida Green Building Coalition. The Comprehensive Plan will support the Greenprint philosophy adopted by the Board of County Commissioners which outlines the County's vision of a sustainable future. The PUBLIC HEARING on this item will be held in the Commission Chambers, Roger Poitras Annex, 3rd Floor, St. Lucie County Administration Building, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida on Tuesday, June, 1, 2010, beginning at 6:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. Written comments received in advance of the public hearing will also be considered. Written comments to the Board of County Commissioners should be received by the Planning and Development Services Department - Planning Division at least 3 days prior to the scheduled hearing. The petition file is available for review at the Planning and Development Services Department offices located at 2300 Virginia Avenue, 21d Floor, Fort Pierce, Florida, during regular business hours Please call 772/462-2822 or TDD 772/462-1428 if you have any questions or require additional information. The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners has the power to review and grant any applications within their area of responsibility. The proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners are electronically recorded. PURSUANT TO Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at a meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings. For such purpose, he or she may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Upon the request of any party to the proceeding, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any parry to the proceeding will be granted an opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. If it becomes necessary, a public hearing may be continued from time to time as may be necessary to a date -certain. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the St. Lucie County Community Risk Manager at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting at (772)462-1546 or T.D.D. (772)462-1428. Any questions about this agenda may be referred to St. Lucie County Planning Division at (772) 462-2822. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA /S/ CHARLES GRANDE, CHAIRMAN PUBLISH DATE: May 19, 2010 I AGENDA REQUEST ITEM NO. III -A DATE: 04/15/10 REGULAR PUBLIC HEARING (X ) LEG. (X ) QUASI -JD ( ) CONSENT ( ) TO: Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY: Britton Wilson (&'V—� SUBMITTED BY: Growth Management Department Senior Long Range Planner SUBJECT: Public Hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A PREVIOUS ACTION: See attached memorandum. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend transmittal and adoption of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance No. 10-020). Coordination/Signatures County Attorney County Surveyor ( ) Danie S. McIntyre County Engineer Michael Powley Originating Dept. ( ) Mark Satterlee Ron Harris ERD ( ) Kareh Smith Growth Management Department MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission / Local Planning Agency THROUGH: Mark Sa4W t` t Director FROM: Britton Wilson, Senior Long Range Planner, Growth Management DATE: April 15, 2010 SUBJECT: Public Hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan ITEM NO.: III -A Background: Florida Statutes require local governments to adopt an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) once every seven years assessing progress in implementing their Comprehensive Plan. The EAR identifies how the Plan should be revised to better address community objectives, changing conditions and trends affecting the community and changes in state requirements. Counties are also required to amend their Comprehensive Plan based upon the EAR and submit EAR -based amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). St. Lucie County adopted the EAR in October 2008 and the report was found sufficient by DCA in January 2009. Once approved it becomes incumbent upon the local government to enact changes included within the EAR. This process allows local governments to update their Comprehensive Plan to ensure it meets current community requirements. As information changes over time (population, funding sources, and infrastructure needs) it may be necessary to update data and analysis referenced in the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the County is adopting only the Goals, Objectives, and Policies by ordinance to allow the opportunity to accommodate needed updates in data and analysis as they occur. All revisions are contained within the draft document delivered to the Planning and Zoning Commissioners on February 18, 2010. Prior to the public hearing, Commission members were provided the draft Comprehensive Plan Update, a copy of a memo from Calvin Giordano & Associates dated February 18, 2010 that summarizes the proposed changes, a memo from Michael Brillhart identifying County adopted economic development incentives and public comment documentation. Input received from public participants in the workshops listed below is provided in the attached staff report with responses from staff where appropriate. Previous Action February 8, 2010 — A public workshop was held. February 15, 2010 — A public workshop was held. March 8, 2010 — A public workshop was held. March 18, 2010 — A workshop with the Planning & Zoning Commission was held. Recommendation Recommend transmittal and adoption of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance No. 10-020). COUNTY F LORI D A Environmental Resources Department TO: Board of County Commissioners Agenda Item Companion Report THROUGH: Karen L. Smith, Environmental Resources Department Director'' FROM: Amy Mott, Environmental Regulations Division Manager DATE: April 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Department Coordination Environmental Resources Department (ERD) has been working closely with Growth Management on the review of the Comprehensive Plan EAR Based Amendments. Findings ERD's comments on the Comprehensive Plan EAR Based Amendments have been included in the attached staff report. Recommendations ERD supports Growth Management's position to transmit and adopt the recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners. Signature - 1 - Growth Management Department j = iCOUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission / Local Planning Agency THROUGH: Mark Satterlee, Growth Management Director FROM: Britton Wilson, Senior Long Range Planner, Growth Management DATE: April 15, 2010 SUBJECT: Staff Report - Public Hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan ITEM NO.: III -A On March 18, 2010, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a workshop on the proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff presented a general overview of the proposed changes and gathered feedback from Board members, which are summarized below. Also during this workshop was an opportunity for the public to comment. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Department hosted three public workshops, which provided for the collection of valuable input from St. Lucie County citizens. All comments and input from the public have been itemized in the attached matrix with responses from staff where appropriate. All material has been posted on the Growth Management website. Concerns Proved by the Planning and Zoning Commission: • Vagueness in the language. • Open concept of definitions, which leads to staff, board and developer interpretation to differ. • Deletion of water bodies, river names and boundaries. • Island and Shoreline restorations. • Western Land sustainability. • Sidewalks in rural areas that lead to nowhere. • Imposing new requirements on the County (cost). Suggestions Provided by the Planning and Zoning Commission: • Well-defined definitions and directions. • Provide provisions for Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). • Create a TDR bank to be used in the Urban Service Area rather than being forced to use only in Unincorporated Areas. • Enhance the availability of industrial, light industry and commercial areas. • Do not rely on construction (home building) as St. Lucie County industry. • Flexibility in all areas of the County especially TVC areas. • Modify adoption schedule. • Define what the State Statues are that need to be in EAR -based Amendments. • Creatively expand disaster preparation and supplies for developments and Mobile Home Communities. St. Lucie County EAR -Based Amendments Responses to Public Workshop Comments EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 2 of 17 EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 3 of 17 15. Zul0 Comments 2. What is Amendment 4/Hometown An initiative on the 2010 ballot. Florida residents will Democracy? have the option to require that all comprehensive plan amendments are approved by referendum during the November 2010 election. 4. The work done in this plan is questionable. It is based upon unfounded science. For example, Phil Jones's statement regarding climate change science. Green and smart growth are buzz words from a global plan putting Agenda 21 in place. In light of recent news, can we back out of this project and reconsider the County's strategy? Growth Management (Ch. 163 Part II F.S.) Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Development Regulation Act, AKA Florida's Growth Management Act passed in 1985 requiring all 67 counties and 410 municipalities to adopt a Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive plans contain chapters or "elements" that address future land use, housing, transportation, infrastructure, coastal management, conservation, recreation and open space, intergovernmental coordination, and capital improvements. A key component of the Act is its "concurrency" provision that requires facilities and services to be available concurrent with the impacts of development. The EAR -based amendments are State mandated with an associated timeframe for completion. GHG reduction and energy efficiency policies have been added to meet statutory requirements. The policies related to GHG reduction and energy efficiency reflect EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 4 of 17 15. Not practical to use bicycles in this weather. EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 5 of 17 It is important for all income types and ages that transportation choices are available. Florida bicycle association: www.floridabicycle.org Bike Florida: www.bikeflorida.org Florida cycling: www.floridacycling.com South Florida Bike Coalition: 17. Government helps to ruin our lives and Government provides a number of functions including environment. The more you help us, the more parks, hospitals, roadways, and EMS, and law you hurt us. I enforcement. 19. You promised that if there was a nuclear power plant, we would get cheap energy. You may want to contact FPL. FPL Customers To Get Fuel Rebate In January; Lowest Bills In State Will Drop In 2010 (Nuclear Power Industry News). FPL residential customers using 1,000 kilowatt-hours will receive a credit of $44.46 on their January electric bills. The fuel charge credit would normally have been spread out over the course of 12 months. FPL does not profit on the fuel it buvs to aenerate electricitv. 21. Don't want energy efficiency. You will ruin Some private companies are choosing to build with the economy. Shipping jobs overseas green building standards to reduce their long term costs. because you will reoulate us to death. 23. Why will government buy and sell houses? This is a capitalist society. Government has nothing to do with the economy. One method of developing home ownership for people with disabilities is through the establishment of trusts. Since 1985, the number of housing trusts has increased more than fivefold in response to the growing demand for housing resources (Center for Community Change, 1989). Housing trust funds are dedicated sources of revenue (e.g., real estate tax sales, interest on real 25. Recovery Act will limit our freedom. Mandate on that will force banks to loan to people who cannot afford it. 27. Not a goal or encouragement. This will be law, a requirement. 29. Commercial/Industrial Future Land Uses. Percentage is too small. What is an appropriate percentage for each of these? EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 6 of 17 estate escrow accounts) committed to the purpose of providing low and moderate income housing. They are generally established by local, county, or state government and are usually ongoing and permanent. Some housing trusts have been created on the state level through a budget allocation rather than an ongoing commitment of revenue (Center for Community Change, 1989). Families of people with disabilities can "buy into" these trusts. In addition, private trusts, established for the benefit of individuals or groups, may also include a housing component. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act is a federal program. It may be best to contact your US Reprehensive or Senator. Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a MXD or SD land use designation that may be developed into a non-residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential and agricultural. 31. Erosion of individual rights. If some can build a house on beach, they should have to deal with the consequences. Insurance companies should be able to say "no." People should have a right to do stupid things EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 7 of 17 Coastal Barrier Resources Act or COBRA enacted October 18, 1982, designated various undeveloped coastal barrier islands, depicted by specific maps, for inclusion in the Coastal Barrier Resources System. Areas so designated were made ineligible for direct or indirect Federal financial assistance that might support development, including flood insurance, except for emergency life-saving activities. The purpose is to protect property owners in the long term. The developer may not own the property for life. Protecting the dunes protects all future owners of a building. 33. Talk to legislators and Tom Pelham at The state legislature and the Florida Department of DCA about comprehensive plan requirements. Community Affairs are responsible for setting Mark and Lorraine are not responsible for comprehensive plan requirements. requirements. 35. Candidate for County Commissioner. Not enough done for economic development. SLC provides for an Economic Development Element, which is an optional element and not required by the State. Beginning in 1985, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted various economic development incentives to attract targeted industries and create jobs within St. Lucie County. These incentives of create targeted industry jobs through employer relocation and local business retention/expansion efforts. The Ad Valorem Tax Abatement and Job Growth Investment Grants (JGIG) incentives have been especially successful. Since 1992, St. Lucie County has attracted over 20 new businesses and created 4,900 new jobs throuqh the authorization of economic EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 8 of 17 EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 9 of 17 faulty. (ie, IPCC and CRU). The have been almost completely discredited. Is it time to stop and rethink the plan based upon science, not political science? There is no adjustment for new information in the 6. Is there a bike route map? What is the cost of putting in sidewalks? Is it specific to schools or commercial areas? Encourage County to install sidewalks by schools and hospitals. Don't put sidewalks in existing developments. Government is doing a good job of spending people's money. In the future, can you show what is required by the state and what is not so we know what to fight at the local level or the state level? Over -burdensome to individual taxpayers. 8. Seems like a tough job ahead. What are ideal land use percentages? State is requiring certain policies. If state is misdirected and is the problem, what is the recourse to go after state policy? What is sea level rise in St. Lucie County since 1988? These issues could be pointed out to the County Commission. Recommend job balance. What are sustainable land use percentages? Optimal jobs need houses. What is ideal percentage of industrial and commercial uses? Jobs are an important part of sustainable EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 10 of 17 economic stimulus efforts. The Comprehensive Plan includes a Public School Facilities Element adopted in 2008 that is not being reviewed with the EAR -based Amendments. Maps TRN-7 and TRN-9 show existing and future bike lanes along major roadways and safe routes to school (Transportation Planning Org.). The County budget process is open to public participation. Data on ideal land use percentages is not available. 10. Incentives to lure companies- job creation developing high wage high skill jobs, but if applied to jobs/housing balance will weaken balance. The problem with high tech is existing unemployed here need jobs. Will need to bring in talent from outside. Current barriers to business are zoning, licenses, and permits. Can't use natural resources like the Port. Port would make a lot of money. Encourage residential uses around the Port. Use port for 12. Will the study impact the affordability of homes' Placing limits on higher densities increases property values and costs. People cannot afford higher rates. Cost so high, people will move away. Substandard housing- what is the standard? When required improvements are made to substandard housing, residents are forced to move out. Jeff Furst say values will settle in between. People will be priced out. 14. County has not designated any area as having slum or blight. 16. How can you assist government and developers in informed decision-makina? Thev are EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 11 of 17 New employees from St. Lucie County or from outside St. Lucie County will benefit the jobs/housing balance. The Comprehensive Plan includes the Port Master Plan. See No 35 on page 7 regarding economic incentives by the County. The EAR -based amendments recommend adding a minimum density. There is no change in maximum densities. The building official determines substandard housing. Home improvement grants do not require residents to move out. Counties may designate certain areas meeting state qualifications for slum and blight. This is usually done as a precursor for development a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) where there are targeted redevelopment programs. There are no CRAs in the County, several exist in Ft. Pierce. The Florida Building Code provides minimum building requirements. All local qovernments must usually at opposite ends of the table. Protecting real estate is fabulous. Should be focused on large swath of regulation and hurdles for development - even regulating outhouses. Get like Texas where there is no zoning. Texas does not have downturn in housing like rest of the country. Dig into regulatory fee structures. Wet to City Council, upland development could have been traded for $15,000 per acre. In the end, it was $110,000 per acre. These were due with the pro forma in development proiects. 18. Doesn't Census data only include household size? 20. 73% of land uses will be controlled by Comp Plan. Work is contracted out. County staff also involved. Layers of bureaucracy in the document. Unfunded mandates. Concern that single-family will not be the norm. What about providing transit and fees in lieu. Seeing a change in government by government. America loves life, liberty, and haDDiness. 22. Port and Inland Port are important. A green building was proposed in the Port. What specific green standard will be required? Mark Young at Maritime Advisors, LLC can give you financial information reqardinq the Port. 24. Real life experience- While at the PX in Saigon, appliances and General Development Corporation EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 12 of 17 adhere to the Florida Building Code. Houston does not have a zoning code, however, they have other land use controls and most properties have deed restrictions. The Census has a variety of demographic information including household income, ethnicity, age, and information about buildings such as The state requires all Counties and cities to have a comprehensive plan that regulates land use. There is no proposal to change existing single family home areas. Local governments may not choose one green standard for buildings and may not require green standards for private buildings. Developers continue to advertise residential development for sale in the County. The EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 13 of 17 EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 14 of 17 6. Definitions of water bodies and rivers are omitted Page 4-22 of the adopted EAR provides the (referenced Ten Mile Creek). This is not based on a following recommendation for Policy 1.1.9.7 — recommendation from the EAR. Revise Policy to include entire waterways. It may be best to allow for a strict definition in the LDC only to prevent inconsistencies among documents. Proposing the following language as an alternative to original proposed change: Policy 1.1.9.7 - Enforce Section 6.02.02 of the Land Development Regulations to protect the watercourses identified below: North Fork of the St. Lucie River — Those portions in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the Martin County line to the confluence with Five and Ten Mile Creeks. Five Mile Creek — Those portions of Five Mile Creek in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to R_r.aaska-6ine Orange Ave. Ten Mile Creek — Those portions of Ten Mile Creek and the Eleven Mile Creek tributary in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to AAsCaFt Shinn Road. 8. Wetlands Mitigation Issues -Two large mitigation This phrase was relocated from Policy 6.1.4.13 to banks in the County. Existing wetland policy being 6.1.4.2 added to "to the maximum extent possible" County owes a duty to the privately funded mitigation banks that thev are putting them out of business. 10. Controlling travel to and from job. The focus is not about controlling travel to and from work but to provide alternative modes of transportation and also recognize that the distance (vehicle miles traveled) development is from urbanized areas should be addressed in the impact 12. Too comprehensive and far reaching, presented without an equal balance of economic benefit. Only two mentions of jobs and are made in reference to controlling where you live in relation to your job. Nothing about creating economic environment to be conducive to the economic resurgence needed, From the government down not up. You will be very unhappy with yourself if you do not give due diligence to what is being presented here before you made a recommendation. Pravina for wisdom on vour part. EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 15 of 17 fee structure. The Economic Development issue is addressed in No. 35 on page 7 above. Please see the Economic Development Element and the memo from Michael Brillhart dated March 15, 2010 (www.stlucieco.gov/qrowth/EAR.htm) on economic development incentives adopted by the BOCC. 14. Unfunded mandates (Bicycle, Pedestrian, St. Lucie County Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways & Greenways and Trail Study). What is the cost of Trails Master Plan was adopted by the BOCC in one mile of bike trail? 2008. The St. Lucie County Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways &Trails Master Plan inventoried all the existing sidewalks, bike paths, missing sidewalks, and provided suaciestions to improve the system. 16. Encourage mass transit, plasma arc The County will need to review the cost of an gasification, however all items presented in this impact fee before the adoption of one. The current plan will increase impact fees and scary away impact fee schedule is being implemented in potential employers instead of enticing them to phases. come. 18. Past study groups chaired by Betty Lou Wells spent years putting together the elements of the plan with a vision for the future. Having no plan at all is a disaster. People are concerned about our fiscal resources and we are now suffering from years of uncontrolled growth causing a crisis in banking and with the local and national economy. Growth needs to pay for itself so the County The policy below is existing language in the Comp Plan; the element number has been changed. Policy 76.1.4.1: No new untreated point source discharges into coastal waters for stormwater runoff and wastewater effluent will be permitted. The Comp Plan has an entire element dedicated to citizens aren't burdened with it. Many items are called for by state legislation, this is not the place to complain about these issues. Post disaster redevelopment is a proposal that we needed after the hurricanes of 2006. Comments about no education being part of the plan, the County has many educational programs. No new untreated storm water? Protect the IR lagoon all of the St. Lucie River, all of Ten Mile Creek, this is what brings tourists and makes life livable in St. Lucie County. We have a strong Comp Plan and encourage you to keep it strong. 20. Uncontrolled growth 22. United Nations Agenda 21, stripping away US 24. Transfer of Development Rights is a bad idea. Ask for increasing riqhts rather than trading them. 26. Business will build and operate Green when it is economically feasible. Goal of any business is to earn a profit. 28.Over 18,000 people in St. Lucie County unemployed EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 16 of 17 education, The Public Schools Facilities Element, which was recently adopted in Dec of 2008 and therefore it is not being updated along with the rest in the EAR -based Amendments. The Growth Management Act of 1985 was instituted in response to uncontrolled growth and is the basis for requiring Comprehensive (Development) Plans. Being studied in depth during the Western Lands EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 1S, 2010 Page 17 of 17 30. Quality of life diminishi 32. Plan does not include cost analysis The County budget process is open to public participation. The amendments reflect existing County policies on sustainability and green practices. Any policy that might require a study or large project includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of" or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 1 2 3 4 Ce 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ORDINANCE NO. 10-020 Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO APPROVE AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL BASED AMENDMENTS; PROVIDING FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature intends that local planning be a continuous and ongoing process; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, Ordinance No. 90-01 on January 9, 1990; and WHEREAS, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to adopt needed amendments to ensure that the plan provides appropriate policy guidance for growth and development; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission acting as the designated Local Planning Agency has reviewed the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments, held an advertised public hearing on April 15, 2010, provided for participation by the public in the process, and rendered its recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has reviewed the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments, held an advertised public hearing on , 2010, while providing for comments and public participation and approved transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has reviewed and addressed the Department of Community Affairs issued Objections, Recommendations and Comments report, and held a second advertised public hearing while providing for comments and public participation; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: A. ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENTS The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, attached here as Exhibit A. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 B. CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Board of County Commissioners does hereby state its intention to amend the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments. C. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Special acts of the Florida Legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County Ordinances and County Resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby superseded by this Ordinance to the extent of such conflict. D. SEVERABILITY If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this Ordinance. If this Ordinance or any provisions thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstances, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property or circumstance. E. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE This Ordinance shall be applicable as stated in Paragraphs A and B. F. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Bureau of Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida, 32304. G. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS The Growth Management Director shall send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. H. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty-one (31) days after adoption. If the Ordinance is challenged within thirty (30) days after adoption, the Ordinance shall not be effective until the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission respectively issues a final order finding the adopted amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184(10), Florida Statutes. Ordinance No. 10-020 Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 I. ADOPTION After motion and second, the vote on this Ordinance was as follows: Charles Grande, Chairman XXX Doug Coward, Vice -Chair XXX Chris Dzadovsky, Commissioner XXX Chris Craft, Commissioner XXX Paula Lewis, Commissioner XXX PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this ATTEST: day, 2010. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: County Attorney Ordinance No. 10-020 Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Exhibit "A" EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT BASED AMENDMENTS Ordinance No. 10-020 Page 4 Suggested motion of recommendation for Ordinance No. 10-020: MOTION TO APPROVE: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEREBY ACTING AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY FORWARD THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT BASED AMENDMENTS TO THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO TRANSMIT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND ADOPT THE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE.... [CITE REASON(S) WHY — PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] MOTION TO DENY: AFTER CONSIDERING THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, INCLUDING STAFF COMMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION (LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY) OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY FORWARD THE EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT BASED AMENDMENTS TO THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO DENY AND NOT TRANSMIT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS THE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE.... [CITE REASON(S) WHY — PLEASE BE SPECIFIC] GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mark Satterlee, AICP, Growth Management Director Britton, Wilson, Senior Planner — Comprehensive Planning FROM: Michael Brillhart, Capital Improvements Manager DATE: March 15, 2010 SUBJECT: EAR Plan Amendments - County Adopted Economic Development Incentives Beginning in 1985, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted various economic development incentives to attract targeted industries and create jobs within St. Lucie County. These incentives are authorized through State Statutes with the purpose of creating targeted industry jobs through employer relocation and local business retention/expansion efforts. The Ad Valorem Tax Abatement and Job Growth Investment Grants (JGIG) incentives have been especially successful in creating new jobs within the County. Since 1992, St. Lucie County has attracted over 20 new businesses and created 4,900 new jobs through the authorization of economic development incentives for targeted industries. A title of each economic development incentive adopted by the Board of County Commissioners through local Ordinance or Resolution is referenced below. Document Adoption Date Economic Development Impact Fee 01/15/2008 Mitigation — Ordinance No. 08-007 Ad Valorem Tax Exemption: Application 10/28/2003 Procedures — Resolution No. 03-258 Passed Voter Referendum in 2002 Job Growth Investment Grant (JGIG) 08/23/1994 Agreement — Resolution No. 94-168 Ad Valorem Tax Exemption: Application 10/06/1992 Procedures — Ordinance No. 92-24 Passed Voter Referendum in 1992 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds 02/05/1985 Guidelines & Procedures — Resolution No. 85-28 Document Adoption Date Enterprise Zone/Empowerment Zone 09/22/1998 w/City of F.P. — Resolution 98-197 Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ): Establishing 12/20/1994 a U.S. FTZ in St. Lucie County — Resolution 94-266 (In addition, the Board has authorized the use of a `Franchise Fee" rebate to one requesting company as a business expansion incentive) Major employers that have created local jobs through the assistance of these incentives include: Maverick Boats, QVC, Bee Electronics, Atlantic Truss, Convergys, Liberty Medical Supply, Liberty Home Pharmacy, Orchid Island, Maribella Yachts, Cabinet Connections, Allen Supply and Scripps Treasure Coast. In April of 2009, the Board of County Commissioners also adopted a Local Stimulus Ordinance (Ordinance No. 09-008) as a means of enhancing job creation as a result of a significant downturn in the local economy. A "local economic emergency' was declared by the Board in light of a national recession that has resulted in significantly high home foreclosure and unemployment rates for the County. The stimulus Ordinance requires that 75% of the labor for each project be local residents and 75% of the materials used for each improvement project be acquired from local vendors through competitive bids to assist in stimulating the local economy. Additionally, the Ordinance identified 12 emergency capital improvement projects that can use federal stimulus dollars allocated through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 and other allocated funding to create jobs on an expedited "shovel ready' basis. The total cost value for these 12 projects is estimated at $10,656,895 with a job creation estimate of 116 new jobs. In addition, 78 other local projects totaling $37,843,274 were identified through this process as contributing to local economic stimulus with an estimated job creation of 390. This would bring the total estimated number of jobs created through this local economic stimulus effort to 506. Calvin, Giordano & Associates, Inc. E X C E P T 1 O N A L S O L u T 1 0 N 5 Memorandum Fort Lauderdale Office - 18M Eller Drive, Suite 600, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316 Phone:954.921.7781 • Fax: 954.921.8807 ❑ Palm Beach Office - 560 Village Blvd„ Suite 340, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 Phone:561.684.6161 • Fax:561.684.6360 DATE: March -30, 201 p TO: Mark Satterlee, AICP, Growth Management Director FROM: Lorraine Tappen, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: EAR -Based Amendments- Planning and Zoning Board Public Workshop Comments CC: Britton Wilson, Senior Planner The Planning and Zoning Commission held a workshop on the proposed Ear -based Amendments on March 18, 2010. The following is a summary of comments received at the workshop: • A correction should be made that the Planning and Zoning Advisory Board is the Local Planning Agency who has an important role to review and approve comprehensive plan amendments. • Staff has not had sufficient time. Should have the same amount of time as the land development code revisions. Schedule more time to review the document • Devil is in the details. The amendments include unnecessary complications and fuzziness. Uncertainty means cost. Adding costs to the process. Not adding anything to the County. • For example, development of community development districts has been added as a requirement for some land use designations. • Concern about definitions of waterbodies taken out: (i.e., 10 Mile Creek) • Concern about mandatory connection to utilities for any permit. • There are two large wetland mitigation banks in the County. By adding three words, to extent possible, may put the mitigation banks out of business. • Don't rely on a summary for all the wordsmithing. • Concern about housing close to employment. Housing cost high on island. • Font on Slide 6 should be made bigger to make it easier to read. • All these things are unfunded mandates. No timetable for all these things. Effect is uncertain. Depends on layers and layers of bureaucracy to inspect and mandate. • How can something this comprehensive be adopted now? It controls where you live and what you drive. It will affect every part of your life. • No equal balance of economic benefit. • Only two references to jobs P:\PROIECTS\2009\092819 ST. LUCIE EAR AMENDMENTS\PLANNING\WORKSHOPS\ST. LUCIE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES 03 18 1 O.DOCX Planning and Zoning Commission EAR -based Amendments Workshop Notes Page 2 • Nothing about creating an economic environment for economic development. Government down. Not people up. Need government for the people. Not government by government. • This is so far reaching that you would be unhappy to not give due diligence to this. • There is no cost analysis. What is the tax burden? • Admirable to adopt green standards, pedestrian standards, trails, but no tangible benefit to being a green County. • $1.5 million for roads, but no information on cost of bike trails. • Encouraging parts of study, i.e., encourage mass transit, solid waste gasification. • Any increase in impact fees may drive employers away. • County has good economic development activities • This is a burdensome plan. Require thorough review. • Participated in EAR with Comprehensive Plan study group which began 1988. • The Comprehensive Plan Study group organized was by Betty Lou Wells with a variety of residents. • Spent years working to build Comp Plan which is a vision for the future. • Having no plan at all is a disaster. • Appreciate that so many are concerned. • Suffering from uncontrolled growth which led to a crisis in housing. • Having a solid plan, having growth pay for itself, is of vital importance. • Greenhouse gas reduction strategies are required by state legislation. If you want to complain, contact your legislator. • 1 wish we had a Post Disaster Redevelopment Plan. We have had to depart from Comprehensive Plan in the past. Great damage was done. Indian River Drive project was a disaster and divisive. • Regarding comments that there is nothing about education in Plan, the County has worked with School Board, (i.e., Marine academies) to entice people to our biotech and for first class education • Please add "for a vision, no new stormwater." Protect all of IRL and Ten Mile Creek. Our natural resources attract people and enhance our quality of life. • Create a new Comp Plan study group to do in depth analysis. This takes a lot of effort to review this. Betty Lou Wells is unfortunately not well. Can supply names to do in depth analysis. It does take effort. • Comp Plan is strong. Keep it strong. • Support the Planning and Zoning Advisory Board. • Grande Beach located on Hutchinson Island, south end of Hutchinson Island. Considered in 2006-2008. Citizens need to understand the process. Folks pro and con spoke out against it. 2/3 were against. PZ recommended disapproval. Then application went to BOCC. Finally, it was granted approval. There were many questionable issues at that time. • Allowed construction on roadway easements and allowed conversion Commercial to residential uses. • Paid representatives to speak for the development. Suspicious of relationship between applicant and BOCC. P:\PROJECTs\2009\092819 ST. LUCIE EAR AMENDMENTS\PLANNING\WORKSHOPS\ST. LUCIE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NoTEs 03 18 1 O.DOCX Planning and Zoning Commission EAR -based Amendments Workshop Notes Page 3 • The Planning and Zoning Board and Growth Management staff should carry sufficient weight with the Board of County Commissioners. • Interaction between the applicant and the BOCC should be prohibited. There should be significant benefit to neighbors. • Should the Planning and Zoning Board be increased to seven members? • Definitely opposed to Comprehensive Plan. • Sustainability, smart growth, and green growth- buzz works for UN Agenda 21 adopted in 1976 and one world governance. Move US from sovereignty and take away our own private property. • Taxpayers are maxed out. This system will increase layers of government. This will be huge and unsustainable. • Roll plans back. • In Carol County, Maryland, a Smart Growth plan was introduced which was political dogma and social engineering. Using housing and zoning code to encourage people with weak personal responsibility to urban areas to move votes to red (to the left) to enhance high government density. • Consider yourself warned by redevelopment in Maryland county. After fights, the Maryland County rolled back their plan. • Where is the money for this stuff when we have foreclosures and school budget crises? • Stop it now. Don't take away any US private property rights. • Transfer of Development Rights is a bad idea. Ask for increasing rights rather than trading them. • Not enough about agriculture. We used to be an agrarian -based economy. • Construction is not sustainable. • In regard to the EAR, is it true that the landfill will supply us with enough capacity for thirty years? Haven't heard much about gas plasma gasification- seems to be discouraged. • Bussing is a big issue here. Not within Comp Plan. In Europe, they use public transit for kids to get to schools. Can you include school bussing in the transportation issues? Can we use public transit to bus kids? • How much did the work cost? • Land use percentages- Commercial, Light Industrial, Industrial- less than 2% of total. • Current jobs/housing ratio is 0.5. Not a good number to be at. • Two most job producing element -Future land use decreased that by 30% • It's clear where our economic problems come from. • Ten years ago the percentage unemployment was 5.7%; now higher-15 or 20%. • Economic Development programs not working. • New rules and impact fees are now answer for prosperity. • How to allow the economy that existed 10 years ago? How do we give power to the people? • 20,000 people are out of work. High tech jobs are a good, long term strategic goal, but don't deter creating blue color jobs. Allow existing companies to develop and expand. P:\PROJECTS\2009\092819 ST. LUCIE EAR AMENDMENTS\PLANNING\WORKSHOPS\ST. LUCIE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES 03 18 1 O.DOCX Planning and Zoning Commission EAR -based Amendments Workshop Notes Page 4 • Difficult to set land uses. Planning and Zoning Commission has a difficult job. • We are environmentally cleaner and more conscious every year, but not fast enough for some people. Business will choose green when profitable. • Being green is not all good. Being green without investment is not a business plan. There should be no government plan to force businesses to go green • Any government plan to shift businesses should be out in the open. • Countless unemployed and underemployed. • Commercial/Industrial land will be reduced in Comp Plan. How can we entice businesses and have economic development when decreasing industrial and commercial. • We are clearly short on jobs. Moving people out of cars and moving people closer to jobs. Is the real purpose to reduce jobs? • Let's not do this just because Tallahassee mandates this. If we need to push back against economy killing decisions, we should do so. • The boot of the County in our neck should not affect our quality of life. • Real estate background with a specialty in marine industries. Past president of Marine Industries Association. Renewable energy specialist for a solar contractor. Also on green committee for Chamber of Commerce. Sustainability Committee for Research Coast. - organized drywall committee. Worked in economic development for mayor in Denver, CO. Involved in land development code rewrite in Fort Pierce. • Want to reference two points. Need to see innovative programs put together by Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council regarding grants for green projects. • Please look up definition of sustainability on Society of Civil Engineers website — sober and reasoned definition. • Concerned about shrill nature of some comments and need for sober discussion. Cancelled attendance at another meeting to attend tonight. • Need more deliberate, considered and educated opinions. • Am I too uneducated to speak at the meeting? Here to participate and take it in. Not happy to hear green. • Not happy government will tell us how to drive, who to drive with, and what to drive. Don't tell us to ride a bicycle. Government should keep to its job. Is this the right thing to do with our money to study getting out of our car, live close to our job, or build a bike trail? Money could have been better spent. • Should we tell people to live close to their job? • People don't want sustainability and green. Do what is right for us. Don't tell us to use light bulbs with mercury. • No need to study for a new library. If you have too many people in a library, build one. Don't need a study for everything. • Been here for 40 years and moved here when Port St. Lucie only had 370 residents. • This is one of the best run places in the US after living in seven states. In past forty years, growth led to increase in 170,000 people. Full inundation of people and cultures. We all came from some place (i.e., few Fort Pierce natives.) Another 170,000 are coming. • Feel both the Planning and Zoning Board and Board of County Commissioners are fair even though I don't always agree. P:\PROJECTS\2009\092819 ST. LUCIE EAR AMENDMENTS\PLANNING\WORKSHOPS\ST. LUCIE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES 03 18 1O.DOCX Planning and Zoning Commission EAR -based Amendments Workshop Notes Page 5 • This is a genuine paradise and I wouldn't change it. We should realize more people are coming. Another 170,000 are coming. Need planning before they get here. When there is no plan in place, some things occur where they shouldn't. That doesn't happen anymore • This does not happen anymore because people like you come to meetings like this. • Planning occurs because you all come out and help contribute to the process. • What are the timing requirements for the EAR -based Amendments? • Will the amendments come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission? • How many extensions are allowed by the state for EAR -based amendments? • Sat through original Comprehensive Plan process in 1998 with Mary Lou Wells. She did an outstanding job. Know how we got here today. • The Planning and Zoning Commission and County staff are young and have no history. • If you have a good plan, it works. This is a dynamic County and we are not static. We change. • These rules and regulations are good. • EAR- feels vague. Need terms defined. Would like definitions to be tighter such as rivers. (i.e., where does Ten Mile Creek start?) Need to tighten definitions including the rivers Mr. Ferguson mentioned. Staff should have some liberty with definitions. The more clarity in the revisions, the better. • Would like to discuss island/shoreline restoration, stabilization in next workshop • Would like to discuss more about western lands sustainability. Now farmers are selling off portions in order to keep some farming operations in place. TDRs are new to all of us. Previously looked TDRs in RLSA. • This County leads. We don't follow. • Let's lead in TDRs. How about Tallahassee creating TDR bank? Use the TDRs in the urban service area -not outside where we don't want more development. Inside the urban service area, density is desirable. Not addressed in this plan. • Concerned about Industrial and Commercial areas and a need to enhance those areas. Can't rely on homebuilding. We need to look at this at our next workshop. • Part of this is utilities. We already have pipes planted in western lands. • Are there enough existing lands to bring economic development and growth? • TVC was good, and needs flexibility. Should be able to change the overall product for the County. • Keep flexibility to adapt to change. • Good economic development focus in Airport Corridor. • Can results of Western Lands Study be folded into the Comp Plan? • Timing and process. It doesn't seem like one meeting is enough. Need a substantial process for analyzing the project. • How do we accomplish the goal of reviewing the EAR -based amendments in a timely manner without belaboring process? P:\PROIECTS\2009\092819 ST. LUCIE EAR AMENDMENTS\PLANNING\WORKSHOPS\ST. LUCIE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES 03 18 1 O.DOCX Planning and Zoning Commission EAR -based Amendments Workshop Notes Page 6 • Need to more time to adequately respond. • What are the consequences- adopt or else? • Concern about timelines in amendments. With budget reductions, timelines will be difficult to keep up. Concerns that staff and BOCC may need to hold to deadlines. Drop dead dates may be troublesome. • Feel like we and public need more time to digest this. Can we come back as a board in addition to the public hearing to allow more review time? • Need to be careful with definitions. Need to be able to interpret. • Concerned about requiring sidewalks in rural areas. Sidewalks everywhere those lead to nothing. Need to look and give flexibility. • Has there been a cost analysis to what we are doing? Concern about stress on staff and consolidate of County departments. Please evaluate staff's ability to handle projects and response time. • Suggest requiring community buildings are hurricane hardened and stored with necessary supplies. • Can post -disaster redevelopment plan include a plan for community buildings to have supplies for residents? Can we look into methods for encouraging this? P:\PROJECTS\2009\092819 ST. LUCIE EAR AMENDMENTS\PLANNING\WORKSHOPS\ST. LUCIE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP NOTES 03 18 1 O.DOCX B6 • SCRIPPS TREASURE COAST NEWSPAPERS • WEDNESDAY, MARCH 31, 2010 • SL Complaints about bears on rise Z W 2 W a Z Q S 0fs/ tA. U J M t0 O r r K aa N N m L: 0) E Q) Z C a C () L Z _o -o (n N_ 0 Q 05 U I+ rfj !C it ►. J r_J BY MIKE VASILINDA WPPV News Channal5 'Tn the season to be on the lookout for ... beats. Florida black beats to be specific. The state reports the num- ber of complaints about the native species is on the increase, and urges homeowners to make sure they erect attracting beats to their yards with food and garbage. Complaints about unwanted bears in backyards are up by more than 500, year to year In 2009, there were almost 3,300 complaints. Florida outlawed bear hunting in 1994, so their population is on the increase, and this is the time of the year bears go on the move It's mating season. They're getting food after a long winter, so they're out looking for food," said Pat Behnke of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conser- vation Commission. There are an estimated 3,000 black bears in Florida. Most interaction with neighborhoods is all about food, Find not just pet food or garbage One homeowner videotaped a Iasi black bear munching on bird food. "In most rases, in cases where a bear has gotten on a mans porch and so on, we found out that the bear had been finding food in the yard. And again, we stress the fact that there is individual responsibility about keep- ing those attractants out of the yard, will keep the bears out of the yard," Behnke said - The Fish and Wildlife Commission urges residents to purchases bear proof garbage containers. They say the treat thing to do if you encountera bear is to stay calm, "make noise, if they can. Back away, walk away slowly, and go in the house." Bear populations are scattered throughout the state. There are no plans to revisit the no -hunting ban. To report a bear in your yard, call the Fish and Wildlife Commission at (888) 40439M. Palm Beach businesses won't get preference BY JIM TURNER jim.turneri�bcripDs.com STUART — Businesses based in Palm Beads County will not be given local vendor preference when Martin County is purchasing or Contracting projects. Commissioner Ed Ciampi said the decision by the Martin County Com- mission wasn't linked to the rebidding on the much -anticipated Aquatics Complex, as some have speculated. The Aquatics Complex is a design build project and was not subject to the local preference requirements. Instead, the decision was due to a similar inclination by Palm Beach County Initially it was believed Palm Beach County was going to include Martin County -based companies as local vendors in a rewrite of Palm Beach County Contract requirements. However, Senior Assistant Mar- tin County Attorney Sarah Woods said Palm Beach County wants to favor Palm Beach County vendors exclusively "I've never had the impression form their staff that they're looking to make Martin County Vendors equal with Palm Beach county vendors," Woods said. Martin County Commissioner Sarah Heard said her board shouldn't act prematurely because Palm Beach County, where there is a greater opportunity for work for Martin County businesses, hadn't finalized the rewrite of its contract selection requirements. Under announced local preference selections, a local company that is out bid on a project by an outofc unty Company Would be given a chance to match the price proposed by the com- petitor If the local company is able to provide the Work at the lower price, it ran get the Contract Through the change, local prefer- ence will be limited to businesses With ties to Martin, Okeechobee, St Lucieor Indian River Counties. Based upon Palm Beach County's perceived position, the Treasure Coast Build- ers Association asked Martin for this limitation. Vero Beach lacrosse team hit with penalties BY COLLEEN WIXON opponents. School offacials coheen.wL-.@scnppa_com contended the team met I ETAILS OF THE SiETTLESIENT VERO BEACH — The the rule because of the in Indian River County School state matches between the The IRNOW MwrCI adntg BDard greed Board voted unanimously varsity and junior varsity TurdRVto acanitAprdpaAed eNOShnErlt to agree to a settlement with teams combined. semnn wHh WtoEBImA ISgiSGhpW ISGfOee the Florida High School The board joined with pMW CmwtM SRI INRWOn:F",kk High SrataDl Athletic Association in team parents to get a tem AWetle ArpeWlpll. which the Veto Beach High porary court injunction Amoy the IRWIN" RI NSArfeneft School girls' lacrosse team that held off any sane- 411SAAMArmhnlerShISIres m to Vain Beach has to return last year's lions against the team and SmodtKirm9e Lam Ranhsiew bMkstir MU2M&2009 state championship trophy allowed the team to finish smm. and the board has to pay the state championship -The board and school INS rem the Wavue team more than$11,000 in fines. tournament. OhWtlplareliptrotylhrift2DB-21109waon The team also will be Vern Beach won its fourth •The district WS pit' FiSAAa SIL901M ft. placed on restrictive proba- consecutive state title •Theboald end ffiIoolSA payan acklmoned SMIII for lie tion for the 2010, 2011 and last year — second under IMadd fond oUt-0f-SM Sines ft Ice Cow LIMIT PROM 2012 seasons. That means FHSAA-recognition — by dLft ft 2008 M ReMin the team can't travel out defeating lake Brantley 16.7 -The Narroa Bteen ad bempmbaeoniorre2DII), 20TI of state to play games, the in the championship game. aM2012 MIRRORS, drIftOrhRC01181) OIAofshte1)Pt4 settlement said. The Fighting Indians are Swiss: The USRrRMpIft0Ut- -SMtmrns4aa"tD The team Will be eligible 140thisyearand3-Oagainst Haida to play in this year's state out-of-state teams. -The stied LN be0aced tna"ftntreprobomfor die championship. They are rated the top YW amrtirgA 1, 2D(18.■ WWh tone eIM" MORON sin The board met Tuesday team in the nation by art' sport AN resuhn tvsasedperBSles, in an executive session lacross Web site Laxpowsr to discuss the proposed ram, a position they claimed settlement after defeating perennial plaintiffs in the sett lement ement. e board voted seek a permanent m a judge so Ct10RS Can also changes the specify "varsity" teams must play at least 60 per cent of their regular games With other FHSAA member SChOolS- Stao writer lame) PtaNer mnmbptmws repon m . Speed limit to remain same on U.S.1 in Sebastian BY ED BIERSCHENK limit "is realistic, enforce- also said he expected the based on a request from the ed. bierschenk�scripps.com able and appropriate" based issue to be discussed at the city to lower the speed limit SEBASTIAN — The speed on the resulisof a speed limit upcoming workshop on to W mph in Sebastian, limit along U.S. 1 in the study and mash history future Community Redevel- although some city officials downtown area will not be "The Department is will opment Area projects said they actually were just lowered now, but could be in ing to lower the posted Marilda Hoover, traffic interested in exploring the the future if the city makes speed limit to 35 mph in the signal operations and stud- idea at this time some changes along the Downtown area of U S. 1 in ies specialist, said speeds Monier -Robinson sug road, according to an e-mail conjunction with a city or were measured at eight dif- gemixi the speed limit should the state Department of county project that would ferent locations, including be 30 mph between East Transportation sent to the change the character of the areas between County Road bound C.R. 512 and Mair city Monday, roadway such as landscap- 512 and Main Street, Main Street and 35 mph between Former Councilwoman ing," said the e-mail signed Street and Jackson Street, Main Street and Jackson and U.S. 1 business owner by transportation official Jackson Street and Roseland Street, Lisanne Monier -Robinson, Richard Mitinger on behalf Road, and Roseland Road The state generally set who has advocated for a of Overton. Please advise and the bridge over the St the speedlimit lased onhow lower speed limit, said she whether this is feasible" Sebastian River fast 85 percent of motorists was encouraged by the elm- Monier -Robinson, who The speed limit is 40 mph are traveling through at tropic communication. has proposed traffrccalmbig in the area between C.R. area, scaP The a -mail, sent on behalf devices such as land512 easthound and Jackwea n The mean speed of traffic of Assistant District Traf- ing, said she will discuss Street and 45 mph north of overall was about 45 mph s tic Operations Engineer the issue at a city workshop the city between Jackson the 40 mph zone and aboul Jonathan Overton, said the scheduled for 5:30 pm. April Street and the bridge 48 mph in the 45 mph cane al transportation department 7. State transportation offs- the time of last week's stud} believes the current speed City Manager Al Mintier cials said they did the study according to Hoover WEST PALM BEACH Body found at recycling center A dead body was found Tuesday morning in a heap of cardboard at a Solid Waste Authority recycling center. Investigators say the umdentibed mans body may have been sitting for days in a pile of cardboard at a temporary holding facility before being brought Tuesday to the pro casing center in West Palm Beach, where it was ultimately found. Wotkersdismveted tr uck unloadingeardboerd at the center at ENO 45th St, where all of Palm Beach Coun ty's recycled materials are soiled and processed. It was not immediately clear how the man dial or bona ids body got into the cardboard heap Detectives on Tuesdal morning were analyzing the area around the body Thr Medical Examiner's Office will perform an autopsy The dead roar[ was described as Hispanic and wearint a red -and white striped shirt, blue jeans and a Large bet buckle. S aR repprt FLA In 2010 71.1112111 �t ! r a..try yr ri L9tnetFllla'1g4ad ^� 230Nw,yn,la A..nua idt Pkne, fl 3e9ex-Sell iFac.11 `lmlk.> a62-1593 . �A2-xL9 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING x Tne 5[ Lucre Transportation Planning OrganlzaHon (St Lucre TPoI announces a public mee[Inq tD wMcn all interes[!o persons nvi[eC D•[e •rid Tim•: Wednesday, AO61 J, 2010, 2:DOpm lortlon: Ciry of fort Pierce Commisslon CnamDers 100 North U.S. Highway 1 Fort Pierce. floHda Am•ndm•n[ to FY gOOe/09-FY 2009/ 10 Un1R•d PI•nnlnq W Prnq.am (uewP): uvwp amenamem for the de —I, Planmmg (tt) Funds rnr use m Fr xmo/ts Am•Mral•nt [o the fY 3009/10 - FY 3033/14 Tnn•••rt•tlon ImPAvmmt Program (TIP>: Approval of tp the tip roc the aevancemmr or cne sa-Jo wlpenlnq projectfrom the Okeecnodee County line In MP S. eJl (FM 230262-2-52-01) 0.bolu0on Mn. 10-01 br Filing tM FY 2010/ 31 PI•nnlnq cone •PPliutiOn Inc ine Tnn•porutlon DlbOvanuq•d (TD) ►rogram: Approval of a resolution br Me Oling of Me FY 2Dro/n pbmq gmne apDHcanon roc ens ro program Amtr•Y/FEC Corridor Prof•Ct FunGin9 Requbb A request [p me Fbrlda Depercmeni or Tmnsporcarlon (FDOr) co in[nrporate Me 4mrmk/FEC Comeor pmjeR Into the FOOT Work program mrrm count• PreSnm Ev,w•non: A presmravon on me resubs of me Tranic Counts Program Evaluation, Organlza[wnal Recommenoabons, and Impkmen[a[lon Plan. N•an roe-wkneY coon«mr study: A Pmsenration o Hie rewas or ens north me-counry Gonnenor sway one m menaeD corrmor augnmmc. e DrM FY 2 010/11-fY g011/I2 UPWP: Review and approval If the drah'JPWp for Me S[ Lucre TPO Loral In)eeb for Economic aOmulua Funding: An update n cne priornmanon or beds proieccs that cows ce rundec by Feeemi economb sbmwus legisbbon �,re"i;xe ai K.a ' "P. ter" o LIn nN 7ra'm�mD',9' �a �Da ra9��amenaa•�..�,nan-d�"m,naw kw. nor yr are . n.0 a9�u Aa or s9A. P„am rtqulaeo udn9 a. um on9�n, tee, w. reka Fewrc me wb <mGC the Sly Wc,e �'POarat J)i 16 aimw��n<,im�y., nape +��K«,.ym xex,m � `s,' 2:aam x+�da as be rr�aa,s,Dnaav �Ke �o m:w�ltn � ; . bx �a�ora or m..P.sIN ee�„9s.sma.wMan -�"a"«,men., r a.,aana�oon Ltmles.6 tannin .ea.oua nrormanon sa e" aeok c,i m �. wan Ezpat r. s .eub. esm �nrcrmaoen an em.Ta, po u ,.v Wi.9.. re sx cvcounn ST. LUCIE COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION I LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ARPIL 15, 2010 NOTICE OFTHE PROPOSED EVALUAn(w AND APPRALSAL REPORT4U15E0 AMENpAENTS TO THE ST LACE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TM St luc• Wunry ' a dPbnp Mbq weabMecel Pbnnnq APnacrty MaaNuMe Wnw9 to A inbmbd panm b DATE AND neE. Thulsdry, Apd is, 2010a16:00 P.M. PLACE Laxly Caanisaiaa, CMmDers, SL Luae Cwnry Aeminismam BuiUng, Rpger Gams Annex, 2300 Vxginia Aawwe, Far Preme, Fbida AfPLICAMT Berra d Cwnry Canmissbr4rs. St. lixae Couny PURPOSE'. Sl Lude Gwdy a mdedamry an upeak b Is Canpeiemne Wn b make IN plan 9e•ner and a seeklr4 InPul m IMm aunges Imm IN Pbnnirq arc Zmkg Cpmmmblt400l Pbmmng AgemY end b canOb Iremmi4l d Ihse pmpce•0 chxlges b the Oepanmenl d CdnmuMy Mails. ORDINANCE No. coma Al, ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF Si. LWE CWNtt, FLORIDA TO APPROVE AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE CONPREHENGIYE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EVALUATION AND AFPRNSAL REPORT BASED AMENDMENTS; PROVIDING FINDINGS, PRONDIN6 FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS PROMgNG FOR SEVERA91Uiy4 PRCNgNG FOR APPLICABILITY PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE; R(OVIgNG FOR FILING wTH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY MFNRS, PROMgNG FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPngI. Tv ConpMenYw Pbn upDb (oRdalN waM'EApbased CanpNNnsW Pbn AneMmNs') Princes diredI. la aM dsvekpmenl'rnd Pes•"rabn aM n IN bob br za''i'I iagdatmm. Ad ra• h Boam d Comry Canmistiakrs adapbd IN slekrewbetl EwlvaOm Inc! Ammbal Repro (EAR) d tie SL Lurie CompeMrdiae Pan tlwl tlw Fbba Degamxn dCanmmly Marrs approved in Amory 2149. The FAR ouVlres poky awga'IMudn9 atldrasNrg 9rem�•e gas M W irtl eM 9nen bvrid'ng practices. The q•wiai CanpMwwve Pan panlbs Ae Como s eppiraAm b deems a onder'G•arr Local coemmmr flrWgh M Prince Gram BlNldng CaliCpn. ire CompMxrv'ra Plan city wppM tle Greenpinl MlbophY edged by Cw awns it Canty Caanissiorers wtsN mlNws ee CwnN's vbbn d a susMirede more. Au bbmNad camas MI x v+an an a,pamnay b m n.am WIiYm Danma,M remie.d n.da.nre a Ie Pi leanng who abo x mnYderea wMm canmem mrordrg Cb psalm shpW ere ra[eWd by Cie GmMn Menagemed Deparbwnl ai Iral Coe (3) bays Pna b Ile ededlbd hr' yy ine Fiala. ere b ayaade W reMew al tlk erorm Me nl pepadranl tlbes keeled at Z13D W¢na Mlue, zM bpi fat Pplu, fbntla, 31981, duvlg reWlar Duainass hers PNase III nvwzNzi a rm mass-uza it yW haw a•anms a rea,ire aed/aA bamrpn The 51. Lode Canty Plming aM Inrlarg C . mbsipnr Loral PMnnrg Agenry Ns IN oamr m rea.w alb make remrtunendellvrs d apraml or tlartial to IN edam d candy camnxswrers eia.n He wnsabaWl mpmeD.s d minoapaal.d st L.D. cmrey iM pioutligs d Uri Plmug orb Lining scant ere ebcemiceXY mcatlatl. PlRSWNT TO SecYm gnataA Fbrih StamkR. x a persm derAes to appeal a tlecuon made by Cie PbNvg eM Zm'Irg Canmmim w41 Hapax[ m airy mbr pa•b•ad al a mNling a Maaq, M a she will need a iecortl d the ameedagt Fawch pLrpcee:M a she may need lo•dure CW a vbakm rewrC It ftprpceedrgs +b nRa, ymitn rsmrd bclltles see IesCnuny.M eybR,ce ppm when tie apDW rs m be bred seem na regal If any wM to ire atm.dnp ha> � WbAAYb9 dnbgahmdng call ere swan mAiry pedyN � � 9 appamaN b vossenmim and'maridRl bsI cam ieq.•sl X 1 Aatanes Ni a pWic hearing may be oxanatl lien lime b lime as may R neceory b a dabfaroin. Mee wN a dmbtly reW� g arcanmotlabm m aCeM his meeting shMd aY4x1 Ce St iiAia CamN CmununAy Risk Mara99eer 1 bash lalyai�,l (/Bl oars pm b h mxarg el (71)a621546 a T.OD. 77816ztd29. My auslms aaout to agmDo may be rNemd b St Lae Canty PMNYng Divisxn at (nz) 42- 2e12. PJNNglC AND ZONING COMw5510N40CAL PVwNWG AGENCY S'. Lq'JE COUNTY FLORIDA iS CAAIG MUNDT, CHAIRMAN PUBLISH DATE: Mardi 31, zoo[ St. Lucie County EAR -Based Amendments Responses to Public Workshop Comments February 8, 2010 - Comments Response 1. Imbalance of commercial, Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a MXD or SD industrial to residential Future Land Use designation that may be developed into a non - development residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Many of the current Future Land Use designations were identified in the late 1980's. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential or agricultural. 2. What data used on sea level "Sea Level Rise in the Treasure Coast Region" by the Treasure rise? Coast Regional Planning Council, December 2005 www.tcrpc.org As part of an ongoing program evaluating global climate change, the EPA has initiated a nationwide project promoting planning for and awareness of sea level rise. In 2000, the EPA issued a grant to the SWFRPC to participate in this program and coordinate the study of sea level rise throughout the State of Florida. In 2002, the TCRPC entered into a contract with SWFRPC to conduct a study of sea level rise within the Treasure Coast Region. The ultimate goal of this project is to diminish losses to life and property from coastal hazards, such as erosion and inundation, and to ensure the long- term survival of coastal wetlands. 3. Concern about potable water, Provisions provided for in the infrastructure element and respective drainage, and stormwater runoff subelements. 4. What is sustainability and is Sustainability: Development that meets the needs of the present there a link between the EAR- without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their based Amendments and the UN own needs. There is no direct link between the SLC Comprehensive Agenda 21 ? Plan and the UN Agenda 21. Committee for a Sustainable Treasure Coast —Final Report is reference in the EAR -based amendments. 5. Too much emphasis on high (EAR p. 1-28) Adopted targeted industry list. Since 1992, SLC has tech jobs and not enough attracted over 20 new businesses and created 4,900 new jobs emphasis on job creation for through the authorization of economic development incentives. existing folks Branding SLC as Florida's research coast. This list is composed of manufacturing, research, and distribution sectors that complement each other and would encourage the creation of industry clusters. Cluster theory is based on the concept that businesses and research centers want to be located in close proximity to similar institutions so that they may take advantage of a skilled workforce, access to specialized higher learning institutions, and adjacency to specialized customers and suppliers. The County has demonstrated the cluster concept with the recruitment of three major life sciences institutes - Torrey Pines Institute, Mann Research Center and the Vaccine and Gene Therapy Institute. St. Lucie County has also recognized its natural assets as a rich source of economic development. These include the vast opportunities for ecotourism and tourists interested in outdoor activities, such as golf and fishing. The existing plan identified tourism as an economic development tool. The Comp Plan contains the optional Economic Development Element. The Ad Valorem Tax Abatement and job Growth Investment Grants (JGIG) incentives have been especially successful in creating new jobs within the County. 6. Too much emphasis on I Florida Administrative Code, State mandated elements: Coastal EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 2 of 17 environmental protection. Too Management Element (9J-5.012), Conservation Element (9J-5.013) sensitive to land preservation. 7. There has been too much Population in St. Lucie County is expected to grow by 64% in the population growth next 30 years BEBR 2009 8. How will Housing Data be New data provided by the 2010 census will be incorporated into the reviewed again after Census? data and analysis of the Housing Element as appropriate. 9. What is jobs/housing balance The jobs/housing balance ratio of 1.5 is suggested by the American and how will that be used as an Planning Association. In an ideal world, there would be one job per indicator? resident. More realistically, a standard of 1.5 jobs to each housing unit could be developed and a range of 1.3 to 1.7 or 1.4 to 1.6 could be adopted as a target. (Weitz, Jerry, "Jobs -Housing Balance," Planning Advisory Service, American Planning Association, 2003.) The jobs/housing balance in St. Lucie County for 2007 is 0.56 based upon the number of households and labor force totals. This low ratio may partially be due to the large retirement community. The County would like to utilize a jobs/housing balance ratio as a barometer of economic success, like a litmus test for the County's progress on balancing obs and housing. 10. There is no existing Transfer A TDR program currently exists in the TVC and Rural Land of Development rights program Stewardship programs. The Western Lands Study is currently right now. exploring the applicability of TDRs in western SLC. 11. How can supporting biofuels HB 7053 amending FS 163.3177 addresses the necessity of rural in the Comp Plan actually help agricultural industrial centers for the efficiency of biofuels production develop biofuels? which may require a Future Land Use Map Amendment (FLUMA) for siting, if so this bill prevents the denial of such a FLUMA based on findings that it promotes urban sprawl. A policy supporting biofuels will ensure that land development regulations do not get in the way of biofuels production. 12. It seems that the County has Zoning for mobile homes is RMH-5 and are permissible under the a policy of not allowing mobile following land use designations: RU, RM, RH and MXD. There are homes. existing mobile home parks identified as a conditional use under HIRD zoning. Currently the following language is present in the Comp Plan: Objective 53.2.6: The County shall continue to provide regulations that permit mobile homes in the county. Policy 53.2.6.1 - The RMH-5 zoning or a similar classification shall be retained in the Land Development Regulations. 13. Osceola County has a transfer Osceola County Comp Plan (adopted in 2007) Policy 1.1.3: of development rights program Urban Infill and Urban Expansion Areas. worth reviewing including options The UGB (Urban Growth Boundary) is divided into two (2) for buying down density. development areas — an Urban Infill Area and an Urban Expansion Area. To encourage development that can be efficiently served with public facilities and services, while discouraging the proliferation of urban sprawl, new residential development within these areas shall be meet the following minimum net densities: Urban Infill Area — 3.0 dwelling units per acre Urban Expansion Area — 5.0 dwelling units per acre Developing at less than the established minimum net densities will be permitted where the County's TDR program is used to buy down the density. Net density is defined as the total number of units divided by the developable area. The developable area consists of the residential land area less land for regional, public recreation and EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 3 of 17 open space areas in excess of the County's minimum requirements, stormwater systems designated by a water management district as "works of the district," natural water bodies and wetlands 14. County Commission has say County commissioners constitute the elected legislative body of the over development of land and can county and as a group are responsible for taxation, appropriations, limit your opportunities? What is ordinances, and other general functions. The State requires all the purpose? counties and cities to have a Comp Plan including regulations for land use. Generally, the purpose of land use and zoning regulations is to protect property values and quality of life which could be adversely impact neighboring uses. 15. Will St. Lucie County Citizens are afforded several opportunities to challenge decisions reconsider their decisions based that they feel may be inconsistent with the Growth Management Act on this erroneous data? and local government comprehensive plans. Your comment is a part (comment provided via email after of the official record. workshop) February 15, 2010 Comments Response 1. What is the source of information for the The Evaluation and Appraisal Report adopted by the amendments? Is there a global connection? BOCC in October 2008 is the basis for the amendments. This document is available online for download and review at: http://www.stlucieco.gov/growth/EAR.htm One of the documents used as a resource is the Committee for a Sustainable Treasure Coast Report. 2. What is Amendment 4/Hometown An initiative on the 2010 ballot. Florida residents will Democracy? have the option to require that all comprehensive plan amendments are approved by referendum during the November 2010 election. 3. Will you consider a petition to stop this This request is a part of the official record and as such project? has been sent to the Board members as an attachment to the March 18, 2010 P&Z agenda item. The EAR - based Amendments are a requirement of Florida statutes. 4. The work done in this plan is questionable. Growth Management (Ch. 163 Part II F.S.) Local It is based upon unfounded science. Government Comprehensive Planning and Development For example, Phil Jones's statement Regulation Act, AKA Florida's Growth Management Act regarding climate change science. Green and passed in 1985 requiring all 67 counties and 410 smart growth are buzz words from a global municipalities to adopt a Comprehensive Plan. plan putting Agenda 21 in place. In light of Comprehensive plans contain chapters or "elements" recent news, can we back out of this project that address future land use, housing, transportation, and reconsider the County's strategy? infrastructure, coastal management, conservation, recreation and open space, intergovernmental coordination, and capital improvements. A key component of the Act is its "concurrency" provision that requires facilities and services to be available concurrent with the impacts of development. The EAR -based amendments are State mandated with an associated timeframe for completion. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction and energy efficiency policies have been added to meet statutory requirements. The policies related to GHG reduction EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 4 of 17 and energy efficiency reflect the County's adopted sustainabilit policy, the "Greenprint." 5. Pay more attention to people- not just Growth Management (Ch. 163 Part II F.S.) Local roads, plants and dirt. Too much time on this Government Comprehensive Planning and Development and not people. Regulation Act, AKA Florida's Growth Management Act passed in 1985. Sustainability and environmental protection has been an interest of St. Lucie residents for a number of years. An important part of sustainability is economic development job creation. 6. Cost of studies in EAR -based amendments Any policy that might require a study or large project a concern includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 7. This will add to cost of development. HB 697 passed in 2008 requiring that Future Land Use Development pays in advance. Green and Transportation Element be amended to address construction adds costs. Cost of permits a urban sprawl, energy efficient land use patterns and concern. strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The state requires that all new public buildings be built to green standards. Private buildings are not required to build to green standards. Many new private buildings are voluntarily building to green standards because of the lonq term cost savings. 9. Using free money for green building. Why HB 697 calls for energy efficiency in the design and are we adding costs? construction of new housing, the use of renewable energy resources. Green buildings are a benefit for the owner/builder in that there will be reduced energy usage and costs. 10. Putting fear in people about greenhouse HB 697 provides for new requirements regarding gases greenhouse gas reduction strategies, strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emission from the transportation sector. 11. Tradition has rotten copper pipes. People Tradition is located in the city of Port St. Lucie. are suffering. 12. Can County help local folks go green? County is looking at ways that code and regulation may Won't it cost money to go green? unintentionally hinder green initiatives by the public and remove these obstructions. The County may choose to offer incentives to builders going green. Green buildings are generally more expensive to build, but owners may save money in the lonq term due to reduced energy usage. 13. Slides 10, 13, and 14 regard reducing No. There will be no new County taxes on drivers. The single occupant automobile use. Are there Comprehensive Plan does not offer provisions for going to be new taxes for drivers? taxation. 14. What is the cost difference between roads, There is no equivalent cost comparison between the bike trails, and transit? three. It's like comparing apples to oranges. By example, roadway costs are per lane mile and are dependent upon specific drainage, right-of-way and infrastructure design requirements. The cost for transit service is based upon the cost per specific bus unit (whether it be large bus or small bus/van) and on -going operational costs (drivers, fuel, insurance etc.) in consideration of the service area. There is no cost equivalent for bike trails or sidewalks. Each jurisdiction, EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 5 of 17 though, can use an equivalent cost per area (ie. $40/linear foot for a 5 foot wide sidewalk; $75/linear foot for a 10 feet paved recreational trail 15. Not practical to use bicycles in this It is important for all income types and ages that weather. transportation choices are available. Florida bicycle association: www.floridabicycle.org Bike Florida: www.bikeflorida.org Florida cycling: www.floridacycling.com South Florida Bike Coalition: www.southfloridabikecoalition.or 16. How about the mercury in compact fluorescent light bulbs? Need a safety suit to What to Do if a Fluorescent or Other Mercury -Containing Light Bulb Breaks: clean up broken bulbs. Mercury can get into http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index.htm#fluorescent New and old style fluorescent light bulbs must be our water. disposed of carefully and in designated solid waste facilities. The Home Depot and other hardware stores offer recycling for compact fluorescent bulbs. 17. Government helps to ruin our lives and Government provides a number of functions including environment. The more you help us, the more parks, hospitals, roadways, and EMS, and law you hurt us. enforcement. 18. How about loss of taxes from less utility All government tax base is decreasing. use? 19. You promised that if there was a nuclear You may want to contact FPL. FPL Customers To Get power plant, we would get cheap energy. Fuel Rebate In January; Lowest Bills In State Will Drop In 2010 (Nuclear Power Industry News). FPL residential customers using 1,000 kilowatt-hours will receive a credit of $44.46 on their January electric bills. The fuel charge credit would normally have been spread out over the course of 12 months. FPL does not profit on the fuel it buys to generate electricity. 20. $14,000 for a water pipe in front of my US Representatives and Senators should be contacted house in Indian River Estates. Please don't regarding the health care issue. help me anymore. Electric bill over $300. No more health care. 21. Don't want energy efficiency. You will ruin Some private companies are choosing to build with the economy. Shipping jobs overseas green building standards to reduce their long term costs. because you will regulate us to death. 22. Slide 17. Policy 3.1.1.5. Assist employers Proposed Policy: Policy 3.1.1.5 Explore existing and to provide homes near employment. new programs by 2013 to assist employers who desire to participate in making housing in reasonable proximity Unfunded mandate. Funding will come from to the workplace. The proposed language originates taxpayers. from the Evaluation and Appraisal Report.The Affordable Housing Committee is a made up of citizens who volunteer their time to recommend policy to the County Commission. The term "assistance" has a very broad application. For instance, Resolution 10-060 was recently adopted that provided for expedited permit review for qualifying County sponsored affordable housing projects. Generally, employers want to ensure housing is available near their place of employment. If an employer is desirous of creating housing for employees, the County or EDC may be able to provide technical sue2ort. 23. Why will government buy and sell houses? One method of developing home ownership fo people EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 6 of 17 This is a capitalist society. Government has with disabilities is through the establishment of trusts. nothing to do with the economy. Since 1985, the number of housing trusts has increased more than fivefold in response to the growing demand for housing resources (Center for Community Change, 1989). Housing trust funds are dedicated sources of revenue (e.g., real estate tax sales, interest on real estate escrow accounts) committed to the purpose of providing low and moderate income housing. They are generally established by local, county, or state government and are usually ongoing and permanent. Some housing trusts have been created on the state level through a budget allocation rather than an ongoing commitment of revenue (Center for Community Change, 1989). Families of people with disabilities can "buy into" these trusts. In addition, private trusts, established for the benefit of individuals or groups, may also include a housing component. 24. Stop the American Reinvestment and The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act is a Recovery Act. federal program. It may be best to contact your US Reprehensive or Senator. 25. Recovery Act will limit our freedom. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act is a Mandate on that will force banks to loan to federal program. It may be best to contact your US people who cannot afford it. Reprehensive or Senator. 26. Government will pay to fix problems that they created. 27. Not a goal or encouragement. This will be law, a requirement. 28. Research on seal level rise- EPA/global The EAR -based Comprehensive Plan Amendments do warming wrong. Making major zoning not change land use or zoning on any property in St. changes. Look at factual sciences. Lucie County. 29. Commercial/Industrial Future Land Uses. Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a Percentage is too small. What is an MXD or SD land use designation that may be developed appropriate percentage for each of these? into a non-residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential and agricultural. 30. County makes it impossible to develop. Impact fees have become the most important method in Impossible to develop commercial property. infrastructure financing and an essential part of local Concern about connection to sewer system. governments to fund infrastructure or public services. Impact fees are an outrage. Fees get in the Impact fees may help to assist in the development of way. This is where the economy goes into a needed parks, schools, roads, sewer, water treatment, downward spiral. Impact fees have obliterated utilities, libraries, and public safety buildings to the newly development in the county. developed area. In most cases impact fees are used in new development. Most states recognize and allow the EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 7 of 17 use of impact fees as a way to regulate land use. The cost of an impact fee can vary from state to state. Generally, area in the Western United States charge higher fees than other places in the country. They can also vary depending on the type of need by a community with school facilities causing the greatest cost of an impact fee. Today, impact fees have become a popularly used method. About 60% of all cities with over 25,000 residents along with 40% of metropolitan counties use impact fees on new developments for public services or infrastructure. In some cities or states such as Florida, 90% of communities use Impact Fees. Impact fees have been in place in St. Lucie County since 1986 and were in place during the construction boom in the 2000's. The purpose is to ensure that development pays for its impact on infrastructure rather than relying on existing residents and taxpayers for related development improvements. 31. Erosion of individual rights. If some can Coastal Barrier Resources Act or COBRA enacted build a house on beach, they should have to October 18, 1982, designated various undeveloped deal with the consequences. Insurance coastal barrier islands, depicted by specific maps, for companies should be able to say "no." inclusion in the Coastal Barrier Resources System. People should have a right to do stupid things. Areas so designated were made ineligible for direct or indirect Federal financial assistance that might support development, including flood insurance, except for emergency life-saving activities. The purpose is to protect property owners in the long term. The developer may not own the property for life. Protecting the dunes protects all future owners of a building. 32. Solar panels on roof. Wind generation Use of solar power is an individual choice. facilities are built by Nexterra. Wind generation would not be economical because wind energy is not reliable. Not enough comparable megawatts. Solar power is for the politicians. Hot water heaters are a waste. 33. Talk to legislators and Tom Pelham at The state legislature and the Florida Department of DCA about comprehensive plan requirements. Community Affairs are responsible for setting Mark and Lorraine are not responsible for comprehensive plan requirements. requirements. 34. Why not statewide programs for water? In 2008, the County included a Water Supply Facilities Work Plan which includes long term plans for water supply. Statewide water programs are implemented through the water management districts. 35. Candidate for County Commissioner. Not SLC provides for an Economic Development Element, enough done for economic development. which is an optional element and not required by the State. Beginning in 1985, the Board of County Commissioners has adopted various economic development incentives to attract targeted industries and create jobs within St. Lucie County. These incentives of create targeted industry jobs through employer relocation and local business retention/expansion EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 8 of 17 efforts. The Ad Valorem Tax Abatement and Job Growth Investment Grants (JGIG) incentives have been especially successful. Since 1992, St. Lucie County has attracted over 20 new businesses and created 4,900 new jobs through the authorization of economic development incentives for targeted industries. In April of 2009, the Board of County Commissioners also adopted a Local Stimulus Ordinance (Ordinance No. 09- 008) as a means of enhancing job creation as a result of a significant downturn in the local economy. A "local economic emergency' was declared by the Board in light of a national recession that has resulted in significantly high home foreclosure and unemployment rates for the County. The stimulus Ordinance requires that 75% of the labor for each project be local residents and 75% of the materials used for each improvement project be acquired from local vendors through competitive bids to assist in stimulating the local economy. 36. Set positive environment. Don't set impact The County will need to review the cost of an impact fee fees in down economy. Is there an economic before the adoption of one. Current impact fees are impact analysis for the amendments? Should being implemented in phases. Any policy that might be upfront about costs. require a study or large project includes the language People are concerned about adding costs. "explore the financial feasibility of or "if funding is Process in economic development is a available." This gives the County Commission the process of elimination. Why set impact fees in option to review implementation of the policies based a down economy? upon available funding. 37. Incentives for green buildings and transfer The Comp Plan makes provision for general policy of wealth. Policy is now a suggestion. People guidelines, not regulation. on podium will set it into law. 38. Living close to employment subjugates The County and the Comprehensive Plan have no free will. People should have a choice. requirement that an individual live near their Spain is a leader in green jobs and their employment. Many individuals many choose to live near unemployment rate is 20%. employment to save money on gas and for other quality of life reasons. 39. TDRs like cap and trade. Failed policy. Generally, private rural land owners support a transfer of Setting up an agency to make a lot of money. development rights program. 40. Job/housing balance will be controlling Generally, the benefit of having a green local businesses. Government involvement in free government is overall cost savings. The FGBC Green market capitalism. What is actual benefit of Local Government Standard designates Green Cities being a "green local government"? PSL is and Green Counties for outstanding environmental green and they have high unemployment and stewardship. It is expected that certified green city and foreclosures. 20 years of development and county governments will not only gain recognition and three years of failure. Government picking publicity, but also function in a more efficient manner winners and losers. Government should not through better internal communication, cost reductions, be in this business. and effective risk and asset management. http://www.floridagreenbuilding.org/local-governments The jobs/housing balance is a method for monitoring economic sustainability. The state and others developed an interest in the jobs/housing balance indicator after overgrowth of residential development. 41. How did EAR come to its conclusions? The EAR was reviewed during many public meetings / hearings and approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 42. Public is due an idea of costs. The County budget process is open to public EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 9 of 17 participation. The amendments reflect existing County policies on sustainability and green practices. Any policy that might require a study or large project includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of" or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 43. Lived here since 1972. Who will provide utilities to Wal-Mart Distribution Center? Unacceptable to create situation where Wal- Mart decided to pull out. 44. Home Depot wanted to relocate to Jensen Jensen Beach is located in Martin County. Beach and decided to pull out because impact fees are too high. County government is deleterious to real development. 45. County money and government money is It is important that residents participate in elections to our money. People have lost trust in our ensure they choose an elected official that represents government. their ideas and values. 46. Should be done at the polls. Florida residents will have the option to require that all comprehensive plan amendments are approved by referendum during the November 2010 election. 47. America has woken up. County It is important that residents participate in elections to Commission -watch your back. ensure they choose an elected official that represents their ideas and values. March 8, 2010 - Workshop Comments Response 1. This is a model for Agenda 21, UN Agenda 21 The County is not implementing Agenda 21. One World Governance, which would strip away The Overall Goal of this Plan is to ensure the best US sovereignty. Smart Growth, Charrettes and living environment and community possible, built on Comprehensive Plans are a euphemism for the needs and desires of the residents of St. Lucie Agenda 21. The Maryland Pathways Plan County. The purpose of this Plan is to protect and established in 1976 reshuffled land rights in the enhance the health, safety, and welfare of St. Lucie name of defending farm land including downzoning County's citizens and of our county's natural and agricultural lands, upzoning remainder and man-made resources. The following Objective requiring inclusionary housing and multifamily supports the Overall Plan Goal. housing. In the South side of Chicago with no Objective: To Improve St. Lucie County's economy representation, public housing was located there while retaining it's cultural and natural resources. increasing drugs, crime, etc. Richard Rothschild mentioned that Smart Growth is social reengineering, urbanizing rural towns, gerrymandering and housing subsidies. This shifts voting patterns from right to left to a Democratic blue vote. I am against this. 2. We just woke up. Things would have been different if we were involved earlier. 3. What is the cost? Everything in Congress goes The amendments reflect existing County policies to the Congressional Budget Office. on sustainability and green practices. Any policy Will County provide costs of projects? Looks that might require a study or large project includes expensive. What is the source for paying for these? the language "explore the financial feasibility of" or Will businesses pay for these projects? "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 4. With 18,000 more unemployed, why isn't' job growth more important? Dirt and critters are not important. Turtle and dunes are important in the Plan, not people. Nothing about education. Most science behind data is from EPA. Most proven faulty. (ie, IPCC and CRU). The have been almost completely discredited. Is it time to stop and rethink the plan based upon science, not political science? There is no adjustment for new information in the plan. 5. Greenhouse reduction —is it required by the state? Is there a ratio of maintaining land use and population? Anything that stifles supply and demand is not our goal. Let people decide where people should go. Not practical to suggest where business should go. Let business do what they have to do. 6. Is there a bike route map? What is the cost of putting in sidewalks? Is it specific to schools or commercial areas? Encourage County to install sidewalks by schools and hospitals. Don't put sidewalks in existing developments. Government is doing a good job of spending people's money. In the future, can you show what is required by the state and what is not so we know what to fight at the local level or the state level? Over -burdensome to individual taxpayers. 7. Are we above or below pollution levels/Greenprint? How is that measured? This is not an engine for job growth. It is a hurdle for job growth. Industrial and commercial properties have been reduced 36%. List of animals that call PSL home (endangered species, etc.) is another way to clamp down on development. 8. Seems like a tough job ahead. What are ideal land use percentages? State is requiring certain policies. If state is misdirected and is the problem, what is the recourse to go after state policy? What is sea level rise in St. Lucie County since 1988? These issues could be pointed out to the EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 10 of 17 It is important to note that the Comprehensive Plan includes an optional Economic Development Element because of the importance of job creation. See response to No. 37 on page 7 in regards to economic stimulus efforts. The Comprehensive Plan includes a Public School Facilities Element adopted in 2008 that is not being reviewed with the EAR -based Amendments. GHG reduction and energy efficiency policies have been added to meet statutory requirements. The policies related to GHG reduction and energy efficiency reflect the County's adopted sustainability policy, the "Greenprint." HB 697 provides for new requirements regarding greenhouse gas reduction strategies, strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emission from the transportation sector. Maps TRN-7 and TRN-9 show existing and future bike lanes along major roadways and safe routes to school (Transportation Planning Org.). The County budget process is open to public participation. Currently there are over 309 acres of vacant land with a MXD or SD land use designation that may be developed into a non-residential use (commercial or industrial) in addition to the 677 acres of vacant commercial and 26 acres of vacant industrial. Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. The majority of St. Lucie County is developed as residential and agricultural. Data on ideal land use percentages is not available. County Commission. Recommend job balance. What are sustainable land use percentages? Optimal jobs need houses. What is ideal percentage of industrial and commercial uses? Jobs are an important part of sustainable development. 9. Unemployment is 15.3%. Current jobs housing balance is 0.5. Business Retention Plan — is this organized by the Economic Development Council? 10. Incentives to lure companies- job creation developing high wage high skill jobs, but if applied to jobs/housing balance will weaken balance. The problem with high tech is existing unemployed here need jobs. Will need to bring in talent from outside. Current barriers to business are zoning, licenses, and permits. Can't use natural resources like the Port. Port would make a lot of money. Encourage residential uses around the Port. Use port for 11. What kind of public transit is anticipated? Trains? How about the cost? High tech jobs ideal, but need to get existing population employed. TDRs may be a benefit for Western Lands. How about supporting agriculture. Current foreclosure crisis dues to economic boom/construction industry. Now many unemployed because of change in trend. 12. Will the study impact the affordability of homes? Placing limits on higher densities increases property values and costs. People cannot afford higher rates. Cost so high, people will move away. Substandard housing- what is the standard? When required improvements are made to substandard housing, residents are forced to move out. Jeff Furst say values will settle in between. People will be priced out. 13. Since January 2007, 8 million people have lost their jobs in the US. It is good that the County is cutting jobs. Who is the Florida Green Building Coalition? Have you considered new data? Exploration of TDRs in Western Lands Study. Until there are TDRs will property owners lose their agricultural tax benefit? How about their rights. Why spend time and energy on Western Lands Study? Much ado about nothing. 14. County has not designated any area as having slum or blight. 15. Economic Development Element mentions on page 7 major employers. Public sector provides EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 11 of 17 That is correct. New employees from St. Lucie County or from outside St. Lucie County will benefit the jobs/housing balance. The Comprehensive Plan includes the Port Master Plan. See No 35 on page 7 regarding economic incentives by the County. The EAR -based Amendments supports agriculture by supporting biofuels production and TDR programs. The EAR -based amendments recommend adding a minimum density. There is no change in maximum densities. The building official determines substandard housing. Home improvement grants do not require residents to move out. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments will have no effect on agricultural tax benefits. Counties may designate certain areas meeting state qualifications for slum and blight. This is usually done as a precursor for development a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) where there are targeted redevelopment programs. There are no CRAs in the County, several exist in Ft. Pierce. The public sectors employees include state and federal employees. Table 10-1 in the Economic 12,000 employees while the private sector has 11,000 employees. How are the 11,000 supposed to support the 12,000? Are the numbers correct? 16. How can you assist government and developers in informed decision -making? They are usually at opposite ends of the table. Protecting real estate is fabulous. Should be focused on large swath of regulation and hurdles for development - even regulating outhouses. Get like Texas where there is no zoning. Texas does not have downturn in housing like rest of the country. Dig into regulatory fee structures. Went to City Council, upland development could have been traded for $15,000 per acre. In the end, it was $110,000 per acre. These were due with the pro forma in development projects. 17. No clear economic data for the Plan. No study on the economic direction of. the Plan. High number of foreclosures. 18. Doesn't Census data only include household size? 19. Port not being used. We disagree with high skill, and high tech jobs. Look at ground level and proceed. No tax for driving vehicles. Plan is lopsided. 20. 73% of land uses will be controlled by Comp Plan. Work is contracted out. County staff also involved. Layers of bureaucracy in the document. Unfunded mandates. Concern that single-family will not be the norm. What about providing transit and fees in lieu. Seeing a change in government by government. America loves life, liberty, and happiness. 21. Policies get in the way of using TDRs. Can't be used unless there are buyers. Population need analysis will put responsibility on developers. High tech is a long term, great strategy. Many cars pass by on 1-95 and the Turnpike. We should have techniques to lure people off the highway to St. Lucie. Support existing businesses. Take advantage of growth in other countries. Economic development should look to growth overseas for local economic advantages. Support local schools. 22. Port and Inland Port are important. A green building was proposed in the Port. What specific green standard will be required? Mark Young at Maritime Advisors, LLC can give you financial information regarding the Port. 23. Mobility Fee- How do you determine the distance in trips? Recommend all new development should state the impact fees to the buyer. Require EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 12 of 17 Development Element identifies 7.8% of the workforce in 2009 as public administration. The Florida Building Code provides minimum building requirements. All local governments must adhere to the Florida Building Code. Houston does not have a zoning code, however, they have other land use controls and most properties have deed restrictions. The Census has a variety of demographic information including household income, ethnicity, age, and information about buildings such as vacancy. The Comprehensive Plan includes the Port Master Plan. A mobility fee is being considered that would be paid for by the developer like other impact fees to reimburse the County for infrastructure improvements. The state requires all Counties and cities to have a comprehensive plan that regulates land use. There is no proposal to change existing single family home areas. TDRs should be developed with the appropriate stakeholder to ensure success. Attracting folks from 1-95 and the Turnpike to visit St. Lucie County is a great economic development idea. International economic development opportunities should be explored as suggested. The Comprehensive Plan includes a Public School Facilities Element adopted in 2008 that is not being reviewed with the EAR -based Amendments. Local governments may not choose one green standard for buildings and may not require green standards for private buildings. Existing traffic data is available with information on trip distance. Requiring builders to disclose impact fees imposes an additional burden on builders who EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 13 of 17 impact frees to be disclosed so people know what currently may voluntarily provide such information. fees were charged. Impact fees paid are also public information and may be requested from the County. 24. Real life experience- While at the PX in Saigon, Developers continue to advertise residential appliances and General Development Corporation development for sale in the County. The lots in Port St. Lucie for sale. Everything in the plan Comprehensive Plan does not prohibit advertising. works a ainst this scenario. 25. Have cost/benefit analyses been performed on Some benefits such as increased park space are EAR -based Amendments? difficult to quantif . 26. Remember that cap and trade was invented by Thank you. Enron. 27. What about the bridge at the County FDOT widening of SR 70 because FDOT had fairgrounds? previously approved the construction of the Multi - Purpose Path on the north side of SR 70 in their project. County paid $150,000 and FDOT funded the rest. It is intended to provide access between the Fairgrounds and the path. March 15, 2010 - P&Z Workshop Comments Response 1. The Planning & Zoning Commission is acting as Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, Local Planning Agency - See Paragraph (4)(b) the Land Planning Agency per FS 163 and as such the LPA is to review and approve the document (4) The local planning agency shall have the prior to sending to the BOCC. general responsibility for the conduct of the comprehensive planning program. Specifically, the local planning agency shall: (a) Be the agency responsible for the preparation of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment and shall make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment of such plan. During the preparation of the plan or plan amendment and prior to any recommendation to the governing body, the local planning agency shall hold at least one public hearing, with public notice, on the proposed plan or plan amendment. The governing body in cooperation with the local planning agency may designate any agency, committee, department, or person to prepare the comprehensive plan or plan amendment, but final recommendation of the adoption of such plan or plan amendment to the governing body shall be the responsibility of the local planning a enc . 2. Staff has not given the Commission sufficient The draft document has been available to the time to review the document as state law requires. public since January 2010. As noted above, the requirement is for at least one public hearing by the LPA. There will be two, possibly three public hearings by the LPA for this item. There will be a minimum of one workshop with the BOCC and two public hearings. 3. Requested that the Amendments be reviewed page by page. Schedule more time for review. 4. Document is not adding anything positive; changing the language in the document is adding unnecessary complications and fuzziness to the &'O V �Jt'�t Vl process, which adds uncertainty (cost) to the process, which will drive away developers. Not addino anvthina positive to the Countv. 5. Requirement adding any project over two hundred acres to form a Community Development District (CDD). This is a business decision, should not be a govt. mandate. Financing vehicle for developers to finance infrastructure. EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 14 of 17 All mention of Community Development Districts (CDD) comes from existing Comp Plan language defining a Future Land Use designation, which have been relocated from the data analysis to the GOPs. The requirement of a CDD is proposed for removal. 6. Definitions of water bodies and rivers are omitted Page 4-22 of the adopted EAR provides the (referenced Ten Mile Creek). This is not based on a following recommendation for Policy 1.1.9.7 — recommendation from the EAR. Revise Policy to include entire waterways. It may be best to allow for a strict definition in the LDC only to prevent inconsistencies among documents. 7. Water and Sewer connection outside the Urban Service Boundary language changed, (you could not pull a building permit outside the Urban Service Boundary, or get a project developed). 8. Wetlands Mitigation Issues - Two large mitigation banks in the County. Existing wetland policy being added to "to the maximum extent possible" County owes a duty to the privately funded mitigation banks that they are putting them out of business. 9. Make font larger in graphs (slide 6). Proposing the following language as an alternative to original proposed change: Policy 1.1.9.7 - Enforce Section 6.02.02 of the Land Development Regulations to protect the watercourses identified below: North Fork of the St. Lucie River — Those portions in unincorporated St. Lucie Countv from the Martin County line to the confluence with Five and Ten Mile Creeks. Five Mile Creek — Those portions of Five Mile Creek in unincorporated St. Lucie Countv from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to E3FanGh Line Orange Ave. Ten Mile Creek — Those portions of Ten Mile Creek and the Eleven Mile Creek tributary in unincorporated St. Lucie County from the confluence of the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to MGGaity Shinn Road. Update to read: Policy 4A.1.2.6: Development requiring central utility services within the unincorporated areas of the County will only be permitted when such development ties into or makes provision for obtaining water or sewer utility service from the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer Utility District. the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority or the City of Port St. Lucie Utility within their respective service areas. tying Onto a Fegional 9F sub FegieRal system that This phrase was relocated from Policy 6.1.4.13 to 6.1.4.2 Thank 10. Controlling travel to and from job. 11. Controlling where you live in relationship to your job. Concern about housing close to employment. 12. Too comprehensive and far reaching, presented without an equal balance of economic benefit. Only two mentions of jobs and are made in reference to controlling where you live in relation to your job. Nothing about creating economic environment to be conducive to the economic resurgence needed, From the government down not up. You will be very unhappy with yourself if you do not give due diligence to what is being presented here before you made a recommendation. Praying for wisdom on your part. 13. Lack of job creation (.56 jobs per household, insufficient). 14. Unfunded mandates (Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways and Trail Study). What is the cost of one mile of bike trail? EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 1S, 2010 Page 1S of 17 The focus is not about controlling travel to and from work but to provide alternative modes of transportation and also recognize that the distance (vehicle miles traveled) development is from urbanized areas should be addressed in the impact fee structure. Generally, employers want to ensure housing is available near their place of employment. If an employer is desirous of creating housing for employees, the County or EDC may be able to provide technical support. The Economic Development issue is addressed in No. 35 on page 7 above. Please see the Economic Development Element and the memo from Michael Brillhart dated March 15, 2010 (www.stlucieco.gov/growth/EAR.htm) on economic development incentives adopted by the BOCC. The jobs/housing balance ratio as a barometer of economic success. Goal of 1.5 jobs per household. The current low ratio may be attributed to the large retirement community. St. Lucie County Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways & Trails Master Plan was adopted by the BOCC in 2008. The St. Lucie County Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways &Trails Master Plan inventoried all the existing sidewalks, bike paths, missing sidewalks, and provided sumestions to improve the system. 1 15. Lavers of bureaucracv to implement. I I 16. Encourage mass transit, plasma arc gasification, however all items presented in this plan will increase impact fees and scare away potential employers instead of enticing them to come. 17. No tangible benefit to being labeled a Green County. Don't know what the tax burden would be to being labeled green county. 18. Past study groups chaired by Betty Lou Wells spent years putting together the elements of the plan with a vision for the future. Having no plan at The County will need to review the cost of an impact fee before the adoption of one. The current impact fee schedule is being implemented in phases. The Florida Green Local Government Certification process provides a systematic way for your local government to assess its level of sustainability and to incorporate multiple environmental, ecological and sustainability features throughout its operations to reduce consumption and increase efficiency; saving taxpayer dollars and the environment! It is expected that certified green city and county governments will not only gain recognition and publicity, but also function in a more efficient manner through better internal communication, cost reductions, and effective risk and asset management. The policy below is existing language in the Comp Plan; the element number has been changed. all is a disaster. People are concerned about our fiscal resources and we are now suffering from years of uncontrolled growth causing a crisis in banking and with the local and national economy. Growth needs to pay for itself so the County citizens aren't burdened with it. Many items are called for by state legislation, this is not the place to complain about these issues. Post disaster redevelopment is a proposal that we needed after the hurricanes of 2006. Comments about no education being part of the plan, the County has many educational programs. No new untreated storm water? Protect the IR lagoon all of the St. Lucie River, all of Ten Mile Creek, this is what brings tourists and makes life livable in St. Lucie County. We have a strong Comp Plan and encourage you to keep it strong. 19. Citizens need to understand the process. 20. Uncontrolled growth 21. Diminished property values 22. United Nations Agenda 21, stripping away US 23. In regard to the EAR, is it true that the landfill will supply us with enough capacity for thirty years? Haven't heard much about gas plasma gasification - seems to be discouraged. 24. Transfer of Development Rights is a bad idea. Ask for increasing rights rather than trading them. 25. Get back to Agriculture 26. Business will build and operate Green when it is economically feasible. Goal of any business is to earn a profit. 27. Being Green without a return on investment is not a viable business model 28. Over 18,000 people in St. Lucie County unemployed 29. Reduction of commercial and industrial land EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 16 of 17 Policy 76.1.4.1: No new untreated point source discharges into coastal waters for stormwater runoff and wastewater effluent will be permitted. The Comp Plan has an entire element dedicated to education, The Public Schools Facilities Element, which was recently adopted in Dec of 2008 and therefore it is not being updated along with the rest in the EAR -based Amendments. Citizens are welcome at any time to call the Growth Management Department and schedule a meeting. Please call (772) 462 - 2822 The Growth Management Act of 1985 was instituted in response to uncontrolled growth and is the basis for requiring Comprehensive (Development) Plans. Yes, the landfill can provide appropriate level of service for the next 30 years. The County is exploring Plasma Arc Gasification to reduce the amount of the waste stream that is currently being landfilled and to extend the useful life of the Bailing and Recycling Facility (Page 4-2 in the EAR -Based Amendments). Policy 4B.1.2.3 - Continue investigation of plasma arc gasification technology as a means to Potentially eliminate or reduce the need for landfill Being studied in depth during the Western Lands Western Lands Stu Table 1-5 showing vacant lands with a future land use designation of Industrial and Commercial are in addition to what is currently listed as existing Industrial and Commercial land uses otherwise known as commercial "supply." Table 1-1 shows 2,486 acres of land currently being put to a EAR -Based Amendments — Comment Matrix April 15, 2010 Page 17 of 17 commercial use, and Table 1-2 shows 1,702 acres of land with a future land use designation of commercial. Lands designated as MXD (Mixed Use Development) have Industrial, Residential and Commercial development potential and table 1-2 shows 5,219 acres of MXD. 30. Quality of life diminishing 31. Need to be more educated on this issue Citizens are welcome at any time to call the Growth Management Department and schedule a meeting. Please call 772 462 - 2822 32. Plan does not include cost analysis The County budget process is open to public participation. The amendments reflect existing County policies on sustainability and green practices. Any policy that might require a study or large project includes the language "explore the financial feasibility of or "if funding is available." This gives the County Commission the option to review implementation of the policies based upon available funding. 33. Encouragement for plasma arc gasification. Submitted Comments Comments Response 1. Recommendation made for updating language to The RSLA is an adopted element of the Comp Plan reflect the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RSLA) that is not being updated during the EAR - Overlay. Amendment process along with other elements (Public Schools Facilities Element), however many of the points presented may be valid and included at the discretion of the BOCC or considered as a part of the Western Lands Study currently underway. 2. Suggested new Policy 1.1.16.5: Allow variance Building codes are State regulated. Amended or exclusion from applicable local building codes policy considered. and Land Development Regulations when acceptable and sustainable green or environmentally friendly building practices can be used in lieu of conventional construction (i.e.: substitute composting toilets in lieu of standard septic system, allow permeable material in the Darking & driveways in lieu of pavement etc. 3. Suggested changes to new policy 1.3.1.2: Policy references partnerships with regional Policy 1.3.1.2 - Consider innovative partnerships governments. Amended policy considered. between urban areas, local and regional governmental entities, and rural landowners that take advantage of and compensation for the services and benefits that rural lands can provide to urban areas and the region as a whole. Examples might include but not limited to compensating rural landowners to support CERP, IRL South Plan, and research on biofuels provide water storage, conservation of agriculture lands or o ens ace. I Growth Management Department MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Mark Satterlee, AICP, PDS Dire;2�(V FROM: Britton Wilson, Senior Long Range Planner, Planning Division DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Supplemental Memo - Transmittal Hearing for the Evaluation and Appraisal Report Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan ITEM NO.: VII-F On May 25, 2010, the Board of County Commissioners heard a presentation on the EAR -based Comprehensive Plan Amendments during their informal meeting. The Board offered comments and suggested changes to the proposed amendments. This supplemental memo serves to address comments and suggested changes. 1. Can you include sustainable housing practices from the document developed by the Affordable Housing Committee and incorporate them into the Housing Element? The following policy can be added to the Housing Element: Policy 3.2.7.6- The County shall require in all rehabilitation and replacement projects use of green, energy efficient materials as appropriate. 2. Gray water practices should be considered. Existing language in the Infrastructure Element calls for water reuse and gray water: Policy 4A.2.2.3- The County shall coordinate with the FDEP, the SFWMD, local municipalities and other appropriate agencies in alternative water supply planning efforts and shall implement reuse programs and potable water conservation strategies as identified in the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan and the UECWSP. Policy 4A.2.2.4- The County shall encourage reuse and reclamation of water for irrigation, landscape, agriculture, and industry as an alternative to the use of potable water supplies. Policy 4A.2.2.5- The County shall provide for education of the public concerning the need for water conservation and the use of gray water for irrigation. 3. Can we include a policy on CBRA Zones? The following policy can be added to the Coastal Management text: Policy 5.2.1.13- The County shall continue to coordinate with the U.S. Department of Interior as it pertains to their digital mapping pilot project of the CBRA zones within St. Lucie County and potential funding issues. May 28, 2010 Page 2 of 3 4. Can we add language to increase stormwater storage capacity in light of flooding after major rain events? A new Statewide Stormwater Rule that is currently forthcoming will require increased storage volume onsite. Public Works will look into obtaining information about what the state (SFWMD) requirements will be for the new Statewide Stormwater Rule, and present this information to the Board. It is premature to add language to the Comprehensive Plan or Land Development Code. 5. Concern about biosolids and nutrient loading in the Indian River Lagoon. The Department of Environmental Protection is working on an update to their regulations and we are awaiting those to see if any changes are permitted or warranted. 6. Can apprenticeships be added to Economic Development Policy 10.2.3.5? Yes, it will be added. The following policy will also be included: Policy 10.2.1.8 The County shall support green and renewable energy loan and grant programs to support development of related green businesses. 7. Is regionalism included in Economic Development policies? Policy 10.2.1.8 shall be modified to state that "the County shall participate in regional economic development activities" including the Research Coast. 8. Please include a language regarding diversification of the tax base. The following Objective and policies can be included: Objective 10.2.5- The County shall through economic development projects encourage diversification of the tax base to further support long-term investment in County quality of life. Policy 10.2.5.1- The County shall encourage appropriate investments that result in beneficial property values for non-residential and residential properties. Policy 10.2.5.2- The County shall ensure support economic development activities that encourage growth in non-residential development resulting in the creation of long term commercial and industrial targeted industry jobs together with comprehensive increases in assessed valuations and ad valorem tax receipts for non-residential development. Other changes to be made to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments: 9. Transportation Element: Change deadline for update to Airport Master Plan to 2011 in Policy 2.7.1.1. 10. Coastal Management Element: • Maintain original language regarding 50-foot buffer requirement along rivers, creeks, and estuaries in Policy 5.1.2.3. • Add language to add guidelines in Land Development Code regarding dune alterations in Policy 5.1.5.7 • Change "shall establish" to "maintain" in Policy 5.1.5.9 regarding removal of invasive species on County -owned beaches. May 28, 2010 Page 3 of 3 11. Conservation Element: Add language to add guidelines in Land Development Code regarding micro - siting in Policy 6.1.8.2 and clustering and conservation easements in environmentally sensitive lands in Policy 6.1.12.4. 12. Intergovernmental Coordination. Add a policy to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element that the County shall coordinate with the St. Lucie County Fire District on development of level of service standards for development of facilities to accommodate existing and future development. 13. Economic Development Element: Add "in cooperation with Visit Florida" in Policy 10.4.2.8 regarding monitoring origination of tourists. Britton Wilson From: Howie [hmfein@gmail.com] ,nt: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 10:52 AM Britton Wilson Subject: RE: Copy of the Comprehensive Plan Update from meeting on 1/8/10 Attachments: image001.jpg; image002.jpg Thank you Britton. However, this does not specifically state how much the sea level has risen in the St. Lucie County area since 1988. 1 understand how the EPA arrived at these projections from reading a few writers books, but no where does it say what the see level rise has been. Even my research online of these same writers cannot show one exact measurement. These writers also admit that their projections are based on global warming which has since been proven incorrect. So why does St. Lucie County accept these writings on sea level rise as fact? Can I make a formal request for the County of St. Lucie to reconsider all of their decisions based on this erroneous information? Thank you for your time. Howard From: Britton Wilson [mailto:WilsonB@stlucieco.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 9:57 AM To: 'Howie' Cc: 'Lorraine Tappen' Subject: RE: Copy of the Comprehensive Plan Update from meeting on 1/8/10 The following language is contained in the adopted EAR: .ojected sea level rise, which the Environmental Protection Agency (1988) estimates at 4.9 to 7.5 feet along the east coast of Florida between 1980 and 2100, is another issue that currently has come to the forefront and to the awareness of the public. Sea Level Rise in the Treasure Coast Region, dated December 2005, prepared by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council provides detail on this issue. The Incorporation of policies into the Plan should be considered indicating that current and credible sea level rise data should be considered when planning long term infrastructure and capital improvement activities, and in future land use decisions. The website for the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's data on sea level rise can be located here: http://www.tcrpc.org/special projects/TCRPC%20SLR%20Report%2012-05-05.pdf I will need to speak with others more versed in transportation issues to answer that question. From: Howie [mailto:hmfein@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 9:47 AM To: Britton Wilson Subject: RE: Copy of the Comprehensive Plan Update from meeting on 1/8/10 Thank you. ;t to reiterate my questions from last meeting: Do we know where we get the information on our sea level expected rise and exactly what has it risen since 1988? 1 mentioned how it is obvious that our drainage policies have created two major effects on our water management - 1) that our water table does not get refilled properly leading to rationing and 2) dirty HOME OF THE ADAMS RANCH BRAFORD CATTLE ADAMS RAN INC. Fort Pierce, Florida 34979-2909 Telephone (772) 461-6321 • Fax (772) 461-6874 February 15, 2010 Mr. Mark Satterlee, Director Ms. Britton Wilson, Senior Planner Saint Lucie County Growth Management Department 2300 Virginia Ave. Fort Pierce, FL. 34981-5652 Re: St. Lucie Comprehensive Plan Update EAR Based Amendment Hearing, Future Land Use Element 'dear Mark and Britton, As you are aware, Adams Ranch and our subsidiary company, Arcco of St. Lucie Inc, are active owners and operators of agricultural lands in Western St. Lucie County. The proposed changes to the Future Land Use Elements and Conservation Elements will have significant long term impacts upon our property and business operations. Please accept this letter as a record pursuant to the adoption and implementation of the changes proposed to these comprehensive plan elements. Each item below references the pages and policy numbers where changes are requested. New, additional language is shown in underline, bold italics. We respectfully request the following changes to the draft Future Land Use Element: Page 1-4, Table 1-2 Future Land Uses (Unincorporated St. Lucie County) Rural Land Stewardship Program was omitted, please include Page 1-6, Table 1-3 Land, Use Designation/Zoning Compatibility Matrix Rural Land Stewardship Program was omitted, please include Page 1-15 Goal 1.1: Ensure the highest quality living environment possible, through a mixture of Land uses reflecting the needs and desires of the local residents and property owners, and how they want their community to develop. The goal shall be implemented by strictly enforced building, zoning and development codes based on objectives and policies that FEEDER CALVES REPLACEMENT HEIFERS BREEDING STOCK COMMERCIAL CATTLE IN VOLUME Letter to Mark Satterlee and Britton Wilson of February 15, 2010 EAR Based Amendments to the Future Land Use Element will enhance St. Lucie County's natural and man-made resources while minimizing any damage or threat of degradation to the health, safety and welfare of the county's citizens, native wildlife and environment, through incompatible land uses. Please add a statement to respect private property rights. Page 1-15 Policy 1.1.1.1 —,Land Use Matrix Rural Land Stewardship Program was omitted, please include Page 1-16 A. Agricultural-5 (AG-5) The AG-5 land use designation is intended for those areas of the County outside of the planned urban service area which are associated with agricultural and Agricultural -related activities. These areas are recognized for first being Appropriate for, but not limited to, the production of citrus, cash crops, sod, ornamental & plant nursery, or ranching activities. These areas are acknowledged as potentially suitable for limited residential development under the following criteria: Page 1-16 B. Agricultural-2.5 (AG-2.5) The AG-2.5 land use designation is intended for those areas of the County outside of the planned urban service area which are associated with agricultural and agricultural -related activities. These areas are recognized for first being appropriate for, , but not limited to, the production of citrus, cash crops, sod, ornamental & plant nursery„ or ranching activities. These areas are acknowledged as potentially suitable for limited residential development under the following criteria: gage 1-21 Add # Q. Rural Land Stewardship Program (RLS) overlay was omitted please include Page 1-21 Objective 1.1.2 - Provide in the land development regulation provisions for a compatible and coordinated land use pattern which establishes agriculture as the primary use outside of the urban service boundary and promotes retention of agricultural activities, conserves & preserves natural resources and maintains native vegetative habitats. Page 1-21 Policy 1.1.2.3 - All future non-agricultural development within the AG-5 and AG- 2.5 future land use categories will be required to preserve open space, which is to be defined to include, but not be limited to, agricultural activities such as groves and range land as well as conservation & preservation of natural areas according to the following criteria: Page 1-24 Add Policy that retains the Rural Land Stewardship Program Element The Preamble to the Adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment adopted on September 13, 2006 states as a Goal : St. Lucie County's _goal in creating a Rural Land Stewardship Area pursuant to Chapter 163.3177(11)(d), F.S. is to protect and conserve agricultural lands and to promote agricultural viability within SSAs to direct incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, to discourage urban sprawl through the RLSA program, and to ensure development within the RLSA that includes a functional mix of land uses and promotes economic diversification. 2 Letter to Mark Satterlee and Britton Wilson of February 15, 2010 EAR Based Amendments to the Future Land Use Element Page 1-29 Policy 1.1.7.1 - Continue to encourage the use of cluster housing and planned unit development techniques to conserve open space and environmentally sensitive areas, through the County's Land Development Regulations which include: a. Minimum acreage requirements necessary to support a viable mixed use community providing sufficient design flexibility to allow innovation and creativity in all forms of planned unit developments; b. Minimum open space ratios of 35 percent in all planned unit developments and including assurances that such areas will remain as open space to protect and conserve existing native habitat, to provide for minimum setback needs from adjacent uses, and to provide active and passive recreational as well as visual amenities; c. Provisions ensuring the long term conservation and preservation of remaining open spaces; Page 1-33 Objective 1.1.9: Through enforcement of Chapter 6.00.00 of the County's Land Development Code, the County shall support criteria and standards for the protection/creation and conservation of native plant communities within the County. For the purpose of this plan, Native Plant Communities shall be preserved as defined in the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's Regional Policy Plan, Regional Policy 10.1.2.2., "...preserved in viable condition with intact ground cover, understory and canopy." Policy 1.1.9.1 - St. Lucie County shall include within its Land Development Regulations criteria and standards for the protection, conservation and preservation of both wetland and upland habitat within one year of adoption of this element. The criteria to be included within the County's Land Development Regulations shall be based upon, but not limited to, the following: Page 1-35 Policy 1.1.9.15 - By DeGembeF 2004, the County shall work with other agencies To develop and appFave consider the financial feasibility of a plan to promote (through acquisition) or protect and conserve, (through incentives), the establishment of designated wildlife corridors connecting viable environmental habitat in order to allow the survival of far ranging species and prevent the isolation of natural communities by 2014. This plan is to be developed in cooperation with the Florida Game and F=Fe6h Water Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of Environmental Regulation Protection, the South Florida Water Management District, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the US Army Corps of Engineers and affected landowners. Page 1-40 Objective 1.1.16: Byte 2904, Within a year of adoption of this Comprehensive Plan, develop amend the land development regulations to allow compatible agri-tourism and Letter to Mark Satterlee and Britton Wilson of February 15, 2010 EAR Based Amendments to the Future Land Use Element eco-tourism facilities on or near resources preserved for public -purpose, or private lands according to the following policies:. Add new policy 1.1.16.5 — Allow variance or exclusion from applicable local building codes and Land Development Reaulations when acceptable and sustainable -green or environmentally friendly building practices can be used in lieu of conventional construction fi.e.: substitute composting toilets in lieu of standard septic system, allow permeable material in the parking & driveways in lieu of pavement, ect. ) Page 1-43 Objective 1.3.1 - Create a sustainable plan for the County's western lands that will Preserve and conserve a functioning network of agriculture, open space, and natural areas while providing economically viable options for agricultural landowners, now and in the future. Page 1-43 Policy 1.3.1.1 - Explore techniques for preservation and conservation of agricultural and rural lands including additional action steps in the Committee for a Sustainable Treasure Coast —Final Report. Policy 1.3.1.2 - Consider innovative partnerships between urban areas, local and regional governmental entities, and rural landowners that take advantage of and compensate for the services and benefits that rural lands can provide to urban areas and the region as a whole. Examples might include but not limited to, compensating rural landowners to support CERP, IRL South Plan, and -research on biofuels, Provide water storage, conservation of agriculture lands or open space. Because of the short span of time, between the release of these EAR based amendments and the public hearings, I may have additional comments at the next meeting. Thank you for consideration of these changes. At the next EAR hearing, I will have suggestons for the Conservation Element. Yo r Truly, Peter Harrison, V.P. Cc: Ms. Lorraine Tappen, Calvin GeoGiordano & Associates 4 Britton Wilson c.om; reachmucklows [reachmucklows@att.net] it: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 10:46 PM ,o; Britton Wilson Re: County Comprehensive Plan These amendments, as presented in the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Update, are antithetical to the basic ideas of the United States Constitution. They limit the freedoms of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They are based on the hoax of global warming, and are retro grade with respect to the economic freedom that is the key to salvaging our nation's economic recovery. Sincerely, Robert B. & Debra L. Mucklow Port Saint Lucie, Florida Mar, 18. 2010 2:07PM No 0097 P. 1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) Based Amendments To the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Land Use Plan 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 written or e-mailed communications will be subject to public disclosure unless an exemption applies to the communication. Optional contact Information*: Name: swan Moaawey Phone: 772-87MW4 ❑✓ Opt -in for future email updates Email. 1—w1s wyemn— The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners, County staff and consultants want your comments on the Comprehensive Plan Update. Please write comments below and return to the St. Lucie County Growth Management Department by cllcking on the Submit button, or you may submit comments and suggestions in person, by phone, or fax to the address at the bottom of this page. The information presented for the EAR plan at the workshops does not include any cost analysis, It is an unknown what the tax burden to the citizens of St. Lucie County will be to implement the strategies in this plan. It is admirable to want to adopt green building standards, pedestrian friendly design standards and implement the recommendations of the SLC Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways and Trails Study, however, there is no tangible benefit to being labeled a "Green County", There are some encouraging parts of the study that should be pursued such as mass transit, energy efficient, affordable housing and plasma arc gasification of solid waste, however, this plan, if fully implemented will increase impact fees in a recession and this is not In the best interests of the community. With a 14.9% unemployment rate, St. Lucie County should be investigating ways to entice employers to this area, not drive them away with impact fees. The long-term strategies for growth In St, Lucie County are good, I. e,, biotech, digital media, emerging technologies, Do not stifle the long term strategies by implementing a burdensome plan that willi at best, give St. Lucie County a "Green County" label along with higher taxes and fewer local jobs for the citizens of this county, Print I GROWTH MANAGEMENT - 2300 Virginia Avenue - Fon Pierce, FL, 34982-5652 Submit Phone (772) 462-2822 FAX (772) 462-1581 Comments on St Lucie County EAR -based Comprehensive Plan Amendments March 18, 2010 Submitted by: H.M. Ridgely III Taken in their entirety the proposed changes to the St Lucie County Comprehensive Plan based on the Evaluation and Appraisal Report, the EAR, represent an overarching desire to make development and growth very difficult or near impossible to achieve. Policy after policy adds additional financial burdens and uncertainty to the possibility of getting a project approved in a way that makes economic sense. Given the current economic times, it seems to me that the county should be encouraging economic growth in hopes of creating jobs for the nearly 15% of the county population that is unemployed. Potential employers will not seek to come to St Lucie county a due to the perception that they are "not open for business." It is cheaper and easier to go somewhere else. Higher costs of doing business and uncertainty will guarantee that St Lucie county remains in its current economic torpor. A few specific comments are as follows. Future Land Use Element "FLUE" Policy 1.1.1.2 A. Agricultural-5 (AG-5) The third bullet point requires that all development activities other than crop or food production on parcels or combinations of parcels in excess of 200 acres be required to establish a Community Development District "CDD" to finance any necessary infrastructure. This policy was previously in the Data and Analysis portion of the FLUE. This policy should be eliminated simply for the reason that CDD'S are extremely expensive to create and with a base density of 1 unit per five acres this policy will effectively stop anyone from developing any parcel if a CDD is required. This appears to be the intent. This significantly devalues the value of any contiguous land owned by a single owner of greater than 200 acres. This comment also applies to section B. AG-2.5 Objective 1.1.4 What is "Smart Growth" There is no definition. Policy 1.1.4.3 States as a matter of fact that development outside the urban service area is a fiscal burden to the rest of the community. Unless this can be empirically proven then this policy should be stricken. Policies based on opinions are a poor way to create a comprehensive plan. Policy 1.1.4.7 Requiring a needs analysis before being able to amend the FLU map to increase densities assumes that all density is fungible and the consumer should take the next available unit before any more are created. This is not how vibrant communities are created. The consumer needs to have choices between housing products and location to entice them to move to the community. Policy 1.1.7.1 Clustered housing within a PUD just to achieve some sort of open space for the sake of open space is not a sound policy. Fragmented open space of no real environmental value only achieves the goal of making the landowner poorer by requiring him to provide a disproportionate share of some fictional level of service for open space. Policy 1.1.9.7 Removing the definitions for the boundaries of water bodies merely subjects potential future development to be subjected to the whim of the county on what they may require. Since when is subjectivity and less certainty a good comprehensive plan policy? Policy 1.1.11.4 Bullet 1. States that "The extractive operation does not adversely affect areas determined to be environmentally significant. Who makes the determination? What criteria are used? This is another ridiculously subjective policy that needs to be stricken. Policy 1.2.1.S The 2008 Greenways and Trails Study is flawed in theory and practice and should not be implemented. Landowners whose property is "underneath" the map are merely being held to some future donation of their property. Again, another devaluation for the landowner. In practice even a landowner whose land is not "underneath" the planned routes can be subjected to such a forced donation if his land is deemed a reasonable substitute for the actual planned path. Goal 1.3 Apparently developing a comprehensive plan to be energy efficient through land use patterns that reduce drive times and greenhouse gases doesn't apply to the Greenways and Trails Study which essentially desires to create a network of trails and paths throughout the western agricultural portion of the county. Wouldn't citizens who live inside the urban service area currently and the future need to drive many miles west to even the nearest access point to such a network? Even if the Greenways and trails network were fully built out the nearest access point to the edge of the urban service area is approximately five miles. Since most residents do not live right on that edge their drive will likely be substantially further. There are many policies relating to the Greenways and Trails Study throughout the revisions to the comprehensive plan that should also be stricken. Policy 1.3.2.3 Requiring all new residential structures to adhere to green building standards will be costly and put such new homes far out of reach financially for the vast majority of St Lucie County residents. Green building should be an option and if the market desires it, builders will build them. Infrastructure Element Policy 4A.1.1.3 Define sprawl. Subjectivity is the death of good growth. Policy 4A.1.2.6 Requires that no development can occur anywhere in the unincorporated county unless they provision water and sewer from one of the three existing utilities. Since the county has a policy of no utilities outside the Urban Service Area "USA" the county is taking away the right to build anything outside the USA. Can anyone say taking? Additionally, specifically naming the three existing utilities excludes will limit options for projects in the future. Conservation Element Policy 6.1.2.15 Define "untreated" stormwater discharge. How will any commercial projects get built? Policy 6.1.5.3 It can easily be argued that all human activity adversely affects quality and quantity of water sources. And recharge areas. This policy is designed to give the county a way to object to any project they do not like. It should be stricken on the grounds of being entirely subjective. Policy 6.1.8.2 f Policy needs to exclude bona -fide agricultural activities. Policy 6.1.8.12 Clustering is an undefined term. Requiring a project to meet such a subjective standard is bad policy. This should be stricken. I'm also not sure what exactly "micro -siting" is. Objective 6.1.15 What is the Wetland Inventory and Evaluation Study and how much will it cost? GIS, read "aerials" is not a tool that can be used for inventorying what's on the ground. Intergovernmental Coordination Element Policy 8.1.1.1 How do you implement a Western Land Study that is nowhere near completion? I wonder if the Western Land Study has a foregone conclusion? Transportation Element Policy 2.3.1.1 To reiterate, the Greenways and Trails Study is flawed and should not be implemented as it is a waste of financial resources for a specious purpose that will only serve a very small segment of the population. Additionally is requires citizens to drive long distances to the rural areas to access such a system. Policy 2.3.2.5 Sidewalks should not be required in rural areas. It should be encouraged based on a case by case basis. Economic Development Element Policy 10.1.1.7 A jobs / housing balance of 1.5 is unrealistic given that St Lucie county has historically been a bedroom community for many jobs outside the county. This policy will merely be used a yet another excuse to not approve any residential development. Additionally, retirees, which make up a sizeable portion of county residents need to be taken into account and subtracted from both the numerator and denominator to arrive at the proper ratio. In fact, I would posit that the county is already at a 1.5 ratio if they were taken out of the denominator for the current ratio. JOHNATHAN A. FERGUSON* ATTORNEY AT LAW *Board Certified City, County and Local Government Law 2366 S. Brocksmith Rd. Fort Pierce, FL 34945 Via E-Mail Mark Satterlee, Director Planning & Development Services St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, FL 34982 fergusonlandusel aw. com fergusonlanduselaw@gmail.com May 17, 2010 Re: EAR Based Amendments — Comments Dear Mark: OR. 772465-0729 Cell 772-971-7506 I offer the following comments on the February 2010 draft of the EAR based comprehensive plan amendments. In general, many of the proposed amendments do one of two things: they make it more expensive to develop in St. Lucie County without a corresponding public benefit or they commit the County to expensive reviews, studies and programs with no indication as to how much such work will cost or where the County will obtain the funds to do such work. I realize that there is a May version now posted, however, I did not have the time to go back through to compare the May version to the February version. I recognize that the latest version may have addressed issues raised by myself and others. I will be happy to sit down with you or Britton to go through my comments in more detail if you feel that would be helpful. Sincerely, Johnathan A. Fergus Enc. Cc: Britton Wilson COMMENTS ON FEBRUARY 2010 VERSION EAR BASED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS COMMENTS PREPARED MAY 15 2010 Page references are to the February 2010 version and the language in italics is from the proposed text. 1) Page 1-16, Policy 1.1.1.2.: The requirement to develop as a Planned Development (PD) for projects in excess of 8 lots should be deleted and, as with all other property, the PD rezoning should be optional. There should be no requirement to create Community Development Districts ("CDD") if the project is larger than 200 acres. Creating a CDD may be an unnecessary cost. 2) Page 1-21, Policy 1.1.2.2.: The requirement to develop as a Planned Development (PD) for projects in excess of 8 lots or more than 160 acres should be deleted and, as with all other property, the PD rezoning should be optional. 3) Page 1-24, Objective 1.1.4.: Consider changes to the future land use plan based upon smart growth, energy efficient land use patterns and discouraging the proliferation of urban sprawl. This objective uses the appropriate buzz words but adds no substance to the Comprehensive Plan ("Plan") because the buzz words are undefinable. As a result it adds uncertainty to the Plan which in turn simply adds an entry point for future disagreements. The objective should be deleted. 4) Page 1-24, Policy 1.1.4.3.: Retain an urban service area boundary to restrict the negative impacts of a sprawling low density development pattern and the fiscal burden that pattern of development has on the ability of the community to meets its service needs. At this time this policy reflects an unsupported conclusion and should be deleted. If such a policy is inserted in the Plan, it should be based on empirical data. To date there is no such data for St. Lucie County unless you want to refer to Dr. Stronge's Economic Analysis prepared for the Western Lands Study which supports the opposite conclusion. 5) Page 1-24, Policy 1.1.4.7.: Page 1 of 6 Future land use map amendment applications that increase residential development must demonstrate a numerical population need unless the amendment enhances urban infill or redevelopment projects. This policy should be deleted unless "need is defined by objective standards. A needs analysis is a complex operation and to add this simple policy without addressing the complexities of a needs analysis is irresponsible. 6) Page 1-28, Policy 1.1.5.13.: Require that new development be designed and planned in a manner which does not place an unanticipated economic burden upon existing taxpayers, services, and facilities of St. Lucie County. Without standards this policy is unenforceable and does nothing but add uncertainty to the process and will inevitably lead to arguments. It is also poorly written. For example, "anticipated" economic burdens would be allowed, it is only "unanticipated" economic burdens which are prohibited. This policy should be deleted. 7) Page 1-31, Policy 1.1.8.1.: This policy should be amended to read as follows: All new subdivisions, planned unit developments and site development plans shall be designed to include an efficient system of internal traffic circulation that does not require internal trips or trips of short duration to be forced onto the major roadway network. Connections to new and existing subdivisions shall be encouraged but shall not be required. 8) Page 1-43, Policy 1.2.1.5.: This policy should be amended to read as follows: The County shall coordinate with the St. Lucie TPO and FDOT to implement the recommendations of the 2008 SLC Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways & Trails Study ("Greenways ') when funding is available. Individual property owners shall not be required to contribute to the funding of the Greenways different from the contribution of the St. Lucie County population at large. 9) Page 1-43, Policy 1.2.1.6.: Explore and implement innovative transportation funding practices that discourage sprawl such as a mobility fee that charges all new developments with costs varying on location and vehicles miles traveled (VMT) per the Transportation Element. Page 2 of 6 This is an unworkable policy and should be deleted. The County does not have the time or resources to "implement" an unproven and non-existent system. The Plan should not contain policies that cannot be effectively implemented. 10) Page 2-62, Policy 2.1.2.7.: This policy should be amended to read as follows: e. _If the County b� adopstlen ef-the a mobility fee, the County may consider the elimination or re-evaluation of the Level of Service standards. 11) Page 2-63, Policy 2.1.2.12.: The County shall consider implementing a mobility fee in accordance with requirements adopted in SB 360 that charges all new developments with costs varying on location and vehicles miles traveled (VMT) by December 2011. The County does not have the resources to comply with this policy and it should be deleted. 12) Page 3-17, Objective 3.1.1.: This objective requires the County to interfere with the "affordable housing" market. The County cannot successfully manipulate the housing market and cannot successfully ensure "affordable housing." However, the County can take steps to assist the housing market by removing unnecessary impediments that drive up costs without a corresponding benefit. Towards that end, the objective could read as follows: The County shall review existing and proposed regulations for their negative financial impacts on affordable housing for all current and anticipated residents; on residents with special housing�needs, including rural and farmworker housing; and on workforce housing 13) Page 4-31, Policy 4A.1.1.3.: In order to prevent sprawl and leapfrog development in the unincorporated areas of the County, no water or sewer utility companies shall be permitted to construct or install water or sewer facilities to serve or provide water or sewer utility service to new development within the unincorporated areas of the County without the consent of the County Commission. The Plan should not contain standardless policies. This policy prohibits an activity without providing the reader with any idea as to what the standards might be other than "sprawl and leapfrog" development. Such a policy grants the County Commission the incorrect notion that it can deny a request for utility service based on this policy because the County Commission gets to define "sprawl and leapfrog development" without the guidance of enumerated standards and on a case by case basis. Such a policy should only be adopted if it is accompanied by standards in the Plan or adopted in the LDRs. Page 3 of 6 14) Page 4-32, Policy 4A.1.2.6. [and similar Policy 41).1.2.5.]: Development within the unincorporated areas of the County will only be permitted when such development ties into or makes provision for obtaining water or sewer utility service from the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer Utility District, the Ft. Pierce Utility Authority or the City of Port St Lucie Utility within their respective service areas. Tying, system Ma� is available as set f&Fth in the annual Serviee AvailabW4, Reper [staff proposed changes]. This policy, as amended, prohibits all development outside the urban service area. The policy should remain unchanged. 15) Page 5-17, Policy 5.1.1.10.: The County shall continue to monitor all credible climate change and sea level rise data and what direct and potential effects this has on the coastal system natural resources. Based on this data the County shall evaluate and update the resource protection standards of the land development regulations and this plan as necessary. The County does not have the resources or expertise to implement this policy and it should be deleted. 16) Page 5-23, Policy 5.1.5.7.: When reviewing redevelopment applications for a site with previously existing manmade alterations on a dune, beach or shoreline system, the alteration shall be evaluated to determine if removal is feasible, and if so, if benefit would occur through removal as a part of the redevelopment project. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 17) Page 5-26, Policy 5.2.1.6.: The County shall consider the most current and credible sea level rise data when planning long term infrastructure and capital improvement expenditures and land use amendments in areas less than 10 feet in elevation. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 18) Page 6-19, Policy 6.1.1.4.: Page 4 of 6 The policy should be amended to read as follows: The County shall continue to support, seek additional funding sources for and implement the Greenways and Trails master Plan to facilitate and encourage alternative transportation means. Individual property owners shall not be required to contribute to the funding of'the Greenways different from the contribution of the St. Lucie County population at large. 19) Page 6-21, Policy 6.1.2.15.: No new untreated point source discharges into estuarine and coastal waters, for stormwater runoff, will be permitted. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 20) Page 6-22, Policy 6.1.4.2.a.: Project modification measures to reduce wetland loss and degradation. All projects shall be required to maximize design modifications to ensure wetland impacts are avoided or minimized to the maximum extent feasible. This change to the policy adds uncertainty to the development process and adds costs without necessarily ensuring a corresponding benefit. This policy enacts a de facto "no wetland impact" rule without explicitly saying so. The change should be deleted. 21) Page 6-25, Policy 6.1.5.3.: Activities and land uses known to adversely affect the quality and quantity of water sources and natural groundwater recharge areas shall be regulated to protect the quality and quantity of these resources. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 22) Page 6-27, Policy 6.1.8.2.f.: Proposed site clearing activities within the known range of listed species or where such species are expected to occur based upon habitat suitability and species ranges shall be surveyed by qualified environmental consultants and/or government ecologists prior to approval and Page 5 of 6 commencement of such activities to determine whether or not populations of listed or plant and animal species occur. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 23) Page 6-30, Policy 6.1.8.12.: The County shall require clustering micro-siting_of structures or other protective mechanisms to preserve native vegetative communities or protected species habitats. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 24) Page 6-34, Policy 6.1.12.4.b. & c.: Those Environmentally Sensitive Areas identified as containing habitat worthy of preservation may require a clustering of allowable density to more suitable areas for development to avoid and minimize impacts to highly sensitive habitat. In sueh s- Environmentally Sensitive Areas containing highly sensitive native habitat worthy of preservation may require the habitat be protected through a conservation easement or other method acceptable to the County. Only footpaths or entryways will be permitted in such areas. Policies without standards or the requirement to adopt standards should not be adopted. It is impossible to understand the impact of this policy and to understand its application. Either the policy should refer to regulations to be adopted in order to implement the policy or it should be deleted. 25) Page 6-39, Objective 6.1.15.: St. Lucie County shall implement the Wetland Inventory and Evaluation Study desi na to facilitate the development of policies and procedures to improve the protection of the existing wetlands in the County. The County cannot afford to implement this objective. Page 6 of 6 7 ITEM NO. VII — G DATE: 06/01/2010 • AGENDA REQUEST REGULAR ( ) PUBLIC HEARING (X ) LEG. ( ) QUASI -JD ( ) CONSENT ( ) TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: Laurie Waldie SUBMITTED BY: Utilities Department Utility Director SUBJECT: Resolution 10-149, Rates, Fees and Charges BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum. FUNDS AVAILABLE: N/A REVIOUS ACTION: April 7, 2009 - BOCC approved rate structure for District. RECOMMENDATION: Board adoption of Resolution 10-149 authorizing the adjustment of water, wastewater, and reuse utility rates, fees and charges within the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District as outlined in the agenda memorandum and attached exhibits. COMMISSION ACTION: (io APPROVED ( ) DENIED ( ) OTHER Approved 4-1 Comm. Craft voting no CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Coordination/Signatures County Attorney ( X) OMB Director ( ) Budget Analyst Dan McIntyre �J Originating Dept. ( X) �( VYY '� Other ( ) Laurie Waldie Utility Department r COUNTY, F L O R I D A TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Laurie Waldie, Utility Director tl DATE: June 1, 2010 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Resolution 10-149, Rates, Fees and Charges ITEM NO. VII — G Background: The Rate Consultant, CDM, has analyzed the Utility customer and revenue projections, the expenditures, and rate covenants to determine the revenue requirements of the St. Lucie County (SLC) Utility system. The scope of work included the task of proposing uniform rates for the consolidated Utility system. Currently the various service areas have different rates based primarily on the rate schedules in effect when an area became part of the SLC Water and Sewer District (District) or SLC Utilities. Staff and the rate consultant have determined the revenue requirements to pay for O&M needs and comply with the Rate Covenant requirements. From that analysis, rates were determined that moved the utility to uniform rates. Attached are Tables 1-4 that show a comparison of the current rates for the various areas, North County which includes Indian River Estates, North Hutchinson Island, and HEW (Sampson Subdivision in Lakewood Park) with the proposed unified set of rates for all SLC Utility customers. The impacts on customers of consolidating the rates will vary by system and by service area. Tables 5 & 6 have been prepared showing these impacts and are attached. Notice of a proposed rate adjustment was included on the bills mailed to all existing St. Lucie County Water & Sewer District customers and advertised in a local newspaper at least 10 days prior to the public hearing (May 19, 2010). The proposed Rate Tariffs were also made available. A public workshop was held on April 22, 2010 on the proposed rates, fees and charges. Minutes from that meeting are attached. The County also received calls, letters, and comments from various customers on this issue. The comments show support from the North County service area (Holiday Pines, Indian River Estates, and Portofino Shores) and show non-support from North Hutchinson Island residents, who currently pay lower rates than the customers in North County. While the Utility still plans to accept credit cards, a new convenience fee of $4.00 per credit card transaction is being proposed to recover some of the costs in providing that service. Staff is requesting approval through this resolution to adopt the adjusted rates effective with bills rendered on or after July 1, 2010. Recommendation Board adoption of Resolution 10-149 authorizing the adjustment of water, wastewater, and reuse utility rates, fees and charges within the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District as outlined in this agenda memorandum and attached exhibits. U) W 1- J_ p Z O C) W U J F. U) W_ h J_ H D F- Z D O U w U J H N j N c0 CI) N [O M N c7 co_ N coZ a j m Oni a s � ..: � O O O, 0 a s . 3 O.463 V OOM Lno� O m ¢_ j¢ ZZ a_ a_ a :� ¢_ ¢ ¢_ ¢ _a :W NNNN W::WN 1p(p ZZ OOOZZ . :::Wc'7 (Dw c0(D CDZ W ZZ :Z Z ZZZ t CON NtO (O 0 N co a0 0 C, O C:) O 00 00 W LLI ¢¢ O N >a l") fD co O) :. a r> tD oo Q7 N ''> >a N COn >a co CO N O >¢ N o� co N �Ii: c0 iMj 00 w ELI LL: trs y W;w �� �u > U) Z N �' lu >w z 0 L4 ; w w a =_ t� w O Z 3- p 0 tY: ski z O W. Q > Q z0 LLI a Q .; m Q 4--> 37> a w H Qw C7 JA.¢FQ J . :.T d.� W C9 fi : C7 CW1oo w F- wo O o mcn Z z W }Z (� mm w (7 '¢ o o m� Z Z W '.' o �>pw Z mC� W o : 24 < =�Z� m O JO mp �y,p�oz00> coZZ W < #LEU����WZ0�O 2000U � O Q:F-wz0p= ¢< W: tfl: _IL W co\��N - Uw0J n' Jam¢ m ..WWoO�� �i"!:>CL <aQ U � }}WWWW F�NcO�IL OJ Jam¢ m L�IcnWOJZ `r a- J-i¢ QU 1QC� G: CV 7CD _ [Ow w N:O IL#:� HWaC� Z C9 O 0 o p Ja w R' w¢ (D 0 (D p z Z- W¢C7 C9 O 0 o p _0 W Lid w O Q 0 U o m Z Z z C� �¢ 2 OQoo o o na Z m a 0 oOLn¢O o Z u¢ U a00� oo o o z a ❑ :W C) o JU D Z. Q U U S U CD O C, o p o .Z : W S W () Olf7 to N I�.�U o U tL W S U O w p C:, 'Ua0`n S i! Z U to n'L J Q U Q 2 }U F ¢ O' OOIn > O' OO a 'U) Z O' OO In ¢ O' OO a W D O"i: F- S N� W i:'i<: m O � O 'iitlia p 0 LO n O W :�,t,li: O a Oa p z O a Oa �O fl: a w �� O »> w cn > F m > 00 D NO U) m UO w U O U U y U U A.L U .: ¢ 2 Z O ::- ....: U `:: .'. CO " W W N N N N a Z W N N a ' W N N¢¢ W W N N N a W W — — — — W �D �D Z . ;: w .n- O O Z Z : W N u 7 m W cD (D cD Z z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z (7 U) ::::: � Cn U) U)a: ��cOnnW (D v�rn v�rnn a0 N ��Drn Q' d' - W� �WO�NNWv.-rnn 2' 2 2' W.-��n .:F '. cl�_•Mr fD NF-Och� N j (h (D W :::F j N Och c1 cD U7N N N .:: F-- rCO O H j Q7 c'7 M fD �N a0 N Hmch ? tD (D c7N cD N �.-N O �j M W N .. .... (MO N N N = 0 ��_ Oa c w O O U) o H 'n x Ck'. w J I"o' w U) z w c OOf a O W CX d C A W C7 w p C7 W O w W o o� Q F_- J >O w .'i' O o > w :O o > w o C� o m C. Z a m m C7 d o O^': W o m 0 �. o - Z W o :m 2f7NZ¢m ri =UU UU-In ZQ� tP7:� o Z mC� w;: o W= % ¢Irz0>� �' �0Z0pa c "U�����Z0 a Z.tz Irz00 < av_ 2W 0-j0 m 11.p o Jz2 p - z Q:— 2 {i): m �:wW O O W W W W WOJZ �wOJZ -- w M N v a J¢ a J¢ a= a J U tJ. w N c'7 V ¢ a ':O d J¢ a U "'Q' N V cO 60 d J a > J �0 — J J C7 F w¢C�p o 1-.� �aC�mH J w¢c�mt- ,�-'>a w C� w ZC9O0Z H :w w0oZZo :Q U. UOZz r W (7aozz C� 2 0 0 2 ( w o D p O O Y: = O Q o o ¢.to a o n O 0 o f�.< Q o O OiW o o 0 U our u +� Z iuoo�U o n U aoLO U Sin-o W a O1 Sin�J U2 n�JU S ~ 0 U n o d 2 O n Q U w U n¢ U .0:Z U n Q U fl U aZoo� 3 �ooU¢ m Q zooC9a;:QzooC7¢ F:: Z w0 ��in � _ mow o m O mow 'pO mow O Q �a �; z Z now H a �� oCL �� a W o p O I O o O w tom z wrn p p Q Uz : d a U `m z Nz z m O w d O O O U N Nof U U U OU z Table 1 w J_ F- C, }� F F-- Z ► O U � _w U L [ J to - w J � F F- Z F O c U - w C C U � u J - F- ln u Table 2 W 2 O F- y U W S cY O LL W J D 0 W S U U) W F- Q H Z W S U w N N N N _Q w^ W Q Q ;:`i w wZZZZ W NNNNZ CO (DZZ:::::; fn U !i :... W F— d. h O �j O a W� F— M CO O a0 O M ;�?�:::::�: W :i?: H a0 O a0 O CC) O o ir)CV >Q co CD co 0>Q co co co N E w y Z N Z N =O O O 3II::2 �Q Q N W CD.��' C9 O C w � _a W R. W Z:: 2' w SW QWZ0JOJ>L<ij Z',~�ZC) uj::a - `� =wo-i-jLn UaJ Qm` U)W0 CL< <U iV Qco =:= = O Q C7 CD 00 OO 0o z Q;:..:wQOO�U ::0 U o Z O VU�n��p C> C'� ZUr o Lo Ln QU »H QZC�C)C) Q .Z 0 o O Q WO M O :�'::: 0 0 t� O w U 2 p a Q ? a O c O LL::: V%::<: CMO U 0 ::N O U U U "w00mco03 w w C7 CI) M co Z p p Z Z Z Z Z cn cn <n 22 �' C' n O IP) O W M h N � n N� W O o o0 co � o W �-- O M O fM O co h N jN > M 0 O M N j > O ai to j > a N s LI;I: LLI:> L3; w z N ; z J O : ';';:: 0 J W J w d Q C9 m Q £ j C7 W N a ..F— (D C. 0 o :j(� G :W` w e > m .� wU #:: of X��Z QIxz0�`-> W O �::: - C) Z Q Q :w a 04 = Ua�Qm w 0 JQ. N;.:: :4:::- Cn W Ri:oCL O �0= J Q Z U w ;C a M _ C4Z � LL, Q 0 o a i.- wQO(nz -� Q F- O Q• U` o p o z Q N. O W Q U o p o Z 0 0 USMr� ��r�o V d:a:zc,��QU LO JU QZoo�;ix:>QZopi�Q --0 w— �17:.�+ I� U):: G::. io 0 W:QF- �A�2' rOw U �F OIL ei: ;pa og -O w cn cn D w U) cn O U O N O U U U Table 3 U) L.LI F- D F- Z I) O U L1J U J U) W H D Z D O U _W U J U) ...... ...... O O O O O ... ...... O� m Z::::: :::: O t0 O M N (�° O >;: z Z O N LVD co f` fn f`') f0 O N :: : W Cn z Z :::: W :::::::: cn N ::::: O O O O O O':; O O O::: Q' W o O O O O O O :::;:;:. 2i M 1(:D N :::::co N VON ON1 O _ 'O¢ U .:; n. Ww wa= _N :wa y 0 L F a 7 0LU i V p W L >, F- J O v J U .0 is Q w C9 > c U 0 oc p u w � U)Q 2 Q o_ LUzo ww a w0Z WU;w wQcan it Q°- a(Dz az :s :W Q o 00 Q ulQ 0 U zp� F' 2 0 CD w O a ¢� a LLO w rn Z Q U::::::: Z 0 co O 0 0 000 0000a w w000Lrio waaa aVO N 4� Z ::;° W ;c: W L to ::: W Z z Z :::: Cn ::::: (n N :::::: (n O Q Q d 0 0 90 r- W W o 0 0 0 0 W v rn N>H Fj- O O M O O O N 7 N C .....` a fh 6c0 J F !n a O N � U ti 1 w v: M N Z r 0 3:w U:0 F- W U 0 rn ;r?; ®®eMNF O O O O O S O a _a p O 0 a 6 Goon 2zNN Z co (D 'IT NJ O V N CO CO O LM n O C 0 0 0 o o 0 a a p Cl0 a owoo LnZZNN Z M cm V M (° V N O� CO7 O 0 C f) O � U + 21 N j U W m W N U CV > w0 cn > = O co LL w U o U °'a 0 U) 2 ° Z LL c 2 Nco 0 00 . c w � N N cm LU F"- Z � o LL W � Up °F- W ZF O W Oo Ztwi_Fw--F- pW.d2 WUJ N��Zww Of z—¢ LL �w Wz�=Www w2WW ���ZwLL of Lij 2 >LL.LLQw�of w > w Z Q w Z of (D OLL OLL 0ZOw}WOf52W<-� QfFLnaWTWOCL OOww wag >Z ui :D j W Z z LL LL 0 Of 00 J� WwwLU a>dU<(L o nofof � o W a o o- o o- Q 0 Q a o 0 0 wZ .<NcV'7m V MOZNZZ�LO !� Z C: - rn Lr O W 0 � o o COD "'t¢ o a a o CD o a aN Nr`rirnv� nZNZZ�Lri ��Z o Q ° ._ + W ar C .0. w y d > aD E E cnm Ew i^:0 >w w o m Z a vIx Q.. o It. Of( ° u c\ ° O J Z W= `W Z M.U) U� 2' p U O� Jco aa(�U_aO:w>ww U 2 c a (D U) Of F- 4:w :W::Z w 0 cn co m ppZ=� ::0' a �:W (nZtL y c W 0 00 U O t7:At 0 > w O 0 y c o w uojLJUU L3#::Q� �::wpF-Z� u ULW U)U) r C) ix:;c :i:�ZUO °rwww C�—a Ua L OOZ UJ - o W `0 ZwF- F- OO.-H :':::::Z ;:i>w—zU U' N W moo V w O lt1:F-U0Z �Q wN• WZ W W L0a� (L �. .'.(:ZZ LULIz �=W LL w2Ww �LL0 's>v� �Z�O f-ULL W W W X W 2� wfn "'� .;:`a OlnW (nZw >LL Lij (D LL a w Cfof mU Z ww2> Z~Qa, W Zw0LL0 U 01 0O W �-ZF->0LLaF-F- a FLawcncrU0Uww w� LLJw —zLL, »:f a g > _ w UOL~i QOOQ wwLw aZa>a-1c)I Cl) Table 4 16, Aj J J_ m J F- z O J U_ a. H J a LL w J z U) LL 0 z 0 U) Q IL 2i 0 0) _C c E O O �U C� O O � Lo 3 O U m C` O aD � >C 0 O 000 0O0 N NT 00 O (D LO CO CO 0 00 O M 00 0)O O m ti O 69 69 69 T- 6c} 69 69 69 00 c- CO o tl) CO c CO � M fl C.0 cM N ti O 00 C7 In 00r- IT--ti 00 to 0 (O 69 M N 00 � LO 69 f q 6F? 60- 69 69 r ~ Lq o00 ti 0) N ti~ ,r-- 00 Ict co N CO 00 U.) O (.0 co co to)-N 6463 N O N O co > O O i� O W _ O N (B O fn 6 C B O !n a' ccn U6 c N C c 0 U) c 0 ..O -0— O O) — O O -O — O O C -O — 07 O C 2 C O C C U �, 0)O C U C jO U U o UOn JW0-Qa- ZW0-Q0- ZWa.Qa_ Table 5 ■1 M. L CI L O N :�i co 4.0 cn ca � r- C) ao o 00 LO co o 'd- (D 06 M m CO CO tt � 0,5- 4i � 6 N m Un cfl c rn in CD o C` ) C) m m ti m tf) M Cp C'7 m Iq EI} Cfl a0 N CM CY) EI} Ef} � EI} Eli Efi d' m Cfl N C9 Co C9 co M N� m N N Z O cn O CQ a) (6 O U C= o O O X O .Q CD z W a_ Q a_ � O C U m O t� � U � � � � U C O U C — CU v 0) cn c _ � O U X L Q N z W a_ Q a_ Table 6 Minutes - Public Meeting St. Lucie County Water & Sewer District April 22, 2010 - 6:OOPM — 8:OOPM County Commission Chambers • Laurie Case, Utility Director, welcome and introductions • Presentation by Dan Anderson, Rate Study Specialist, CDM, Inc. 2009 was the last rate increase to be implemented. PowerPoint Presentation to consolidate rates for the district. • Open the floor for questions/comments. ■ (Question) — Why are there different rate structures and how will costs be reduced? (unable to hear clearly from microphone) ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — North County Utility District and South Hutchinson Island District Wastewater Utility are separate districts as they are set up differently and will remain separate. The North County systems came on separately throughout the years and it was decided best to consolidate them in to one district. Since the last rate study over a year ago, there have been substantial cost reductions but due to being highly regulated, some costs cannot be cut. ■ (Dan Anderson; CDM) — Variable costs, i.e. electric, chemicals, and waste management, are the 3 top expenses and are 15% — 20% of costs incurred. The other 80% — 85% are fixed costs. Revenue is made up of approximately 2/3 coming from volume and 1/3 coming from fixed costs. SHI is legally defined as its own entity and is operated differently than the North District. Resolution 05-120 has legal requirements for bond coverage as each belongs in legally defined enterprise funds. ■ (Dan Anderson; CDM) — Indian River Estates is part of the consolidated district by resolution and bill payments pay for only the costs for the Utility system operating expenses. The MSBU was to pay for distribution facilities to provide service to that area. ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — All customers of the district are considered equal as they all get the same service. ■ (Kathy Dwyer; IRE) — Indian River Estates was told at the time of the MSBU they would be a separate entity and would like a copy of resolution 05-120. The consolidation was done without the knowledge of Indian River Estates property owners and would like to be a separate rate structure. ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — On June 28, 2005, the consolidation notice with Indian River Estates was published in the newspaper and Indian River Estates was in Ordinance 05-277 but unfortunately it was not on the Public Minutes — Public Meeting 04/22/2010 Page 2 Hearing cover memo. Indian River Estates will be treated as all other areas in the district. ■ (Question; HP) — Why has it taken so long to get rates reduced when a rate study was done last year? Why was this not done then? ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — At that time the Utility was concerned with sustainability issues and cash flow for bond covenant. The BOCC wanted a phased in approach to make us more sustainable. It (consolidated rate) was looked at then and was deemed not feasible at that time. ■ (Dan Anderson; CDM) — Consolidation is usually a gradual evolution. Revenue sufficiency was key last year. ■ (John Alves; IRE) — We had to pay $6,000 for our MSBU versus $2,500 paid by Port St. Lucie customers, which was a separate cost so why should we have to pay others debt with this consolidation? ■ (Dan Anderson; CDM) — The MSBU paid for infrastructure only opposed to operating costs. Indian River Estates is legally in the North County Utility District and bond council would have to be consulted before revenues could be separated and another district formed. It would be difficult to obtain reason to legally define another district. ■ (Question) — Why can't there be one district for MSBU customers and another that did not pay for their lines? ■ (Dan Anderson; CDM) — Consolidated rate structures cannot separate each party, i.e. we could not measure and charge based on length of pipe used or distant of home from plant, etc. The level of service is the same for all regardless of where you are located. The $10 million note is for future growth. ■ (Keith?; NHI) — Why are our bills 50% higher than Martin County and 100% higher than Indian River County? This rate consolidation is a very bad time for us as half of our residents have left for the season. ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — Timing just came together now as other issues had to be handled earlier. St. Lucie County Utilities is a young utility with smaller plants, which the county acquired, and the bulk agreement with FPUA, plus we have many regulated costs. We had hoped for more growth that would help with the economy of scales which did not transpire. Some counties have just one large plant that handles many customers which helps bring down costs. ■ (Customer) — Is this a consolidation or is the utility just trying to increase rates? ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — The revenues will be the same regardless if together or separate. It is to cover the costs of utilities and cuts have been made. ■ (Questions; IRE) — Are there any plans for municipal sewer in Indian River Estates? ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — Not at this time. Minutes — Public Meeting 04/22/2010 Page 3 (Question) — There is too much of a cost difference between Martin County, Indian River County and us. What can be done to lower costs to be comparable to other counties? (Laurie Case; SLCU) — Smaller utilities cost more to operate. We would like to be a regional plant and we are planning for that option. (Craig Mundt; NHI) — Too many times have hearings been held when residents are gone. The County has made reductions to control costs and the utilities can do the same. Condominiums are in budget discussions and setting rates are difficult with increases in utilities. Other rate structure was phased in 5-5-5 and now it is a 20% — 30% increase all at once. Why is this not phased in? We need additional time to research. Why are we paying so much more than Martin County and Indian River County? Why not let Indian River County run lines for North Hutchinson Island? No condo owners see bills therefore this has not been advertised well. ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — Received about 12 emails today.... (interrupted by audience — indicating there will be more coming) ■ (Dave Smith; NHI) — You need to lower rates to generate revenue and cap expenses. ■ (Laurie Case; SLUC) — We are not looking to increase revenue. We are just consolidating the rates. ■ (Dan Anderson; CDM) — Cutting too much depletes reserves needed for later problems that may arise. Bond covenant must be met. The rates recommended are there to sustain the system. ■ (Customer) — Are expansions part of the rates and fees? ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — No, connection fees cover that and the loan. ■ (Trish Gilsinan; HP) — We have been paying much more than some of you for a long time. This rate increase isn't bad if it balances things out. Why isn't the utility sold to a bigger utility? ■ (Laurie Case; SLCU) — There had been talks with FPUA and it was not deemed feasible and also annexation issues arose. Laurie Case thanks all for coming. The public hearing will be advertised when set. North County Utility District Public Workshop April 22, 2010 6:OOPM — 8:OOPM County Commission Chambers Sign In Sheet Name Address Phone —;!Z,S /- 2�10" 6 U I!f f 3 /�1- wt 4ri ( -,i) 5dYy N t�Y AkfP U. sLl S-.17 ij-1�11 12 � y 9 i� V-JL�L' �' �QFibCs� J !o � � ��L� G `� f nos �.. �'L ��� - V' t-r-c� �i' � T !•� 1 ! North County Utility District Public Workshop April 22, 2010 6:OOPM — 8:OOPM County Commission Chambers Sign In Sheet Name Address Phone N�Ss� (r c � 57769 IkZcG ! / fil e s `� 7 g � �l ?z ISiH LS -T 1 11), It'O ze, 5�, / be,�?rPu,, pi 7,/ s - 2 ,,- 1O 1)�,7-q��,-�-�rq4 RESOLUTION NO. 10-149 A RESOLUTION OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SITTING AS THE COMMISSION OF THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT, AUTHORIZING THE ADJUSTMENT OF WATER, WASTEWATER, AND REUSE UTILITY RATES, FEES AND CHARGES FOR CUSTOMERS WITHIN THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 04-023, (the "District Ordinance") the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners ("Board") created the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District ("District") for the purpose of providing water, wastewater, and reclaimed water service within the boundaries of the District; and WHEREAS, on April 7, 2009, in Resolution No. 09-125, the Board, sitting as the Commission of the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District ("Commission") established the existing water, wastewater and reuse utility rates, fees and charges for the utility services furnished to the customers of the District ("2009 Rate Resolution"); and WHEREAS, the Commission provided written notice of the proposed Schedules of Rates, Fees and Charges for the District to the utility customers within the District; the notice set forth the date, time and place of the meeting of the Commission at which such proposals would be considered and whereby interested parties had an opportunity to be heard concerning the 2010 Rate Schedule. WHEREAS, the Board, on the advise and recommendation of its utility staff and technical advisors, and after hearing comments from the public, has established an adjusted schedule fixing wastewater and reclaimed water utility rates, fees and charges W&S District Rate Resolution 10-149 for customers within the District and finds that such adjusted 2010 Schedule of Rates, Fees and Charges (Exhibit "1") is just and equitable and in the public interest. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, sitting as the Commission of the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District: Section 1. ADOPTION OF 2010 RATE SCHEDULE FOR THE DISTRICT. The 2010 Rate Schedule, setting forth the rates, fees and charges for customers within the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District to be serviced by the District utility system is hereby adopted. The adjustment under the 2010 Rate Schedule shall be effective commencing with the first billing cycle on or after July 1, 2010. Section 2. SEVERABILITY. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of their Resolution is for any reason held by a court to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remainder of this Resolution. Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption (the "Effective Date") Section 4. ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this Resolution was as follows: Chairman Charles Grande Vice Chairman Doug Coward XXX Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky XXX Commissioner Paula A. Lewis XXX Commissioner Chris Craft XXX W&S District Rate Resolution 10-149 PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this 1st day of June, 2010. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: BY: Deputy Clerk Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: County Attorney EXHIBIT "1" SCHEDULE OF RATES, FEES AND CHARGES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2010 W&S District Rate Resolution 10-149 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL METERED RATE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For water service to single family or multi -family residences where the water is individually metered. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Meter Size Customer Account Charge (Per Metered Connection) Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) 0 to 5,000 5,001 to 10,000 10,001 and 15,000 15,001 and above $ 19.49 $ 48.72 $ 97.44 $155.91 $ 2.40 $ 3.37 $ 6.06 $ 8.08 $ 9.43 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL METERED RATE SCHEDULE WASTEWATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For wastewater service to single family or multi -family residences where the water is individually metered. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Meter Size All Meter Sizes $23.23 Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) 0 to 10,000 $ 6.97 (wastewater capped at 10,000 gallons) Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT IRRIGATION RATE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For water service to all customers who require potable irrigation service in the district. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Meter Size 3/4" 1" 1 ''/2" 2" All Above Customer Account Charge (Per Metered Connection) Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) 0 to 5,000 5,001 to 10,000 10,001 and 15,000 15,001 and above $ 19.49 $ 48.72 $ 97.44 $155.91 Per Utility Analysis $ 2.40 $ 3.37 $ 6.06 $ 8.08 $ 9.43 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT MULTI -FAMILY METERED RATE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For water service to residences where one meter provides service to two or more customers. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Times the number of units Meter Size All Meter Sizes $13.84 Per Unit Customer Account Charge (Per Metered Connection) $ 2.40 Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) Times the number of units 0 to 2,500 2,501 to 5,000 5,001 to 7,500 7,501 and above $ 3.37 $ 6.06 $ 8.08 $ 9.43 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT MULTI -FAMILY METERED RATE SCHEDULE WASTEWATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For wastewater service to residences where one meter provides service to two or more customers. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Times the number of units Meter Size All Meter Sizes $20.91 Per Unit Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) Times the number of units 0 to 9,000 $ 6.97 (Maximum 9,000 gallons times units) Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT COMMERCIAL METERED RATE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For water service to all commercial and industrial customers and to where no other rate schedule applies. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Based on water ERC's (an ERC equals 300 gallons per day) Per ERC $29.23 Customer Account Charge (Per Metered Connection) $ 2.40 Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) 0 to 5,000 $ 3.37 5,001 to 10,000 $ 6.06 10,001 to 15,000 $ 8.08 15,001 and above $ 9.43 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT COMMERCIAL METERED RATE SCHEDULE WASTEWATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For wastewater service to all commercial and industrial customers and to where no other rate schedule applies. RATES (Monthly) Base Facility Charge Based on water ERC's (an ERC equals 300 gallons per day) Per ERC $34.85 Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) All Gallons $ 6.97 Sewer Base Facility Charge (Flat Fee All Meter Sizes) $66.23 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION METER WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For water service to all temporary construction meters and to where no other rate schedule applies. Deposit In Advance Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) All Gallons $268.00 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT FIRE PROTECTION RATE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — Applicable to all connections to the utility system for private fire protection service. RATES (Yearly) Base Facility Charge* Meter Size 2" $ 214.00 4" S 667.00 6" $1,333.00 8" $2,133.00 Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) All Gallons $ 8.08 *Note: May be charged monthly. Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT ALLOWANCE FOR PRUDENT INVESTMENT RATE SCHEDULE ACCRUED GUARANTEED REVENUES AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — Applicable to all water and wastewater customers who require service from the plant and lines capacity. RATES (At time of connection — billed annually) Water Wastewater Per ERC $193.00 $265.00 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES RATE SCHEDULE WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — Applicable to all water and wastewater customers of the utility system. RATES: Normal reconnection of service Violation reconnection of service Premises visit (in lieu of disconnect) Late Payment Charge Convenience Fee Initial Application Fees: Administrative Fee Plan Review Fee Inspection Fee Developer Agreement Fee Service Agreement Fee DRC Fee Request for meter test: 5/8" to 1 ''/z" Meter 2" and above Meter Fee applicable when meter tests within tolerances. Normal Hrs. After Hrs. $36.00 $98.00 (emergency only) $46.00 $36.00 $ 6.00 $ 4.00 $295.00 2% of construction costs 1 ''/2% of construction costs $5,820.00 $582.00 $50.00 $36.00 Actual cost plus 15% Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT RECLAIMED WATER RATE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE AVAILABILITY — Available throughout the area served by the District. APPLICABILITY — For water service to all customers who require reclaim water for irrigation in the district. RATES (Monthly) Consumption Charge (Per 1,000 Gallons) All Gallons $ 3.04 Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 ST. LUCIE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT CUSTOMER DEPOSITS APPLICABILITY — Before rendering service, the County will require a deposit to secure the payment of bills which shall be non-negotiable and non -transferable. The amount of such deposit shall be an amount at least necessary to cover charges for service for two billing periods. Deposit Type Meter Size Water Deposit Amt Wastewater Deposit Amt Residential 3/4" $ 84.00 $ 88.00 Residential 1" $116.00 $ 252.00 Residential 11/2" $230.00 $ 364.00 Residential 2" $462.00 $ 794.00 Multi -Family Two months Two months (per unit) estimated bill estimated bill Commercial 3/4" $116.00 $ 116.00 or two months estimated bill whichever is greater Commercial 1" $204.00 $ 373.00 or two months estimated bill whichever is greater Commercial 1 1/2" $462.00 $1,627.00 or two months estimated bill whichever is greater Commercial 2" $926.00 $1,864.00 or two months estimated bill whichever is greater Commercial 3" $1,102.00 $2,205.00 or two months estimated bill whichever is greater 4" and above Two months Two months estimated bill estimated bill Resolution 10-149 St. Lucie County Utility Rates Effective for bills rendered after July 1, 2010 NOTICE DE MEETING Notice of Public Hearing The public is hereby notified that the Board isof County Commsioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 1, 2010, during the regularly scheduled meeting of the County Commis- sion beginning at 6:00 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible, at 2300 Virginia Avenue, Ft. Pierce, FL, to re- ceive public com- ment on proposed adjustments to the water, wastewater and reclaimed wa- ter rates, fees and charges for cus- tomers of the St. Lucie County Water and Sewer District (Does not include the South Hutchin- son Isl2nd District wastewater cus- tomers). The pro- posed rates are available for review at the Utility Office or on the website at www.stlucieco.- org/utilities. Publish: May 19, 2010 2147950 AGENDA REQUEST CiiuNTY FL:O.IRIID A ITEM NO. VII-H DATE: June 1, 2010 REGULAR [] PUBLIC HEARING [xx] CONSENT[] TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Heather Sperrazza Lueke Assistant County Attorney SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 10-021 - Pain Management Clinics BACKGROUND: See CA10-668 FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: Forwarded from Local Planning Agency on May 20, 2010, with recommendation for approval. RECOMMENDATION: This is the first of two public hearings. The second hearing will be on June 15, 2010, at 6p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard. COMMISSION ACTION: [ ] APPROVED [ ] DENIED [X] OTHER: No Action required at this time. CONCURRENCE: Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Review and Approvals County Attorney: Management & Budget Purchasing: Daniel 5. McIntyre Originating Dept. Public Works Dir: County Eng.: Finance: (Check for copy only, if applicable) Eff. 5/96 CouNT , INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Heather Sperrazza Lueke, Assistant County Attorney C.A. NO.: 10-668 DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 10-021 - Pain Management Clinics BACKGROUND: In the Spring of 2009, the State Attorney's Office for the 17`h Judicial Circuit in Broward County, Florida, issued an interim report on "The Proliferation of Pain Clinics in South Florida" which established the following facts: (i) in 2008, an average of 13.5 deaths per day in Florida were attributed to prescription drugs; and (ii) pain clinics are migrating north from Broward County. St. Lucie County has recently been made aware by law enforcement and news reports that a pattern of illegal drug use and distribution has been associated with some pain management clinics in South Florida. Several counties and municipalities in South Florida have enacted restrictions on pain management clinics or have enacted moratoriums on new pain management clinics in their jurisdictions. Such restrictions or temporary bans could result in pain management clinics migrating to St. Lucie County. The threat of illegal narcotic activity and increased crime associated with such clinics is significant and could undermine the economic health of the County. County staff is currently analyzing the effects of pain management clinics in the County to determine whether it is necessary to adopt additional standards under the zoning and land development regulations in connection with the issuance of any development permits, business licenses, or approvals for the location of pain management clinics within the unincorporated St. Lucie County, Florida, analyzing new laws regarding pain management clinics enacted by the Florida Legislature, and preparing to make recommendations which will better promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the County. While staff is undergoing its analysis, and in order to prevent the occurrence during this period of uses which are incompatible with the intent of the zoning and land development regulations, staff requests that the Board establish a moratorium which would prevent the granting of development permits or approvals for pain management clinics in the unincorporated St. Lucie County, during this period. On May 20, 2010, the Local Planning Agency forwarded the Ordinance to the Board with a recommendation for approval and no recommended changes. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION: This is the first of two public hearings. The second hearing will be on June 15, 2010, at 6 pm or as soon thereafter as may be heard. Respectfully submitted, c 'J Heather Sperrazza Lueke Assistant County Attorney Attachments ORDINANCE NO. 10-021 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, DEFINING "PAIN MANAGEMENT CLINIC"; IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT PERMITS OR APPROVALS FOR PAIN MANAGEMENT CLINICS; PROVIDING AN EXPIRATION DATE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, has made the following determinations: 1. In the Spring of 2009, the State Attorney's Office for the 17th Judicial Circuit in Broward County, Florida, issued an interim report on "The Proliferation of Pain Clinics in South Florida" which established the following facts: (i) in 2008, an average of 13.5 deaths per day in Florida were attributed to prescription drugs; and (ii) pain clinics are migrating north from Broward County. 2. St. Lucie County has recently been made aware by law enforcement and news reports that a pattern of illegal drug use and distribution has been associated with some pain management clinics in South Florida. 3. News media such as the Miami Herald, the Sun -Sentinel, and the Palm Beach Post have published numerous articles in recent months describing the "pipeline" trafficking drugs from some South Florida pain management clinics to users from other states such as Kentucky, West Virginia, and Ohio. 4. Several counties and municipalities in South Florida have enacted restrictions on pain management clinics or have enacted moratoriums on new pain management clinics in their jurisdictions. Such restrictions or temporary bans could result in pain management clinics migrating to St. Lucie County. 5. The threat of illegal narcotic activity and increased crime associated with such clinics is significant and could undermine the economic health of the County. 6. County staff is directed to analyze the effects of pain management clinics in the County, to analyze the criteria for such additional standards under the zoning and land development regulations in connection with the issuance of any development permits, business licenses, or approvals for the location of pain management clinics within the unincorporated St. Lucie County, Florida, to analyze any new laws regarding pain management clinics enacted by the Florida Legislature, and to make recommendations which will better promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the County. 7. While staff is undergoing its analysis, and in order to prevent the occurrence during this period of uses which are incompatible with the intent of the zoning and land development regulations, it is necessary to establish a moratorium which prevents the granting of development permits or approvals for pain management clinics in the unincorporated St. Lucie County, during this period. 8. It is not the intent of this moratorium to interfere with legitimate medical clinics nor the legal use of controlled substances. 9. The Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, finds and declares a need to temporarily suspend further issuance of permits or approvals for pain management clinics until such time that appropriate regulations can be adopted in order to best assess whether the County should review its zoning and land development regulations in connection with pain management clinics. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: PART A. DEFINITION "Pain Management Clinic" means a privately -owned clinic, facility, or office, which advertises in any medium for any type of pain -management services, or employs a physician who is primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications, and is required to register with the Florida Department of Health pursuant to Section 458.309 or Section 459.005, Florida Statutes (2009). A physician is primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications when the majority of patients seen are prescribed or dispensed controlled substance medications for the treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain. Chronic nonmalignant pain is pain unrelated to cancer which persists beyond the usual course of the disease of the injury that is the case of the pain for more than 90 days after surgery. PART B. DECLARATION OF MORATORIUM For the purposes set forth herein, it is in the best interest of the general public and there exists a need to declare a moratorium on the issuance of permits or approvals for pain management clinics in order for staff to examine and make recommendations to its County Commission as to the criteria to be considered by the County Commission for the establishment of pain management clinics. PART C. EXPIRATION This ordinance shall expire upon the earlier of the following: nine months from the effective date of this Ordinance, or upon the effective date of the Land Development Code amendments dealing with pain management clinics to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners during this moratorium or upon a vote of the Board of County Commissioners to end the moratorium. PART D. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, County ordinances and County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. PART E. SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance. PART F. APPLICABILITY OF ORDINANCE. This ordinance shall be applicable in the unincorporated area of St. Lucie County. PART G FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance to the Bureau of Administrative Code and Laws, Department of State, The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida 32304. PART H. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage of this ordinance. PART I. ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: Charles Grande, Chairman Doug Coward, Vice Chairman Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky Commissioner Chris Craft Commissioner Paula Lewis PASSED AND DULY ENACTED this ATTEST: Deputy Clerk day of 2010. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA INTERIM REPORT OF THE BROWARD COUNTY GRAND JURY THE PROLIFERATION OF PAIN. CLINICS IN SOUTH FLORIDA SPRING TERM A.D. 2009 MICHAEL J. SATZ State Attorney NOVEMBER 19, 2009 I. INTRODUCTION Pill Mills are afflicting the health and welfare of the citizens of our community. Here in Broward County, Florida, Pill Mills have proliferated at an alarming rate. Your Grand Jury was empanelled to investigate and review why Pill Mills are proliferating in South Florida, what effect they are having on the community, how Broward County has become a major source of Oxycodone and what can be done to protect the public from the dangers that may be caused by Pill Mills. Your Grand Jury heard testimony from doctors who specialize in pain medicine, prescription drug abusers, addicts and their family members, local law enforcement personnel, state and federal law enforcement personnel from neighboring states including members of the Federal High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Task Force and investigators on the Appalachia High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Initiative for the South Florida -Kentucky Prescription Fraud Task Force, a representative of the Florida Department of Health's Office of Drug Control responsible for coordinating the State's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, an elected representative of the Florida State House of Representatives responsible for the State's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, local officials responsible for initiating local ordinances to regulate pain clinics, a physician appointed to the Florida Board of Medicine, a veteran prosecutor in charge of a Drug Trafficking Unit that specializes in the prosecution of drug trafficking cases by prescription drugs, a member of the judiciary in charge of drug court from the State of Florida's Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, an elected public defender, an epidemiologist with the Center for the Study and Prevention of Substance Abuse at Nova Southeastem University, and a Lieutenant Governor of a neighboring state. 2 II. BACKGROUND After the tragedy of 9-11 in 2001, the United States of America secured its ports; the increased security effectively reduced the quantity of illegal drugs imported into the United States. According to law enforcement who testified before your Grand Jury, as a result of the dwindling supply and inaccessibility of illegal drugs entering the United States through South Florida, many traffickers, dealers and users shifted their efforts from acquiring illegal drugs to the diversion of legal prescription drugs to illegal uses. Beginning in 2002, and continuing for the next seven years, the Florida Legislature failed, in spite of repeated bills brought before it, to enact legislation to implement a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP). A Prescription Drug Monitoring Program provides an electronic database from which doctors, pharmacists and law enforcement officers can track the dispensation of prescription drugs to patients. In early 2009, thirty eight (38) states had enacted legislation implementing a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program in their states. Thirty two (32) of the states' Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs were in effect, while six were waiting to go online. Florida was the largest state without a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program and became a destination for traffickers, dealers and users seeking to illegally acquire prescription drugs. Without a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program in place, drug traffickers, dealers and users easily engage in illegal doctor shopping to acquire prescription drugs. They travel to multiple doctors several times a day, week or month in search of physicians who willingly prescribe and supply them prescription drugs. If ethical and conscientious doctors refuse to sell them drugs, they travel from pain clinic to pain clinic attempting to find an unscrupulous physician willing to supply them drugs. 3 Pain clinics that "treat patients for pain" by dispensing large quantities of controlled substance medication for non -medical purposes are referred to as Pill Mills. Not allpain clinics are Pill Mills; however, Pill Mills can be a doctor's office, pain clinic or health care facility. They differ from legitimate pain clinics that are associated with hospital facilities and legitimate pain medicine practices. Typically, they are rogue clinics putting pills out for cash. Patients seeking drugs, who go to pain clinics, engage in the "dance" with the doctor. The patients fake illnesses and complain of nonexistent pain. They produce altered MRI's or MRI's that do not show any injuries. Some clinic doctors will take cash for the initial visit, spend a few minutes with the patient for an "exam" and then prescribe a 30 day cocktail of various narcotics to the patient. Your Grand Jury heard testimony from law enforcement officials and addicts that the cocktail usually includes: 1) 150 to 240 30 milligram Roxicodone pills, which are Oxycodone; 2) 90 to 100 10 milligram Percocet pills which contain Oxycodone and Tylenol and is administered for break -through pain between the Roxicodone doses; 3) 350 milligram tablets of Soma, which is Carisoprodol and is a muscle relaxant; and 4) 2 milligram pills of Xanax, which is Alprazolam and is an anti -anxiety medication given to help patients with sleep disturbances. Through some doctors, the pain clinics dispense the cocktail or Oxycodone on site to the patient, for cash only. The patient then travels to another clinic to repeat the "dance." This routine allows traffickers, dealers and users to easily obtain enormous quantities of prescription drugs and allows some doctors, and some clinics that dispense drugs on site, to profit handsomely while plausibly denying any wrongdoing. 4 The number of pain clinics has skyrocketed in South Florida From August 2008 - to November 2009, a new pain clinic opened in Broward and Palm Beach counties on average every 3 days. Finally, in July 2009 Florida enacted legislation to implement a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. The Prescription Drug Monitoring Program is to be operational beginning in December 2010. While supporters of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program jubilantly hailed the long overdue enactment of the legislation, many questions are being raised as to whether the Program will ever be properly funded or effective as a deterrent to doctor shopping, as the legislation is presently written. Opponents of the legislation still raise questions regarding the constitutionality of the legislation; they claim that the legislation jeopardizes the privacy rights of innocent citizens.' See recommendations on pages 40-43 of this report that address these concerns. ' Some opponents to the legislation object to the very idea that a database wiL be kept that contains their prescription drug history (although others point out that pharmacies already have that information in a database). If a patient takes his. prescription to a pharmacy and submits the prescription to them for a drug, the information goes to a clearing house and if you are on Medicaid the information goes into a database. Other opponents object to the legislation because it allows law enforcement to have access to the database when law enforcement is conducting an active criminal investigation and requests the information from the manager of the database. They contend that law enforcement should have to establish the standard of probable cause (i.e., that they articulate that there is a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity) before being allowed access to the database of someone's prescription drug history. 5 III. THE RISE OF THE PAIN CLINICS AND THEIR EFFECTS A. The Proliferation of Pain Clinics In 2007 there were 4 pain clinics operating in Broward County. From those 4 pain clinics in Broward County the number swelled to 66 pain clinics operating in South Florida in 2008. From August 2008 to November 2009 the number of pain clinics opening and operating in South Florida exploded in number from 66 to 176, and the number of pain clinics opening and operating in Broward County increased from 47 to 115.2 Pain clinics, which dispense prescription drugs on site, dispensed almost 9 million dose units of Oxycodone in South Florida during the last six months of 2008. 6.5 million Dose units of the 9 million dose units were dispensed in Broward County alone.3 B. Broward County: the Source of Oxvcodone During the first six months of 2008, the top 25 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone in the nation were located in the State of Florida; 22 of the top 25 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone were in South Florida; and, 18 of the top 25 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone were located in Broward County, Florida.4 ' Information regarding the number of Pain Clinics provided by Law Enforcement Officers of the Broward Sheriff s Office Pharmaceutical Drug Diversion Unit. Information regarding Dispensing Practitioners of Oxycodone obtained from Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) by US Drug Enforcement Administration through the Broward Sheriffs Office and the Center for the Study and Prevention of Substance Abuse at Nova Southeastern University ° Information regarding Dispensing Practitioners of Oxycodone obtained from Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) by US Drug Enforcement Administration through the Broward Sheriffs Office and the Center for the Study and Prevention of Substance Abuse at Nova Southeastern University I. Of the more than 1 million dispensing doctors registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) almost 60,000 dispensing doctors (or 6%) are registered in the State of Florida.5 During the last six months of 2008, all 50 of the top 50 Oxycodone Units Dispensed January 2008 — June 2008 by top 25 dispensing doctors: 3,383,200 Broward 852,800 Palm Beach 393,900 Miami -Dade 126,990 Hillsborough 116,800 Manatee 5 Florida Statute 465.0276 provides the authority for practitioners to dispense drugs. It reads as follows: (1) A person may not dispense medicinal drugs unless licensed as a pharmacist or otherwise authorized under this chapter to do so, except that a practitioner authorized by law to prescribe drugs may dispense such drugs to her or his patients in the regular course of her or his practice in compliance with this section. (2) A practitioner who dispenses medicinal drugs for human consumption for fee or remuneration of any kind, whether direct or indirect, must: (a) Register with her or his professional licensing board as a dispensing practitioner and pay a fee not to exceed $100 at the time of such registration and upon each renewal of her or his license. Each appropriate board shall establish such fee by rule. (b) Comply with and be subject to all laws and rules applicable to pharmacists and pharmacies, including, but not limited to, this chapter and chapters 499 and 893 and all federal laws and federal regulations. (c) Before dispensing any drug, give the patient a written prescription and orally or in writing advise the patient that the prescription may be filled in the practitioner's office or at any pharmacy. (3) The department shall inspect any facility where a practitioner dispenses medicinal drugs pursuant to subsection (2) in the same manner and with the same frequency as it inspects pharmacies for the purpose of determining whether the practitioner is in compliance with all statutes and rules applicable to her or his dispensing practice. (4) The registration of any practitioner who has been found by her or his respective board to have dispensed medicinal drugs in violation of this chapter shall be subject to suspension or revocation. (5) A practitioner who confines her or his activities to the dispensing of complimentary packages of medicinal drugs to the practitioner's own patients in the regular course of her or his practice, without the payment of fee or remuneration of any kind, whether direct or indirect, and who herself or himself dispenses such drugs is not required to register pursuant to this section. The practitioner must dispense such drugs in the manufacturer's labeled package with the practitioner's name, patient's name, and date dispensed, or, if such drugs are not dispensed in the manufacturer's labeled package, they must be dispensed in a container which bears the following information: (a) Practitioner's name; dispensing doctors of Oxycodone in the nation were in the State of Florida; 45 of the top 50 dispensing doctors of Oxvcodone were located in South Florida; and, 33 of the top 50 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone were located in Broward County, Florida.6 The most recent data available for the top 50 doctors dispensing Oxycodone reveals that from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009, 49 of the top 50 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone in the United States were in the State of Florida; 43 of the top 50 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone were in South Florida and 25 of the top dispensing doctors of Oxycodone were located in Broward County. (b) Patient's name; (c) Date dispensed; (d) Name and strength of drug; and (e) Directions for use. 6Information regarding Dispensing Practitioners of Oxycodone obtained from Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) by US Drug Enforcement Administration through the Broward Sheriff's Office and the Center for the Study and Prevention of Substance Abuse at Nova Southeastern University Oxycodone Units Dispensed July 2008 — December 2008 by top 50 dispensing doctors: 6,584,200 Broward 109,400 Palm Beach 450,000 Miami -Dade 308,400 Pinellas 277,300 Hillsborough 220,400 Lake 111,200 Orange 109,760 Seminole Information regarding Dispensing Practitioners of Oxycodone obtained from Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) by US Drug Enforcement Administration through the Broward Sheriff's Office and the Center for the Study and Prevention of Substance Abuse at Nova Southeastern University Oxycodone Units Dispensed October 2009 —March 2009 by top 50 dispensing doctors: 5233,785 Broward 2,368,430 Palm Beach 646,500 Miami -Dade 192,400 Pinellas 184.330 Hillsborough 169,200 Lake 8 The most recent data available for the top 100 doctors dispensing Oxycodone reveals that from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009, 48 of the top 100 dispensing doctors of Oxycodone in the United States were located in Broward County, Florida. Those 48 doctors dispensed 7,174,885 dose units during that six month period, or 53.8% of the total Oxycodone dose units dispensed by the top 100 dispensing doctors in the United States. The data for the most recent period from April 2009 to September 2009 has not yet been released and is not yet available. C. The Effects of prescription drugs and Oxvcodone throughout Florida and Broward Coun 1. Deaths from prescription drugs and Oxvcodone The Florida Medical Examiners Commission reported that in 2006 there were 2,780 lethal dose reports of prescription drugs detected in deceased persons in the State of Florida or an average of more than 7 reported deaths per day. In 2007 the Florida Medical Examiners Commission reported that there were 3,317 lethal dose reports of prescription drugs detected in deceased persons in the State of Florida or an average of more than 9 reported deaths per day. In 2008 the Florida Medical Examiners Commission reported that there were 3,750 lethal dose reports of prescription drugs detected in deceased persons in the State of Florida or an average of more than 10 reported deaths per day. In 2008 there were an additional 6,286 reports where prescription drugs were detected in deceased persons that 164,686 Seminole 133,800 Orange 208,600 Lee 0 were not considered to be at a lethal dose level but may have been found in combination with other substances. The total of 10,036 prescription drugs detected was related to 4,924 deaths or an average of nearly 13 '/2 deaths per day in Florida during 2008. Oxvcodone alone was detected in 1,574 deceased persons in Florida during 2008 and was determined to be a lethal dose level by medical examiners who considered it to be the cause of death in 942 of those cases. Across Florida, the number of reports detected among deceased persons for Oxvcodone increased 26 percent in 2008. Reports related to the category of prescription opioids detected among deceased persons increased 8 percent in Florida in 2008 and increased 23 percent in Broward County in 2008. 2. Increases in crime and the costs of enforcing the laws. Your Grand Jury heard testimony from law enforcement officials that burglaries and robberies in the areas where the pain clinics are located have increased; drug trafficking in prescription drugs and street level sales of prescription drugs have increased; and, identity theft and organized crirn;nal activities have increased. Your Grand Jury heard testimony from law enforcement officials how criminals rob pharmacists of Oxycodone and then ignore and leave cash behind; your Grand Jury also heard testimony where an addict described how offenders broke into his house and violently robbed him and his family at gunpoint to get his Oxycodone. The costs incurred by law enforcement to combat the crimes, the costs incurred by the judicial system to process the offenders, and the costs incurred by the Department of Corrections and the County to house the offenders have all increased. Testimony was presented to your Grand Jury, that drug trafficking in prescription drugs in Broward 10 r County increased greatly. Testimony was presented to your Grand Jury, by the Circuit Court Judge in charge of the drug court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit that fifty percent (50%) of the 1600 active cases in Drug Court are individuals who are charged with the illegal possession of prescription drugs. 3. Increases in the use of prescription drugs, addictions and the costs of treating patients. Several witnesses, including an epidemiologist with the Center for the Study and Prevention of Substance Abuse at Nova Southeastern University, testified to your Grand Jury that prescription drug abuse is an epidemic spreading across the nation, particularly in Florida, and more specifically in Broward County. As the use of cocaine has recently declined the non -medical illegal use of prescription opioids has dramatically increased. Reports show that drug use today is more dangerous, more addictive and more deadly than it was even just a decade ago. Prescription drug abuse leads to polysubstance abuse (people using more than one drug) and an increase in the consequences of deaths, medical emergencies and addiction treatments. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health conducted annually by the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration estimates that in the last 30 days over 5 million Americans used non -medical prescription opioids or narcotic analgesics or pain relievers. In 2005, .11,300,000 Americans age 12 and above had used prescription pain medication in a non -medical use. In 2007, the number increased almost 50% to 16,280,000 Americans. One of the age groups that have shown the highest levels of prescription non -medical use has been young adults age 18 to 25. In 2007, 2,147,000 11 Americans were first time non -medical users of prescription pain medication. You can only be a first time user once in your life and those first time non -medical users of prescription pain medication numbered more than those first time users of marihuana (2,090,000), prescription tranquilizers (1,232,000), cocaine (906,000), Ecstasy, inhalants, and prescription stimulants (642,000). The DAWN system tracks reports of incidents of hospital emergency departments. According to the DAWN tracking system Broward County has the highest proportion of prescription drug and prescription opioid visits among 20 metropolitan areas in the country. Compared to Miami -Dade County, which has the highest reports for cocaine, Broward County has a much higher proportion of prescription medication reports from emergency departments for prescription opioids. In Broward County, 20% of the opioid emergency department reports were related to heroin while 80% were related to prescription opioids. In Miami -Dade County 73% of the opioid emergency department reports were for heroin and 27% were among the prescription opioids. This reverse pattern between two neighboring counties illustrates the difference that we have with the prescription drug problem even within South Florida. In tracking Florida Primary Treatment Admissions, prescription drugs have been the fastest rising number of treatment admissions in Florida, with a 1500/o increase between 2004 and 2008. The costs of treating the drug abusers' and drug addicts' addictions have increased. There are not enough government programs, treatment facilities and beds to handle the growing number of patients who need treatment for their addictions. In the past 5 years there has been a 30% decrease in the availability of community based 12 residential treatment facilities and programs in Broward County. This loss of residential programs is having an effect on the entire criminal justice system. The prognosis only gets bleaker as funding shrinks with the budget cuts imposed upon all government agencies. 4. Decreases in the quality of life With the increase in the number of pain clinics has come an increase in the number of overdose deaths involving the illegal use of prescription medications. And, with the increase in the number of pain clinics has come a decrease in the quality of life for the person who becomes addicted and for an ever increasing number of Floridians and Americans who lives are affected by a loved one who becomes addicted to prescription medication due to the ease of access provided by some pain clinics. 13 TV. THE OPERATIONS OF PAIN CLINICS A. Dispensing Controlled Substances Authority to prescribe and dispense controlled substances by a practitioner is found in Florida Statute 893.05(l). It states: "A practitioner, in good faith and in the course of his or her professional practice only, may prescribe, administer, dispense, mix, or otherwise prepare a controlled substance, or the practitioner may cause the same to be administered by a licensed nurse or an intem practitioner under his or her direction and supervision only." To administer is to provide a single dose treatment of a drug to a patient, such as an injection or oral dose. To prescribe is to author or write a prescription fora patient. The prescription is usually for an extended treatment (from days to a month). To dispense is to sell medications to a patient/customer such as a pharmacy does or a doctor licensed to dispense medications. At some pain clinics, doctors dispense drugs directly to patients without using a pharmacist. Pursuant to Florida Statute 467.0276(2)(3), the doctor need only pay the state a fee of $100 and agree to submit to the same annual inspections required of pharmacists. However, pain clinics that dispense drugs on site are not held to the same standards of practice as pharmacies.$ Pharmacies are required to maintain their records for two years 8 Chapter 64B 16-27 of the Florida Department of Health's regulations establishes Standards of Practice for Pharmacies dispensing Controlled Substances for the Treatment of Pain: (1) An order purporting to be a prescription that is not issued for a legitimate medical purpose is not a prescription and the pharmacist knowingly filling such a purported prescription shall be subiect to penalties for violations of the law. 14 for inspection and copying by law enforcement officers.9 Pain Clinics are supposed to (2) The following criteria shall cause a pharmacist to question whether a prescription was issued for a legitimate medical purpose: (a) Frequent loss of controlled substance medications, (b) Only controlled substance medications are prescribed for a patient, (c) One person presents controlled substance prescriptions with different patient names, (d) Same or similar controlled substance medication is prescribed by two or more prescribers at same time, (e) Patient always pays cash and always insists on brand name products. 9 Florida Statute 893.07 regarding Records states: (1) Every person who engages in the manufacture, compounding, mixing, cultivating, growing, or by any other process producing or preparing, or in the dispensing, importation, or, as a wholesaler, distribution, of controlled substances shall: (a) On January 1, 1974, or as soon thereafter as any person first engages in such activity, and every second year thereafter, make a complete and accurate record of all stocks of controlled substances on hand. The inventory may be prepared on the regular physical inventory date which is nearest to, and does not vary by more than 6 months from, the biennial date that would otherwise apply. As additional substances are designated for control under this chapter, they shall be inventoried as provided for in this subsection. (b) On and after January 1, 1974, maintain, on a current basis, a complete and accurate record of each substance manufactured, received, sold, delivered, or otherwise disposed of by him or her, except that this subsection shall not require the maintenance of a perpetual inventory. Compliance with the provisions of federal law pertaining to the keeping of records of controlled substances shall be deemed a compliance with the requirements of this subsection. (2) The record of controlled substances received shall in every case show: (a) The date of receipt. (b) The name and address of the person from whom received. (c) The kind and quantity of controlled substances received. (3) The record of all controlled substances sold, administered, dispensed, or otherwise disposed of shall show: (a) The date of selling, administering, or dispensing. (b) The correct name and address of the person to whom or for whose use, or the owner and species of animal for which, sold, administered, or dispensed. (c) The kind and quantity of controlled substances sold, administered, or dispensed. 15 also. Pharmacies are not allowed to advertise that they distribute narcotics.10 Pain clinics do advertise that they dispense narcotics." Many clinics are not owned by doctors. The (4) Every inventory or record required by this chapter, including prescription records; shall be maintained: (a) Separately from all other records of the registrant, or (b) Alternatively, in the case of Schedule III, rV, or V controlled substances, in such form that information required by this chapter is readily retrievable from the ordinary business records of the registrant. In either case, records shall be kept and made available for a period of at least 2 years for inspection and copying by law enforcement officers whose duty it is to enforce the laws of this state relating to controlled substances. (5) Each person shall maintain a record which shall contain a detailed list of controlled substances lost, destroyed, or stolen, if any; the kind and quantity of such controlled substances; and the date of the discovering of such loss, destruction, or theft. "Florida Statute 465.024 prohibits promoting the sale of certain drugs. It states (1) It is declared that the unrestricted use of certain controlled substances, causing abnormal reactions that may interfere with the user's physical reflexes and judgments, may create hazardous circumstances which may cause accidents to the user and to others, thereby affecting the public health, safety, and welfare. It is further declared to be in the public interest to limit the means of promoting the sale and use of these drugs. All provisions of this section shall be liberally construed to carry out these objectives and purposes. (2) No pharmacist, owner, or employee of a retail drug establishment shall use any communication media to promote or advertise the use or sale of any controlled substance appearing in any schedule in chapter 893. (3) This section shall not prohibit the advertising of any medicinal drugs, other than those controlled substances specified in chapter 893, or any patent or proprietary preparation, provided the advertising is not false, misleading, or deceptive. '' Florida Statute 465.015 states: (3)(c) It is unlawful for a person, firm, or corporation that is not licensed or registered under this chapter to 1. Use in a trade name, sign, letter, or advertisement any term, including "drug," "pharmacy," "prescription drugs," "Rx," or "apothecary," which implies that the person, firm, or corporation is licensed or registered to practice pharmacy in this state. 2. Hold himself or herself out to others as a person, firm, or corporation licensed or registered to practice pharmacy in this state. (d) It is unlawful for a person who is not registered as a pharmacy technician under this chapter or who is not otherwise exempt from the requirement to register as a pharmacy technician, to perform the functions 16 doctors work as contractors for the owners. The owners may have little or no medical background. If the pain clinic is not physician owned, then it is unre-gulated by any state agency. There is no requirement that owners and employees undergo a criminal background check. The clinic is not regulated through the Florida Department of Health or the Florida Board of Medicine. The Department of Health regulates healthcare professionals and not facilities. The dispensing doctor's activity at the clinic can be regulated by the Board of Medicine, but the pain clinic is independent and not under scrutiny. The Agency for Health Care Administration oversees only the clinics that accept insurance. Therefore, nearly all Pill Mills take cash only. of a registered pharmacy technician, or hold himself or herself out to others as a person who is registered to perform the functions of a registered pharmacy technician in this state. 4) Any person who violates any provision of subsection (1) or subsection (3) commits amisdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. Any person who violates any provision of subsection (2) commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. 17 V. PAIN MEDICINE A. Backeround Your Grand Jury heard testimony regarding the advent of the treatment of pain by specialists. Doctors testified that our bodies need to have pain. If we did not experience pain then our bodies would not know that there was something wrong with them. If we hurt our back or our leg and did not feel pain, then we would keep on hurting our back or leg. Pain is a symptom. Throughout our lives we experience pain and then we heal. In some people's lives they experience illness or injury that gives them pain, and even though they try to treat that illness or that problem, the pain does not go away. Someone who has an injury and has experienced multiple back surgeries because of the injury but still has pain has a chronic pain or intractable pain. People with an intractable pain have a disease. Pain medicine or pain management is the management of the disease process, either with medication, with physical modalities, with psychological or psychiatric modalities, with interventional management, with acupuncture or other modalities. A pain specialist treats someone with severe, chronic, unrelenting pain. B. Board Certification of Pain Specialists In 1993 the American Board of Anesthesiology created a specialty in pain medicine by creating a Certificate of Added Qualifications in Pain Management. The American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology also accept that Board. To become board certified with a Certificate of Added Qualifications in Pain Management, you first have to be board certified in your specialty. 18 The American Board of Pain Medicine was then created. It is more interdisciplinary and bestows upon the successful specialist in pain medicine a Diplomate of American Board of Pain Management. Both of these Boards are recognized in the State of Florida by the Florida Board of Medicine. Prior to the establishment of the Boards the treatment of pain medicine was often haphazard and accomplished through a variety of doctors, neurologists, family physicians, and internists. C. The Treatment of Pain There are many legitimate pain medicine specialists who caringly treat patients who suffer from chronic pain. A pain medicine specialist described to your Grand Jury the typical treatment of a patient suffering from chronic pain. First, the doctor would examine the patient to ensure there were no neurological injuries. If a patient injured his neck in an automobile accident and had an acute injury, he was in pain because his neck got banged up in an automobile accident and it was in a spasm. That would be a symptom and it would be appropriate to give an opioid or pain killer to treat that symptom. However, a doctor would also want to treat the underlying problem. He would ask, "Why does the patient have this pain?" The patient's muscles may have gotten stretched or torn, or the ligament may have been pulled, or the patient may have a herniated disc. The doctor would want to diagnose the problem and prescribe the appropriate medication: an inflammatory medicine would be prescribed if the muscles or disc were inflamed or muscle relaxers would be given to treat a spasm when the muscle locked down. Also modalities such as heat, physical therapy, and stretching would be used. 19 If a patient had chronic intractable pain and other numerous ways of dealing with it had failed, then in an effort to make the person functional, the doctor would discuss therapy involving opioids. The patient would sign an informed consent form acknowledging the risks and pitfalls. The doctor would also ensure that the patient understood that the patient would probably develop physical dependence on the drug and experience side effects. D. Respected Specialists in Pain Medicine v. Pill Mills Respected specialists in pain medicine also administer opioids to patients; however, they never administer opioids in the manner Pill Mills do. They have usually attempted other treatments and have carefully discussed with the patient the ramifications of using opioids. They also continue to treat their patients and monitor their patients' prognoses. Respected and legitimate pain medicine specialists abhor the Pill Mills that taint their profession and sully their reputations. At Pill Mills doctors write prescriptions and dispense controlled substances allegedly treating pain; however, Pill Mills treat all patients who say that they have pain the same, whether they have pain or not, by prescribing and selling opioids to the patients. They do not treat pain or the symptom of pain. They are lucrative businesses accepting cash only. They do not require extensive screening and do not treat patients nor conduct follow-up examinations of the patients. They do not follow the authorized treatment for intractable pain outlined in the Florida Statutes." 12 Florida Statute 459.326 Intractable pain; authorized treatment. 20 E. The user The average user of prescription drugs has changed in the last few years. Your Grand Jury heard testimony from law enforcement officials that a few years ago the mean demographic of the user was a white upper middleclass person from their late 30s to early 40s to their late 50s. The drug seeker started out with a legitimate medical injury that developed into a dependence upon and a tolerance to the drugs. Eventually, the user's original injury healed and when his physician refused to supply him additional drugs the user sought them anyway he could. Today, the average user is a white upper naiddleclass person, age 18-25. Typically today, the drug seeker started out seeking the drugs for recreational purposes as opposed to easing the pain of a legitimate medical injury. There are still many, many patients seeking drugs who developed dependence because they sought comfort from the pain of an injury. Anyone can become addicted to prescription drugs and Oxycodone, in particular. A parent with a nagging injury who suffers legitimate pain can become addicted to the drug as easily as a person who is just seeking a drug to obtain a high. Oxycodone is a powerful drug and does not discriminate against which user becomes an (1) For the purposes of this section, the term "intractable pain" means pain for which, in the generally accepted course of medical practice, the cause cannot be removed and otherwise treated. (2) Intractable pain must be diagnosed by a physician licensed under this chapter and qualified by experience to render such diagnosis. (3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a physician may prescribe or administer any controlled substance under Schedules U-V, as provided for in s. 893.03, to a person for the treatment of intractable pain, provided the physician does so in accordance with that level of care, skill, and treatment recognized by a reasonably prudent physician under similar conditions and circumstances. (4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to condone, authorize, or approve mercy killing or euthanasia, and no treatment authorized by this section may be used for such purpose. 21 addict. Narcotic pain medicines taken long enough and in high enough strengths, not only stop working, while escalating physical dependence, but make the user's pain worse. Hyperalgesia occurs when a user experiences extreme sensitivity to pain. Experts tell us that the treatment is to detoxify the user. However, as users and other experts testified, if the user is not willing to stop using the drugs then any treatment is doomed to failure. 22 VI. OXYCODONE A. Background Opium is a natural plant. From opium we get three major drugs: morphine, codeine and thebaine, all naturally occurring opiates. Opioids are synthetic and not naturally occurring. Oxycodone is an opioid. The drug works in the brain and spinal cord to reduce pain, create pain relief and analgesia. It also produces side effects, respiratory depression, sedation and constipation. It is a reward enhancing substance that has the potential for addiction. Drug manufacturer's brand name drugs Percodan, Percocet, Oxycontin and Roxicodone contain Oxycodone. Oxycodone is a schedule E controlled substance in the federal schedule registry, which means it has a high potential for abuse and a currently accepted but severely restricted medical use in treatment in the United States. It is not an illegal drug and can be prescribed by a physician; however, abuse of the substance may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.13 13 One addict testified to the effect of Oxycodone upon him, "It just made me fee] more relaxed. I wasn't hyper and wound up and I feel, I felt that I could function on that drug more so than cocaine." He then described the withdrawals he experienced from Oxycodone to your Grand Jury, "You get terrible pains in your legs, and hot and cold flashes, really bad diarrhea, throwing up. You can't eat at all even though you're feeling better, `cause you just don't have an appetite at all. It's really bad." Another addict testified, "I could not function without it [Oxycodone]. I had to have it every day." He then described the withdrawals: The first part of it would be you would start to get ill as in your stomach would hurt, you couldn't eat, you couldn't hold food down. You'd try to sleep at night, or I should say you would get cold sweats. It didn't matter what the temperature is, you feel like its 20 degrees outside and you're sweating bullets. And then from there you couldn't sleep at night. And that would go on for, different areas of those symptoms would go on for about a week or two. And then from there, I think a month after that, within the month, that first month of detox, I couldn't get a full night's worth of sleep. Your legs would kind of kick and flex and twit. I mean twitch around. He then described the side effects from the drugs upon him: It's a synthetic Heroin, so it would have the same effects that Heroin would have on you, things, you can use it all the same way as you can use Heroin, it has on it. You know. It would horribly 23 B. Types of Drugs There are three types of drugs: controlled substances, non -controlled substances and over the counter drugs. Controlled substances are regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and fall into 5 schedules. They are enumerated in Florida Statute 893.d3.14 constipate you for weeks, it would make you not be able to sleep fully. Those were some of the effects. After that, you know, the long term effects, I know I never had to wear glasses before, but you know I came to thinking about it, and after I had detoxed and I had gotten out of jail, I find later that my vision seemed to be awful bad. I don't know if it has any correlation to it, but I mean I go to think about it and, you know, my eyes are, you know, dilated every single day for two years, it can't be good for you, from taking the medication. So there after that I had to get glasses. And my memory had gone and it slowly seems to be coming back. I mean I can remember, I can stay awake through a movie or anything like that. I couldn't do that before. Fall asleep, have a cigarette in my hand, burn holes in my pants. It was horrible. I'd just nod off. Driving trying to rub my eyes to stay awake even though it's in the middle of the day. 14 Florida Statute 893.03, Standards and Controlled Substances a. Schedule I: A substance in Schedule I has a high potential for abuse and has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and in its use under medical supervision does not meet accepted safety standards. Examples of Schedule I controlled substances include Heroin and LSD. b. Schedule II: A substance in Schedule II has a high potential for abuse and has a currently accepted but severely restricted medical use in treatment in the United States, and abuse of the substance may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence. Examples of Schedule II controlled substances include Raw opium, codeine, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, morphine, and cocaine. As we previously mentioned, Oxycodone is a Schedule II controlled substance. c. Schedule III: A substance in Schedule III has a potential for abuse less than the substances contained in Schedules I and II and has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and abuse of the substance may lead to moderate to low physical dependence or high psychological dependence or, in the case of anabolic steroids, may lead to physical damage. Examples of Schedule III controlled substances include diet drugs, barbituric acid, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids. d. Schedule IV: A substance in Schedule IV has a low potential for abuse relative to the substances in Schedule III and has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and abuse of the substance may lead to limited physical or psychological dependence relative to the substances in Schedule III. Examples of Schedule IV controlled substances include Benzodiazepines such as Xanax and Valium, alprazolam, diazepam prazepam, and Phenobarbital. e. Schedule V: A substance, compound, mixture, or preparation of a substance in Schedule V has a low potential for abuse relative to the substances in Schedule IV and has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and abuse of such compound, mixture, or preparation may lead to limited physical or psychological dependence relative to the substances in Schedule IV. 24 Non -Controlled substances require a prescription to obtain but are not controlled. Examples of non -controlled substances include antibiotics, cholesterol medication, and Viagra. No prescription is needed for over-the-counter medications. Examples include Robitussin, Tylenol and Sudafed. C. Doctor Shopping Florida Statute 893.13(6)(a) makes it "unlawful for any person to be in actual or constructive possession of a controlled substance unless such controlled substance was lawfully obtained from a practitioner or pursuant to a valid prescription or order of a practitioner while acting in the course of his or her professional practice or to be in actual or constructive possession of a controlled substance except as otherwise authorized by this chapter. Any person who violates this provision commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084." Florida Statute 893.13(7)(a)8 is referred to as the "doctor shopping" statute and governs the conduct of those seeking to obtain prescription drugs from multiple pain clinics multiple times. Violating it is a third degree felony. It states: "It is unlawful for any person ... [t]o withhold information from a practitioner from whom the person seeks to obtain a controlled substance or a prescription for a controlled substance that the person making the request has received a controlled substance or a prescription for a controlled substance of like therapeutic use from another practitioner within the previous 30 days." 25 Florida Statute 893.13(8)(a) governs the conduct of the doctors who dispense controlled substances in Florida.15 It prohibits prescribing physicians from assisting patients to obtain controlled substances through deceptive or fraudulent representations, knowingly writing a prescription for a controlled substance for a fictitious person, or writing a prescription for a controlled substance for a patient if the sole purpose for the prescription is to provide a monetary benefit for the prescribing physician. D. Diversion Diversion is the illegal movement and illegal use of legal drugs. Law Enforcement is faced with thousands of traffickers, dealers and abusers seeking to illegally obtain legal prescription drugs and divert them to illegal uses. These individuals are local residents and travelers from out of state. They come to South Florida from 15 Florida Statute 893.13(8) states: (a) Notwithstanding subsection (9), a prescribing practitioner may not: 1. Knowingly assist a patient, other person, or the owner of an animal in obtaining a controlled substance through deceptive, untrue, or fraudulent representations in or related to the practice of the prescribing practitioner's professional practice; 2. Employ a trick or scheme in the practice of the prescribing practitioner's professional practice to assist a patient, other person, or the owner of an animal in obtaining a controlled substance; 3. Knowingly write a prescription for a controlled substance for a fictitious person; or 4. Write a prescription for a controlled substance for a patient, other person or an animal if the sole purpose of writing such prescription is to provide a monetary benefit to, or obtain a monetary benefit for, the prescribing practitioner. (Emphasis added). (b) If the prescribing practitioner wrote a prescription or multiple prescriptions for a controlled substance for the patient, other person, or animal for which there was no medical necessity, or which was in excess of what was medically necessary to treat the patient, other person, or animal, that fact does not give rise to any presumption that the prescribing practitioner violated subparagraph (a)1., but may be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether the prescribing practitioner knowingly assisted a patient, other person, or the owner of an animal to obtain a controlled substance in violation of subparagraph (a)1. (c) A person who violates paragraph (a) commits felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. 26 Kentucky, illegally and legally obtaining Florida Identification cards, presenting fraudulent MRI records to doctors, faking injuries, lying about their symptoms and "doctor shopping" multiple times at rogue clinics that are willing to prescribe, dispense and sell them prescription drugs for cash. The patients then either sell their prescription drugs on the street to obtain cash to buy more prescription drugs, travel back to Kentucky to sell the prescription drugs on the streets there for a handsome profit or use their 30 day supply within a couple of days and then seek to obtain more drugs illegally. Enforcing the criminal statutes involving diversion trafficking and doctor shopping can be very difficult. The investigations involving doctor shopping are very labor and paper intensive and often take several weeks or months to investigate. There is usually not an immediate arrest as the investigations are time consuming and involve diligently obtaining prescriptions and documents from pharmacies or dispensing practitioners. However, the number of prescription drug trafficking cases being prosecuted in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit has been increasing with a great many out of state offenders traveling to South Florida to obtain prescription drugs. Without a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program there is no database for which a dispensing doctor or pharmacist can look to determine if a patient is doctor shopping. Many doctors, in good faith, prescribe medications to patients who are lying to them. It is naive to think that a trafficker, dealer or user of prescription drugs is going to truthfully reveal to a doctor that he has just purchased 240 Oxycodone pills earlier that day- from another doctor or clinic. As the statute is written we allow doctors to rely upon the word of an addict to truthfully reveal to a doctor that he has already obtained the maximum supply of pills he can obtain by statute for the month. 27 Good intentioned doctors who are interested in the care of the patient often see through the lies and refuse to prescribe prescription drugs to those who do not need them. The above statutes do not make these doctors' conduct criminal. Even if the doctor suspected that the patient was lying to him and still prescribed drugs to him, the doctor would not be criminally liable unless the sole purpose in writing the prescription was to obtain a monetary benefit for the doctor or the medication prescribed was in excess of what was medically necessary to treat the patient. The "dance" is created when a patient goes to a clinic seeking drugs. He takes an MRI, (fake, forged, showing injury or showing no injury — it does not matter), tells the doctor he has pain and describes some non-existent symptoms. An unscrupulous doctor, unaware or even aware that the patient has already obtained prescription drugs from several other clinics, may prescribe a cocktail of drugs to the patient and dispense them on site for cash. The doctor can plausibly deny that he knew that the patient was doctor shopping. There is no database to check. You can never prove that the doctor's sole purpose in prescribing the drugs was to make money, or that the prescription was not medically necessary. And, the doctor can claim that the patient produced an N EI and described pain and injuries. Unless law enforcement officers follow the patient from clinic to clinic, or stumble upon a patient with multiple prescription bottles on him, there is no available method to prove that he has been doctor shopping and violating the statute. Addicts presented testimony to your Grand Jury as to how they easily obtained prescription drugs from some pain clinics after their family physicians refused to provide drugs to them. They explained how they brought MRI's to pain clinics and lied about 28 their pain. The MPTs did not show injuries that coincided with the pain they described to the doctors. The patients spent a few minutes with the doctors and the doctors then gave the patients a prescription for a cocktail of drugs. The patients paid $1504250 cash for the visit and anywhere from $200 to $800 for the drugs on site. E. The Oxvcodone Pipeline to and from Kentucky Your Grand Jury hoard testimony regarding a prescription drug trafficking pipeline that exists between Kentucky and Florida. Since Kentucky is bordered by seven states, it is extremely difficult to enforce the drug laws in Kentucky. In the 1990's prescription medication abuse exploded in Kentucky. Oxycontin was being used, sold and diverted everywhere. Doctor shopping was rampant. Oxycodone became known in Kentucky as hillbilly heroin. In response to this dilemma, Kentucky, in 1999, enacted the KASPER system, the Kentucky All Scheduled Prescription Electronic Reporting system, a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. It took a couple of years to implement the system and then it took a couple of more years of working to perfect the system so that it became effective. Initially, many doctors did not access the system. There was also a one month delay from when law enforcement requested information from the system to the time they obtained the information they requested. Today, the KASPER system has a one hour real time delay in receiving the information from the time it is imputed into the database. The KASPER system is one of the strictest Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs in the country and has effectively cut off all doctor shopping in Kentucky and become a model for many other states' programs. 29 In August 2005 the Federal Government passed the National All Scheduled Prescription Electronic Reporting Act (NASPER). The NASPER Act allowed and encouraged states to develop and set up prescription drug monitoring programs. It also provided extra funding for states that develop prescription drug monitoring programs that link up or network with other states. It was based on KASPER but was not funded by the Federal Government until recently. As a result of the KASPER system eliminating doctor shopping in Kentucky, Florida, and specifically Broward County, has become a destination for traffickers from Kentucky. They travel to Florida and illegally purchase drugs here and then transport them to Kentucky to sell there. Drug Traffickers from Kentucky sponsor carloads of patients to travel to the pain clinics in Broward County. For example, a sponsor who funds a carload of patients fronts the money for 5 to travel to Broward County. A manager holds the money for the 5 patients. The manager takes the 5 to a clinic, giving the patients the money prior to them entering the clinic. Each patient pays $150 to $250 cash for the doctor's visit. Each patient then receives a cocktail. As previously mentioned, the typical cocktail consists of Roxicodone, Percocet, Xanax and Soma. Roxicodone is Oxycodone in 30 milligram tablets with a street value of $1 per milligram per pill. Soma has a street value of $2 to $3 per pill. And, Xanax has a street value of $2 to $4 per pill. The manager takes the 5 to multiple clinics, then returns to Kentucky and sells the drugs for thousands of dollars. 30 F. Florida Trafficking Penalties for Oxycodone In the State of Florida pursuant to Florida State Statute 893.135(1)(c)l.a., if you knowingly sell, purchase, manufacture, deliver or bring into Florida, or you knowingly are in actual or constructive possession of 4 to 14 grams of Oxycodone, you are facing up to 30 years in Florida State Prison with a 3 year minimum mandatory prison sentence, and a $50,000.00 mandatory fine. In the State of Florida pursuant to Florida State Statute 893.135(1)(c)l.b., if you knowingly sell, purchase, manufacture, deliver or bring into Florida, or you knowingly are in actual or constructive possession of 14 to 28 grams of Oxycodone, you are facing up to 30 years in Florida State Prison with a 15 year minimum mandatory prison sentence, and a $100,000.00 mandatory fine. And, in the State of Florida pursuant to Florida State Statute 893.135(1)(c)l.c., if you knowingly sell, purchase, manufacture, deliver or bring into Florida, or you knowingly are in actual or constructive possession of 28 grams or more, up to 30 kilograms of Oxycodone, you are facing up to 30 years in Florida State Prison with a 25 year minimum mandatory prison sentence, and a $ 500,000.00 fine. It takes approximately 33 pills of 30 milligram Oxycodone to make a gram. So, it would take approximately 132 Oxycodone pills to reach the 3 year minimum mandatory prison level, 462 Oxycodone pills to reach the 15 year minimum mandatory prison level and approximately 924 Oxycodone pills to reach the 25 year minimum mandatory prison level. 31 G. Enforcing the Laws Testimony was received how clinic parking lots are seen with cars bearing Kentucky plates, the occupants waiting for the clinics to open. As one witness testified before your Grand Jury, "If you've ever been to a pain clinic in Broward County recently, people who are waiting to get in the doors to see the doctors are wrapped around the buildings." Armed guards hired by the clinics patrol the lots while video cameras scan the lots. Without a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program law enforcement cannot successfully enforce the existing laws. By the time law enforcement initiates and completes a successful investigation leading to the arrest of . a doctor, user or dealer, several new clinics have opened. Doctor shopping is prevalent as there is no monitoring program. One law enforcement official testified to your Grand Jury, "We've made some incredible progress in the particular places that we're investigating, although I think we could spend the next 20 years investigating different clinics and different providers of the medication and there'd be ten more pop up if you take one out. The only way that there's going to be a change in the problem is the legislative change with the prescription drug monitoring system." Your Grand Jury heard testimony from several law enforcement sources regarding pending criminal investigations involving persons and organizations trafficking in prescription drugs. Additionally, your Grand Jury heard testimony regarding successful prosecutions of doctors and individuals who traffick in prescription drugs. Finally, your Grand Jury heard testimony regarding the law's potential harsh treatment of abusers who are caught with trafficking amounts of Oxvcodone. No indictments are being issued by your Grand Jury as the focus of our inquiry has been upon the proliferation of the pain 32 clinics, and their substantial dangers to our communities. We do note that it was recently reported that over 300 individuals had been arrested in Kentucky for dealing in prescription drugs from South Florida. H. Local Communities' Solutions A couple of cities in Broward County have attempted to restrict the growing number of pain clinics in their cities by enacting ordinances to prohibit the location of pain management clinics that dispense narcotic drugs on site. On July 28, 2009, the City of Dania Beach, Florida enacted Ordinance No. 2009-009 that changed the city's zoning code regarding medical offices that offer on site dispensing of narcotic drugs. Under the ordinance future clinics are not allowed to open in areas marked for redevelopment and they will not be allowed to dispense medications on site. It also defined a Pain management clinic as a "type of medical office providing a variety of personal services by an on -site physician who is currently licensed by either the Florida Board of Medicine or Board of Osteopathic Medicine and his or her staff, which, individually or collectively, are intended to reduce or manage pain." On April 23, 2009, the City of Coconut Creek, Florida passed Ordinance No. 2009- 005 that established a moratorium on the submission, processing, or issuance of Business Tax Receipts for a period of one hundred fifty (150) days to provide the City staff with the necessary time to research the issues surrounding the dispensing of prescription drugs at various business locations within the City. After establishing a moratorium, the City of Coconut Creek, Florida passed Ordinance No. 2009-014 on September 10, 2009. The ordinance aimed to provide adequate protection to the community and establish the 33 legitimacy of Pain Clinic Facilities. It requires officials to scrutinize Special Land Use Applications pain clinics submit to the city, particularly those clinics that only accept cash and not medical insurance. It also regulates owners, employees and operators of pain clinics.' 6 16 Coconut Creek Ordinance No. 2009-014, Section 3 amended Article III Zoning Regulations, Division 8 Master Business List, Section 13-621 Master Business List, Pain Clinics (8)a. j. to read as follows: (8) To provide adequate protection to the community and establish the legitimacy of the facility, the Special Land Use Application Submission for Pain Clinics, must, in addition to the criteria set forth in Section 13- 35, address the following: a. No business approved as a special land use under this section shall limit the form of payment for services or prescriptions to cash only. b. In the event the business applying for approval under this section does not accept insurance reimbursement, it must state the reason for such policy in its application and the failure of any business to accept insurance, Medicare or Medicaid reimbursements shall be considered by the Planning and Zoning Board in making its decision as to the appropriateness of granting a special land use permit. c. The application for special land use shall disclose in detail the owners and operators of the facility, and shall be required to update the owner/operator information annually at the time of application for business tax receipts for the business, or at any time that there is a change of owner/operator. d. No business operating under a special land use permit under this section shall be owned, either in whole, or in part, or have any contractual relationship, whether through employment or by independent contract, with a physician who, within the five year period prior to the date of application fora special land use or at any time after application for a special land use under this section, has been denied the privilege of prescribing, dispensing, administering, supplying or selling any controlled substance or who has, within the five year period prior to the date of application for a special land use under this section or at any time after application for a special land use under this section, had any state Medical Board action taken against his or her medical license as a result of dependency on drugs or alcohol. e. The business shall be operated by a medical director who is a Florida licensed physician. f. The business shall not be owned in whole or in part by any person who has been convicted of or who has pled guilty or nolo contendere to any felony in this State or in any other state within the five year period prior to the date of application for a special land use. However, in no event shall the business be owned in whole or in part by any person who has been convicted of or who has pled guilty or nolo contendere at any time to an offense constituting a felony in this State or in any other state involving the prescribing, dispensin,Supplying or selling of any controlled substance. g. The application for special land use shall include an affidavit by the medical director attesting to the fact that no employees of the facility have been convicted of a drug -related felony within the five year period to the date of application and that the business shall not employ any such convicted felons thereafter. h. Any business approved as a special land use under this section shall maintain the appropriate diagnostic equipment to diagnose and treat patients complaining of chronic pain. 34 The efforts the cities of Dania Beach and Coconut Creek have taken to regulate pain clinics in their cities are commendable. Their actions will certainly benefit their cities; however, their city ordinances only address the issue in their cities. If Dania Beach makes it difficult to open new clinics in Dania Beach, the clinics will open just north of Dania Beach in Fort Lauderdale or south of Dania Beach in Hollywood. If Coconut Creek requires pain clinics to accept insurance in order to operate in Coconut Creek, then the new clinics will open in the city of Margate next door to the city of Coconut Creek. The ordinances also do not affect the already established clinics that are grandfathered in. Those clinics will continue to operate as they have before. While the cities' efforts are admirable, a more universal approach is needed that globally addresses the dilemma in Florida. i. Any business seeking approval as a special land use under this section shall be required to file with its application a natural disaster management plan. j. Any business seeking approval as a special land use under this section shall be required to file with its application a floor plan showing the location and adequate security for protection of any controlled substance to be dispensed in the course of the business. 35 VII. PRESCRIPTION DRUG MONITORING PROGRAM A. Creates an Electronic Database While your Grand Jury was in session, the Florida Legislature passed legislation enacting a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. On June 18, 2009, the Governor signed Senate Bill 440 and Senate Bill 462 into law, effective July 1, 2009. Section 1, Chapter 2009-197 created Florida Statute 893.0551. Section 1, Chapter 2009-198, Laws of Florida created Florida Statute 893.055. Section 2, Chapter 2009-198, Laws of Florida created the Program Implementation and Oversight Task Force within the Executive Office of the Governor. Section 3, Chapter 2009-198, Laws of Florida added subsections (4), (5), and (6) to section 458.309, Florida Statutes, giving the Florida Board of Medicine rulemaking authority over pain clinics. Section 4, Chapter 2009-198, Laws of Florida added subsections (3), (4), and (5) to section 459.005, Florida Statutes, giving the Florida Board of Osteopathic Medicine rulemaking authority over pain clinics. Under Florida Statute 893.055, the Florida Department of Health is responsible for designing and establishing a comprehensive electronic database system that has controlled substance prescriptions provided to it, by December 1, 2010. The law requires the Department of Health, in consultation with the Office of Drug Control, to adopt rules "concerning the reporting, accessing the database, evaluation management, development, implementation, operation, security, and storage of information within the system." The new law requires the pharmacy dispensing the controlled substance and each prescriber who directly dispenses a controlled substance to submit to the electronic system specific detailed information for inclusion in the database. 36 B. Authorizes Boards to Develop Rules The law requires the Department of Health to work with the professional health care licensure boards, such as the Board of Medicine, the Board of Osteopathic Medicine, and the Board of Pharmacy; other appropriate organizations, such as the Florida Pharmacy Association, the Office of Drug Control, the Florida Medical Association, the Florida Retail Federation and the Florida Osteopathic Medical Association, including those relating to pain management; and the Attorney General, the Department of Law Enforcement, and the Agency for Health Care Administration to develop rules appropriate for the prescription drug monitoring program. Florida Statutes 458.309 and 459.005 now require pain clinics to register with the Department of Health and subjects the clinics to annual inspections. Florida Statute 458.309 allows the Board of Medicine to adopt rules setting forth standards of practice for physicians practicing in pain clinics and prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications through pain clinics. The statute also allows the Board of Medicine to adopt rules relating to Facility operations, Physical operations, Infection control requirements, Health and safety requirements, Quality assurance requirements, Patient records, Training requirements for all facility health care practitioners who are not regulated by another board, Inspections and Data collection and reporting requirements. Florida Statute 459.005 allows the Board of Osteopathic Medicine to adopt rules setting forth standards of practice for physicians practicing in pain clinics and prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications and similarly allows the Board of Osteopathic Medicine to adopt the same rules the Board of Medicine can adopt. 37 C. Fifteen (15) Day ReportinE Requirement Each time a controlled substance is dispensed to an individual, the controlled substance shall be reported to the department through the system as soon thereafter as possible, but not more than 15 days after the date the controlled substance is dispensed unless an extension is approved by the department for cause as determined by rule. Any person who willfully and knowingly fails to report the dispensing of a controlled substance as required by this section commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, D. Access to the Database A pharmacy, prescriber, or dispenser shall have access to information in the prescription drug monitoring program's database which relates to a patient of that pharmacy, prescriber, or dispenser in a manner established by the department as needed for the purpose of reviewing the patient's controlled substance prescription history. Other access to the program's database shall be limited to the program's manager. Law Enforcement does not have direct access to information in the prescription drug monitoring program database. Law Enforcement may request information from the program manager during active investigations regarding potential criminal activity, fraud, or theft regarding prescribed controlled substances. Prior to the information being released to Law Enforcement the program manager must verify that the request from Law Enforcement is authentic and authorized by the requesting entity. 38 E. Fundinsz All costs incurred by the department in administering the prescription drug monitoring program shall be funded through federal grants or private funding applied for or received by the state. The department may not commit funds for the monitoring program without ensuring funding is available. The prescription drug monitoring program and the implementation thereof are contingent upon receipt of the nonstate funding. The department and state government shall cooperate with the direct -support organization established pursuant to subsection (1 1) in seeking federal grant funds, other nonstate grant funds, gifts, donations, or other private moneys for the department so long as the costs of doing so are not considered material. Subsection (11) provides that the Office of Drug Control, in coordination with the department, may establish a direct - support organization that has a board consisting of at least five members to provide assistance, funding, and promotional support for the activities authorized for the prescription drug monitoring program. F. Oversight Task Force Section 2, Chapter 2009-198, Laws of Florida created the Program Implementation and Oversight Task Force within the Executive Office of the Governor. The purpose of the task force is to monitor the irnplementation and safeguarding of the electronic system established for the prescription drug monitoring program under section 893.055, Florida Statutes, and to ensure privacy, protection of individual medication history, and the electronic system's appropriate use by physicians, dispensers, pharmacies, law enforcement agencies, and those authorized to request information from 39 the electronic system. The Office of Drug Control must submit a report to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by December 1 of each year which contains a summary of the work of the task force during that year and the recommendations developed in accordance with the task force's purpose. The task force must provide a final report on July 1, 2012, to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. That task force will then expire unless the Legislature reenacts this section. 40 VM- RECONEMENDATIONS A. Prescription Drug Monitoring Program When your Grand Jury was empanelled there was no Prescription Drug Monitoring Program enacted in the State of Florida. For various reasons, for several years, the legislation had always failed to pass. It was obvious to your Grand Jury, from listening to the testimony presented, a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program was and is desperately needed in the State of Florida."' The arguments against a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program simply are not valid when compared to the necessity for one.'8 Halfway through your Grand Jury's term, a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program was enacted in Florida. Your Grand Jury applauds the Legislature for finally passing this important legislation and encourages the Legislature, the Department of Health and the Office of Drug Control to diligently and swiftly implement the system. Many witnesses who testified before your Grand Jury expressed concern that the system would not be adequately funded. As the legislation is currently written, the system is to be funded through federal grants or private funding. Although your Grand Jury has confidence that the direct support organization, which will be established by the Office of Drug Control, will assiduously endeavor to locate funding for the system, your Grand Jury considers funding the system to be of the utmost importance. 17 Even opponents of the legislation that was passed are concerned about the proliferation of pill mills and their effects upon the community. "We are struggling with this. And obviously there's a problem when a bunch of people that live in the mountains of Kentucky are driving to Fort Lauderdale to get prescriptions. Obviously there's something wrong here and it's got to be stopped. I think we all get that. The question is, do we take a bazooka and shoot a fly?" a The opposition to the legislation was summed up as follows: "It is not our job to use government to protect the addicts from themselves. You know, when you hear that whole thing about activist judges and the role of government in people's lives, this is what we're talking about. Should we give up all of our privacy rights to protect an addict from themselves? I'm not giving up my rights. Because somebody out there has got a drug problem and because I want to protect him, therefore, I'm giving up my rights? I don't think that's right. I don't think that's fair." 41 (1) Pour Grand Jury recommends that the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program be swiftly implemented and adequately funded, by any means necessary; and, if the direct support organization cannot obtain the necessary federal e ants or private funding to implement and run the system that the Legislature authorize the expenditure of state government money to fund the program.. Your Grand Jury heard testimony regarding other states' Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs' successes and failures. The Prescription Drug Monitoring Program enacted by the Florida Legislature allows the person who dispensed the controlled substance no more than 15 days after dispensing the controlled substance to report the data to the department through the system. Other states' experiences tell us that a 15 day period to report the information to the database is not going to be effective in stopping doctor shopping. Drug traffickers, dealers and users travel to numerous pain clinics in a single day. Sponsors from Kentucky can bring 5 people to Florida to purchase drugs, go to 5 different clinics, 5 days in a row and then bring 5 different individuals the next trip. Your Grand Jury was informed that Kentucky offered assistance to Florida with implementing our system; assistance that would allow the time period to be similar to Kentucky's. Your Grand Jury recognizes that it was important to get the Legislation enacting the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program passed and that concessions had to be made to accomplish this; however, since the system will not be operating for another year, the technology is certainly available and the political will attainable to reduce the time to report the data to the system. 42 (2) Your Grand Jury recommends that the Legislature change the statute's reporting requirement time from 15 days to a time that makes the program effective in eliminating doctor shopping. There is no requirement in the statute that dispensing doctors access the database to see if a patient has purchased drugs within the past 30 days. The law allows physicians to voluntarily access the database. While a doctor who has an established long term relationship with a patient may not need to access the database, as he is familiar with the patient, doctors at pain clinics who first meet a patient for a few moments and prescribe opioids to that patient, and every other patient, need to access the database. If they do not access the database, they will turn a blind eye to doctor shopping and continue to dispense opioids to traffickers, dealers and users who are doctor shopping. (3) Your Grand Jury recommends that the Florida Legislature, the Florida Board of Medicine and/or the Florida Board of Osteopathic Medicine require all doctors who work at pain clinics to access and view patients' databases prior to prescribing and dispensing medication to patients. The Professional Staff of the Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee noted in their analysis of the Florida Senate Bill that ultimately became Florida Statute 893.055, the goals of other states' "Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs are dependent on the mission of the state agency that operates the program or uses the data. Each state that has implemented a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program has its own set of goals for its program." One of the concerns opponents to the legislation 43 had to the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program was that Law Enforcement would have access to the database without probable cause and that this could violate a person's right to pnvacy.19 Law Enforcement does not have direct access to the information in the database. Law Enforcement may request information from the program manager during active investigations regarding potential criminal activity, fraud or theft regarding prescribed controlled substances. The Legislature recognized people's privacy concerns when it enacted the. Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. Florida Statute 893.0551(5) makes it a third degree felony for any person who willfully and knowingly divulges information contained in the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program database in a manner that violates the statute. Additionally, the Program Implementation and Oversight Task Force is "to monitor the implementation and safeguarding of the electronic system established for the prescription drug monitoring program under section 893.055, Florida Statutes, and to ensure privacy, protection of individual medication history, and the electronic system's appropriate use by physicians, dispensers, pharmacies, law enforcement agencies, and those authorized to request information from the electronic system.'' It is interesting to note that pharmacy records are now readily available to law enforcement. 19 One respected legal scholar, an opponent of the legislation, testified "I can not be clear enough on this. This is the most dangerous legislation of the last 50 years. There is no legal standard that the police are held to." He cautioned,. "If you just turn this over to law enforcement, I tell you, mark my words, five years from now the nightmare stones will be all over. And they won't be you reading about them in the papers. It will be your friends; it will be your children; it will be your spouses." He further predicted, "I assure you, this law will) not withstand a constitutional attack in court. It just won't. You can't have law enforcement have access to your prescription history. It's blatantly illegal and irresponsible." A legislator who pushed for the enactment of the legislation testified that the constitutionality of the legislation was never an issue. Cr! B. Pain Clinics actins as Pharmacies In less than 2 years the number of pain clinics in South Florida went from 4 to 176, unleashing 9 million dose units of Oxycodone in our community every 6 months. In February and March of 2009 there was even a shortage of Oxycodone in South Florida because the demand was so high. Supporters of pain clinics argue that pain clinics provide a necessary medical service to our community and that reforms must not inhibit their doctors who are treating patients with legitimate ailments. Opponents counter that pain clinics are unregulated facilities supplying prescription drugs to traffickers, dealers and users and are practicing profit making medicine rather than treating patients' ailments. Pain Clinics advertise the availability of prescription drugs and dispense prescription drugs to patients. It does not make any sense that a pain clinic that advertises and dispenses prescription drugs would be subjected to lesser standards of practice than a pharmacy. The new legislation now requires pain clinics to register with the Department of Health and subjects them to regulations by the Board of Medicine and Board of Osteopathic Medicine. However, until the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program is implemented, (4) Your Grand Jury recommends that prescription drugs be prohibited from being dispensed at pain clinics, unless there is no pharmacy within 10 miles of the pain clinic. (S) In the alternative to recommendation (4) Your Grand Jury recommends that a pain clinic be allowed to dispense only a 3 day supply of prescription drugs to patients instead of a 30 day supply. 45 (6) Your Grand Jury recommends that pain clinics be prohibited from advertising that they sell prescription drugs. Most Pain Clinics deal exclusively in cash. A few are now advertising that they accept credit cards. None accept medical insurance. Cash only clinics have the ability to avoid scrutiny by not engaging in business with insurance companies and they have the ability to hide proceeds more effectively. If pain clinics accepted medical insurance then the Department of Health could further regulate them, and ensure that they are not contributing to doctor shopping. (7) Your Grand Jury recommends that pain clinics be required to accept major medical insurance. C. The Reculation of Pain Clinics Prior to the enactment of this legislation the Florida Board of Medicine and the Florida Board of Osteopathic Medicine did not have the authority to regulate the pain clinics. They could regulate the doctors who worked at the pain clinics; however, a member of the Florida Board of Medicine testified that the Board could not initiate a complaint against a doctor without a specific complainant filing a complaint against a doctor. With the enacted legislation the Boards of Medicine will have the authority to adopt rules regulating the doctors and pain clinics. A panel of physicians, recently appointed to listen to suggestions and discuss potential regulations and solutions; is currently conducting public hearings regarding rules for pain clinics. Whether the Boards of Medicine will have the fortitude to regulate and discipline its members in this very .R lucrative field is another question. If the Board of Medicine and the Board of Osteopathic Medicine do not exercise their authority to aggressively regulate the doctors and pain clinics then the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program alone will lack the teeth to make an impact against doctor shopping. While your Grand Jury recognizes that the Board of Medicine and the Board of Osteopathic Medicine will earnestly address regulations impacting pain clinics and rules governing physicians who work at pain clinics, your Grand Jury implores the Legislature, the Board of Medicine and the Board of Osteopathic Medicine to consider the following: (8) Your Grand Jury recommends that the Legislature consider whether it is appropriate for nonphysicians to own pain clinics and whether owners of pain clinics should be physicians. (9) Your Grand Jury recommends that a Medical Director for a pain clinic be Board Certified in pain medicine. (10) Your Grand Jury recommends that only doctors Board Certified in Pain Medicine be allowed to dispense drugs from a pain clinic. (11) Your Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Medicine and the Board of Osteopathic Medicine establish minimum qualifications and training for physicians working at pain clinics. (12) Your Grand Jury recommends that background checks be undertaken of all owners, doctors and employees at pain clinics. (13) Your Grand Jury recommends that pain clinics not be owned in whole or part by a person who has been convicted of or who has pled guilty or nolo contendere to an offense that constitutes a felony. 47 (14) Your Grand Jury recommends that pain clinics not be owned, either in whole or in part, by or have any contractual relationship, whether through employment or by independent contract, with a physician who during the course of his practice has been denied the privilege of prescribing, dispensing, administering, supplying, or selling any controlled substance and who has, during the course of his practice, had board action taken against his medical license as a result of dependency on drugs or alcohol. (15) Your Grand Jury recommends that pain clinics not be owned in whole or in part by a person who has been convicted of or who has pled guilty or nolo contendere to an offense that constitutes a misdemeanor, the facts of which relate to the distribution or illegal prescription of any narcotic. D. The Treatment of Patients Throughout your Grand Jury's term, pain medicine specialists questioned how a physician at a pain clinic could medically treat so many patients and provide the appropriate follow up care to the patients. The answer they all opined was that the physicians at the pain clinics could not ethically treat that many patients at a time. (16) Your Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Medicine and Board of Osteopathic Medicine establish standards of care for doctors employed at pain clinics that limit the number of active patients a doctor can medically treat to 100 to ensure that all patients are receiving the proper care and follow up care at the facility for their ailments. (17) Your Grand Jury recommends that pain clinics be allowed to treat only a certain small percentage of patients residing from out of state. 48 IX. CONCLUSION In the past 2 years the number of pain clinics in South Florida mushroomed from 4 to 176, dumping 9 million dose units of Oxycodone in our community every 6 months. Although the pain clinics originated in Broward County, they have spread north quickly throughout the rest of Florida, particularly in the major metropolitan areas. With the enactment of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program and the legislation that provides the medical licensing boards with authority to regulate the pain clinics, there is hope that the legislation will effectively eliminate doctor shopping once the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program is implemented and the medical licensing boards set rules and standards of practice for the pain clinics and the doctors who work at the clinics. While obviously not all pain clinics are Pill Mills, Pill Mills are a true danger whose harms will be affecting our communities long into the future in ways unbeknownst to us. With the implementation of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, our community should see the eradication of Pill Mills and the further emergence of pain medicine that truly addresses patients' ailments. Finally, (18) Your Grand Jury recommends that a future Broward County Grand Jury be empanelled prior to the March 2012 Spring Term and prior to the Program Implementation and Oversight Task Force's presentation of its final report in July 2012, to review the status of Pill Mills in South Florida, the status and effectiveness of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program and the rules and regulations the Florida Board of Medicine and the Florida Board of Osteopathic Medicine enact to regulate the pain clinics. DATED this 19t' day of November, A.D., 2009 Lancea V. LeBlanc, Foreperson Broward County Grand Jury Spring Term, 2009 50 APPENDIX A Chapter 893 DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL 893.0551 Public records exemption for the prescription drug monitoring program.-- (1) For purposes of this section, the term: (a) "Active investigation" has the same meaning as provided in s. 893.055. (b) "Dispenser" has the same meaning as provided in s. 893.055. (c) "Health care practitioner" or "practitioner" has the same meaning as provided in S. 893.055. (d) "Health care regulatory board" has the same meaning as provided in s. 893.055. (e) "Law enforcement agency" has the same meaning as provided in s. 893.055. (f) "Pharmacist" means any person licensed under chapter 465 to practice the profession of pharmacy. (g) "Pharmacy" has the same meaning as provided in s. 893.055. a (h) "Prescriber" has the same meaning as provided in s. 893.055. (2) The following information of a patient or patient's agent, a health care practitioner, a dispenser, an employee of the practitioner who is acting on behalf of and at the direction of the practitioner, a pharmacist, or a pharmacy that is contained in records held by the department under s. 893.055 is confidential and exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution: (a) Name. (b) Address. (c) Telephone number. (d) Insurance plan number. (e) Government -issued identification number. (f) Provider number. (g) Drug Enforcement Administration number. 51 (h) Any other unique identifying information or number. (3) The department shall disclose such confidential and exempt information to the following entities after using a verification process to ensure the legitimacy of that person's or entity's request for the information: (a) The Attorney General and his or her designee when working on Medicaid fraud cases involving prescription drugs or when the Attorney General has initiated a review of specific identifiers of Medicaid fraud regarding prescription drugs. The Attorney General or his or her designee may disclose the confidential and exempt information received from the department to a criminal justice agency as defined in s. 119.011 as part of an active investigation that is specific to a violation of prescription drug abuse or prescription drug diversion law as it relates to controlled substances. The Attorney General's Medicaid fraud investigators may not have direct access to the department's database. (b) The department's relevant health care regulatory boards responsible for the licensure, regulation, or discipline of a practitioner, pharmacist, or other person who is authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense controlled substances and who is involved in a specific controlled substances investigation for prescription drugs involving a designated person. The health care regulatory boards may request information from the department but may not have direct access to its database. The health care regulatory boards may provide such information to a law enforcement agency pursuant to ss. 456.066 and 456.073. (c) A law enforcement agency that has initiated an active investigation involving a specific violation of law regarding prescription drug abuse or diversion of prescribed controlled substances. The law enforcement agency may disclose the confidential and exempt information received from the department to a criminal justice agency as defined in s. 119.011 as part of an active investigation that is specific to a violation of prescription drug abuse or prescription drug diversion law as it relates to controlled substances. A law enforcement agency may request information from the department but may not have direct access to its database. (d) A health care practitioner who certifies that the information is necessary to provide medical treatment to a current patient in accordance with ss. 893.05 and 893.055. (e) A pharmacist who certifies that the requested information will be used to dispense controlled substances to a current patient in accordance with ss. 893.04 and 893.055. (f) A patient or the legal guardian or designated health care surrogate for an incapacitated patient, if applicable, making a request as provided in S. 893.055(7)(c)4. (g) The patient's pharmacy, prescriber, or dispenser who certifies that the information is necessary to provide medical treatment to his or her current patient in accordance with s. 893.055. (4) Any agency or person who obtains such confidential and exempt information pursuant to this section must maintain the confidential and exempt status of that information. 52 (5) Any person who willfully and knowingly violates this section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (6) This section is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2014,.unless reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature. History.--s. 1, ch. 2009-197. 53 APPENDIX B Chapter 893 DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL '893.055 Prescription drug monitoring program.-- (1) As used in this section, the term: (a) "Patient advisory report" or "advisory report" means information provided by the department in writing, or as determined by the department, to a prescriber, dispenser, pharmacy. or patient concerning the dispensing of controlled substances. All advisory reports are for informational purposes only and impose no obligations of any nature or any legal duty on a prescriber, dispenser, pharmacy, or patient. The patient advisory report shall be provided in accordance with s. 893.13(7)(a)8. The advisory reports issued by the department are not subject to discovery or introduction into evidence in any civil or administrative action against a prescriber, dispenser, pharmacy, or patient arising out of matters that are the subject of the report; and a person who participates in preparing, reviewing, issuing, or any other activity related to an advisory report may not be permitted or required to testify in any such civil action as to any findings, recommendations, evaluations, opinions, or other actions taken in connection with preparing, reviewing, or issuing such a report. (b) "Controlled substance" means a controlled substance listed in Schedule II, Schedule III, or Schedule IV in s. 893.03. (c) "Dispenser" means a pharmacy, dispensing pharmacist, or dispensing health care practitioner. (d) "Health care practitioner" or "practitioner" means any practitioner who is subject to licensure or regulation by the department under chapter 458, chapter 459, chapter 461, chapter 462, chapter 464, chapter 465, or chapter 466. (e) "Health care regulatory board" means any board for a practitioner or health care practitioner who is licensed or regulated by the department. (f) "Pharmacy" means any pharmacy that is subject to hcensure or regulation by the department under chapter 465 and that dispenses or delivers a controlled substance to an individual or address in this state. (g) "Prescriber" means a prescribing physician, prescribing practitioner, or other prescribing health care practitioner. (h) "Active investigation" means an investigation that is being conducted with a reasonable, good faith belief that it could lead to the filing of administrative, civil, or criminal proceedings, or that is ongoing and continuing and for which there is a reasonable, good faith 54 anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution in the foreseeable future. (i) "Law enforcement agency" means the Department of Law Enforcement, a Florida sheriff s department, a Florida police department, or a law enforcement agency of the Federal Government which enforces the laws of this state or the United States relating to controlled substances, and which its agents and officers are empowered by law to conduct criminal investigations and make arrests. (2)(a) By December 1, 2010, the department shall design and establish a comprehensive electronic database system that has controlled substance prescriptions provided to it and that provides prescription information to a patient's health care practitioner and pharmacist who inform the department that they wish the patient advisory report provided to them. Otherwise, the patient advisory report will not be sent to the practitioner, pharmacy, or pharmacist. The system shall be designed to provide information regarding dispensed prescriptions of controlled substances and shall not infringe upon the legitimate prescribing or dispensing of a controlled substance by a prescriber or dispenser acting in good faith and in the course of professional practice. The system shall be consistent with standards of the American Society for Automation in Pharmacy (ASAP). The electronic system shall also comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) as it pertains to protected health information (PHI), electronic protected health information (EPHI), and all other relevant state and federal privacy and security laws and regulations. The department shall establish policies and procedures as appropriate regarding the reporting, accessing the database, evaluation, management, development, implementation, operation, storage, and security of information within the system. The reporting of prescribed controlled substances shall include a dispensing transaction with a dispenser pursuant to chapter 465 or through a dispensing transaction to an individual or address in this state with a pharmacy that is not located in this state but that is otherwise subject to the jurisdiction of this state as to that dispensing transaction. The reporting of patient advisory reports refers only to reports to patients, pharmacies, and practitioners. Separate reports that contain patient prescription history information and that are not patient advisory reports are provided to persons and entities as authorized in paragraphs (7)(b) and (c) and s. 893.0551. (b) The department, when the direct support organization receives at least $20,000 in nonstate moneys or the state receives at least $20,000 in federal grants for the prescription drug monitoring program, and in consultation with the Office of Drug Control, shall adopt rules as necessary concerning the reporting, accessing the database, evaluation, management, development, implementation, operation, security, and storage of information within the system, including rules for when patient advisory reports are provided to pharmacies and prescribers. The patient advisory report shall be provided in accordance with s. 893.13(7)(a)8. The department shall work with the professional health care licensure boards, such as the Board of Medicine, the Board of Osteopathic Medicine, and the Board of Pharmacy, other appropriate organizations, such as the Florida Pharmacy Association, the Office of Drug Control, the Florida Medical Association, the Florida Retail Federation, and the Florida Osteopathic Medical Association, including those relating to pain management; and the Attorney General, the Department of Law Enforcement, and the Agency for Health Care Administration to develop rules appropriate for the prescription drug monitoring 55 program. (c) All dispensers and prescribers subject to these reporting requirements shall be notified by the department of the implementation date for such reporting requirements. (3) The pharmacy dispensing the controlled substance and each prescriber who directly dispenses a controlled substance shall submit to the electronic system, by a procedure and in a format established by the department and consistent with an ASAP -approved format, the following information for inclusion in the database: (a) The name of the prescribing practitioner, the practitioner's federal Drug Enforcement Administration registration number, the practitioner's National Provider Identification (NPI) or other appropriate identifier, and the date of the prescription. (b) The date the prescription was filled and the method of payment, such as cash by an individual, insurance coverage through a third party, or Medicaid payment. This paragraph does not authorize the department to include individual credit card numbers or other account numbers in the database. (c) The full name, address, and date of birth of the person for whom the prescription was written. (d) The name, national drug code, quantity, and strength of the controlled substance dispensed. (e) The full name, federal address of the pharmacy o dispensed. If the controlled pharmacist, the practitioner registration number, and address. Drug Enfo r other to substance s full n rcement Administration registration number, and cation from which the controlled substance was was dispensed by a practitioner other than a ame, federal Drug Enforcement Administration (f) The name of the pharmacy or practitioner, other than a pharmacist, dispensing the controlled substance and the practitioner's National Provider Identification (NPI). (g) Other appropriate identifying information as determined by department rule. (4) Each time a controlled substance is dispensed to an individual, the controlled substance shall be reported to the department through the system as soon thereafter as possible, but not more than 15 days after the date the controlled substance is dispensed unless an extension is approved by the department for cause as determined by rule. A dispenser must meet the reporting requirements of this section by providing the required information concerning each controlled substance that it dispensed in a department -approved, secure methodology and format. Such approved formats may include, but are not limited to. submission via the Internet, on a disc, or by use of regular mail. (5) When the following acts of dispensing or administering occur, the following are exempt 56 from reporting under this section for that specific act of dispensing or administration: (a) A health care practitioner when administering a controlled substance directly to a patient if the amount of the controlled substance is adequate to treat the patient during that particular treatment session. (b) A pharmacist or health care practitioner when administering a controlled substance to a patient or resident receiving care as a patient at a hospital, nursing home, ambulatory surgical center, hospice, or intermediate care facility for the developmentally disabled which is licensed in this state. (c) A practitioner when administering or dispensing a controlled substance in the health care system of the Department of Corrections. (d) A practitioner when administering a controlled substance in the emergency room of a licensed hospital. (e) A health care practitioner when administering or dispensing a controlled substance to a person under the age of 16. (f) A pharmacist or a dispensing practitioner when dispensing a one-time, 72-hour emergency resupply of a controlled substance to a patient. (6) The department may establish when to suspend and when to resume reporting information during a state -declared or nationally declared. disaster. (7)(a) A practitioner or pharmacist who dispenses a controlled substance must submit the information required by this section in an electronic or other method in an ASAP format approved by rule of the department unless otherwise provided in this section. The cost to the dispenser in submitting the information required by this section may not be material or extraordinary. Costs not considered to be material or extraordinary include, but are not limited to, regular postage, electronic media, regular electronic mail, and facsimile charges. (b) A pharmacy, prescriber, or dispenser shall have access to information in the prescription drug monitoring program's database which relates to a patient of that pharmacy, prescriber, or dispenser in a manner established by the department as needed for the purpose of reviewing the patient's controlled substance prescription history. Other access to the program's database shall be limited to the program's manager and to the designated program and support staff, who may act only at the direction of the program manager or, in the absence of the program manager, as authorized. Access by the program manager or such designated staff is for prescription drug program management only or for management of the program's database and its system in support of the requirements of this section and in furtherance of the prescription drug monitoring program. Confidential and exempt information in the database shall be released only as provided in paragraph (c) and s. 893,0551. 57 (c) The following entities shall not be allowed direct access to information in the prescription drug monitoring program database but may request from the program manager and, when authorized by the program manager, the program manager's program and support staff, information that is confidential and exempt under s. 893.0551. Prior to release, the request shall be verified as authentic and authorized with the requesting organization by the program manager, the program manager's program and support staff, or as determined in rules by the department as being authentic and as having been authorized by the requesting entity: 1. The department or its relevant health care regulatory boards responsible for the licensure, regulation, or discipline of practitioners, pharmacists, or other persons who are authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense controlled substances and who are involved in a specific controlled. substance investigation involving a designated person for one or more prescribed controlled substances. 2. The Attorney General for Medicaid fraud cases involving prescribed controlled substances. 3. A law enforcement agency during active investigations regarding potential criminal activity.. fraud, or theft regarding prescribed controlled substances. 4. A patient or the legal guardian or designated health care surrogate of an incapacitated patient as described in s. 893.0551 who, for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the database information, submits a written and notarized request that includes the patient's full name, address, and date of birth, and includes the same information if the legal guardian or health care surrogate submits the request. The request shall be validated by the department to verify the identity of the patient and the legal guardian or health care surrogate, if the patient's legal guardian or health care surrogate is the requestor. Such verification is also required for any request to change a patient's prescription history or other information related to his or her information in the electronic database. Information in the database for the electronic prescription drug monitoring system is not discoverable or admissible in any civil or administrative action, except in an investigation and disciplinary proceeding by the department or the appropriate regulatory board. (d) The following entities shall not be allowed direct access to information in the prescription drug monitoring program database but may request from the program manager and, when authorized by the program manager, the program manager's program and support staff, information that contains no identifying information of any patient, physician, health care practitioner, prescriber, or dispenser and that is not confidential and exempt: 1. Department staff for the purpose of calculating performance measures pursuant to subsection (8). 2. The Program Implementation and Oversight Task Force for its reporting to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives regarding the W prescription drug monitoring program. This subparagraph expires July 1, 2012. (e) All transmissions of data required by this section must comply with relevant state and federal privacy and security laws and regulations. However, any authorized agency or person under s. 893.0551 receiving such information as allowed by s. 893.0551 may maintain the information received for up to 24 months before purging it from his or her records or maintain it for longer than 24 months if the information is pertinent to ongoing health care or an active law enforcement investigation or prosecution. (8) To assist in fulfilling program responsibilities, performance measures shall be reported annually to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and .the Speaker of the House of Representatives by the department each December 1, beginning in 2011. Data that does not contain patient, physician, health care practitioner, prescriber, or dispenser identifying information may be requested during the year by department employees so that the department may undertake public health care and safety initiatives that take advantage of observed trends. Performance measures may include, but are not limited to, efforts to achieve the following outcomes: (a) Reduction of the rate of inappropriate use of prescription drugs through department education and safety efforts. (b) Reduction of the quantity of pharmaceutical controlled substances obtained by individuals attempting to engage in fraud and deceit. (c) Increased coordination among partners participating in the prescription drug monitoring program. (d) Involvement of stakeholders in achieving improved patient health care and safety and reduction of prescription drug abuse and prescription drug diversion. (9) Any person who willfully and knowingly fails to report the dispensing of a controlled substance as required by this section commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. (10) All costs incurred by the department in administering the prescription drug monitoring program shall be funded through federal grants or private funding applied for or received by the state. The department may not commit funds for the monitoring program without ensuring funding is available. The prescription drug monitoring program and the implementation thereof are contingent upon receipt of the nonstate funding. The department and state government shall cooperate with the direct -support organization established pursuant to subsection (11) in seeking federal grant funds, other nonstate grant funds, gifts, donations, or other private moneys for the department so long as the costs of doing so are not considered material. Nonmaterial costs for this purpose include, but are not limited to, the costs of mailing and personnel assigned to research or apply for a grant. Notwithstanding the exemptions to competitive -solicitation requirements under s. 287.057(5)(f), the department shall comply with the competitive -solicitation requirements under s. 297.057 for the 59 procurement of any goods or services required by this section. (11) The Office of Drug Control, in coordination with the department, may establish a direct -support organization that has a board consisting of at least five members to provide assistance, funding, and promotional support for the activities authorized -for the prescription drug monitoring program. (a) As used in this subsection, the term "direct -support organization" means an organization that is: 1. A Florida corporation not for profit incorporated under chapter 617, exempted from filing fees, and approved by the Department of State. 2. Organized and operated to conduct programs and activities; raise funds; request and receive grants, gifts, and bequests of money; acquire, receive, hold, and invest, in its own name, securities, funds, objects of value, or other property, either real or personal; and make expenditures or provide funding to or for the direct or indirect benefit of the department in the furtherance of the prescription drug monitoring program. (b) The direct -support organization is not considered a lobbying firm within the meaning of s. 11.045. (c) The director of the Office of Drug Control shall appoint a board of directors for the direct -support organization. The director may designate employees of the Office of Drug Control, state employees other than state employees from the department, and any other nonstate employees as appropriate, to serve on the board. Members of the board shall serve at the pleasure of the director of the Office of Drug Control. The director shall provide guidance to members of the board to ensure that moneys received by the direct -support organization are not received from inappropriate sources. Inappropriate sources include, but are not limited to, donors, grantors, persons, or organizations that may monetarily or substantively benefit from the purchase of goods or services by the department in furtherance of the prescription drug monitoring program. (d) The direct -support organization shall operate under written contract with the Office of Drug Control. The contract must, at a minimum, provide for: 1. Approval of the articles of incorporation and bylaws of the direct -support organization by the Office of Drug Control. 2. Submission of an annual budget for the approval of the Office of Drug Control. 3. Certification by the Office of Drug Control in consultation with the department that the direct -support organization is complying with the terms of the contract in a manner consistent with and in furtherance of the goals and purposes of the prescription drug monitoring program and in the best interests of the state. Such certification must be made CSI annually and reported in the official minutes of a meeting of the direct -support organization. 4. The reversion, without penalty, to the Office of Drug Control, or to the state if the Office of Drug Control ceases to exist, of all moneys and property held in trust by the direct -support organization for the benefit of the prescription drug monitoring program if the direct -support organization ceases to exist or if the contract is terminated. 5. The fiscal year of the direct -support organizatiori, which must begin July 1 of each year and end June 30 of the following year. 6. The disclosure of the material provisions of the contract to donors of gifts, contributions, or bequests, including such disclosure on all promotional and fundraising publications, and an explanation to such donors of the distinction between the Office of Drug Control and the direct -support organization. 7. The direct -support organization's collecting, expending, and providing of funds to the department for the development, implementation, and operation of the prescription drug monitoring program as described in this section and s. 2, chapter 2009-198, Laws of Florida, as long as the task force is authorized. The direct -support organization may collect and expend funds to be used for the functions of the direct -support organization's board of directors, as necessary and approved by the director of the Office of Drug Control. In addition, the direct -support organization may collect and provide funding to the department in furtherance of the prescription drug monitoring program by: a. Establishing and administering the prescription drug monitoring program's electronic database, including hardware and software. b. Conducting studies on the efficiency and effectiveness of the program to include feasibility studies as described in subsection (13). c. Providing funds for future enhancements of the program within the intent of this section. d. Providing user training of the prescription drug monitoring program, including distribution of materials to promote public awareness and education and conducting workshops or other meetings, for health care practitioners, pharmacists, and others as appropriate. e. Providing funds for travel expenses. f. Providing funds for administrative costs, including personnel, audits, facilities, and equipment. g. Fulfilling all other requirements necessary to implement and operate the program as outlined in this section. (e) The activities of the direct -support organization must be consistent with the goals and 61 mission of the Office of Drug Control, as determined by the office in consultation with the department, and in the best interests of the state. The direct -support organization must obtain a written approval from the director of the Office of Drug Control for any activities in support of the prescription drug monitoring program before undertaking those activities. (f) The Office of Drug Control, in consultation with the department, may permit, without charge, appropriate use of administrative services, property, . and facilities of the Office of Drug Control and the department by the -direct -support organization, subject to this section. The use must be directly in keeping with the approved purposes of the direct -support organization and may not be made at times or places that would unreasonably interfere with opportunities for the public to use such facilities for established purposes, Any moneys received from rentals of facilities and properties managed by the Office of Drug Control and the department may be held by the Office of Drug Control or in a separate depository account in the name of the direct -support organization and subject to the provisions of the letter of agreement with the Office of Drug Control. The letter of agreement must provide that any funds held in the separate depository account in the name of the direct -support organization must revert to the Office of Drug Control if the direct -support organization is no longer approved by the Office of Drug Control to operate in the best interests of the state. (g) The Office of Drug Control, in consultation with the department, may adopt rules under s. 120.54 to govern the use of administrative services, property, or facilities of the department or office by the direct -support organization. (h) The Office of Drug Control may not permit the use of any administrative services, property, or facilities of the state by a direct -support organization if that organization does not provide equal membership and employment opportunities to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, gender, age, or national origin. (i) The direct -support organization shall provide for an independent annual financial audit in accordance with s. 215.981. Copies of the audit shall be provided to the Office of Drug Control and the Office of Policy and Budget in the Executive Office of the Governor. 0) The direct -support organization may not exercise any power under s. 617.0302(12) or (16). (12) A prescriber or dispenser may have access to the information under this section which relates to a patient of that prescriber or dispenser as needed for the purpose of reviewing the patient's controlled drug prescription history. A prescriber or dispenser acting in good faith is immune from any civil, criminal, or administrative liability that might otherwise be incurred or imposed for receiving or using information from the prescription drug monitoring program. This subsection does not create a private cause of action, and a person may not recover damages against a prescriber or dispenser authorized to access information under this subsection for accessing or failing to access such information. (13) To the extent that funding is provided for such purpose through federal or private grants or gifts and other types of available moneys, the department, in collaboration with the Office 62 of Drug Control, shall study the feasibility of enhancing the prescription drug monitoring program for the purposes of public health initiatives and statistical reporting that respects the privacy of the patient, the prescriber, and the dispenser. Such a study shall be conducted in order to further improve the quality of health care services and safety by improving the prescribing and dispensing practices for prescription drugs, taking advantage of advances in technology, reducing duplicative prescriptions and the overprescribing of prescription drugs, and reducing drug abuse. The requirements of the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting (NASPER) Act are authorized in order to apply for federal NASPER funding. In addition, the direct -support organization shall provide funding for the department, in collaboration with the Office of Drug Control, to conduct training for health care practitioners and other appropriate persons in using the monitoring program to support the program enhancements. (14) A pharmacist, pharmacy, or dispensing health care practitioner or his or her agent, before releasing a controlled substance to any person not known to such dispenser, shall require the person purchasing, receiving, or otherwise acquiring the controlled substance to present valid photographic identification or other verification of his or her identity to the dispenser. If the person does not have proper identification, the dispenser may verify the validity of the prescription and the identity of the patient with the prescriber or his or her authorized agent. Verification of health plan eligibility through a real-time inquiry or adjudication system will be considered to be proper identification. This subsection does not apply in an institutional setting or to a long-term care facility, including, but not limited to, an assisted living facility or a hospital to which patients are admitted. As used in this subsection, the term "proper identification" means an identification that is issued by a state or the Federal Government containing the person's photograph, printed name, and signature or a document considered acceptable under 8 C.F.R. s. 274a.2(b)(1)(v)(A) and (B). (15) The Agency for Health Care Administration shall continue the promotion of electronic prescribing by health care practitioners, health care facilities, and pharmacies under S. 408.0611. (16) By October 1, 2010, the department shall adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to administer the provisions of this section, which shall include as necessarythe reporting, accessing, evaluation, management, development, implementation, operation, and storage of information within the monitoring program's system. History.--s. 1, ch. 2009-198. 'Note. --Section 2, ch. 2009-198, provides that: "(1) The Program Implementation and Oversight Task Force is created within the Executive Office of the Governor. The director of the Office of Drug Control shall be a nonvoting, ex officio member of the task force and shall act as chair. The Office of Drug Control and the Department of Health shall provide staff support for the task force. 63 "(a) The following state officials shall serve on the task force: 1. The Attorney General or his or her designee. "2. The Secretary of Children and Family Services or his or her designee. "3. The Secretary of Health Care Administration or his or her designee. "4. The State Surgeon General or his or her designee. "(b) In addition, the Governor shall appoint 12 members of the public to serve on the task force. Of these 12 appointed members, one member must have professional or occupational expertise in computer security; one member must be a Florida -licensed, board -certified oncologist; two members must be Florida -licensed, fellowship -trained, pain -medicine physicians; one member must be a Florida -licensed primary care physician who has experience in prescribing scheduled prescription drugs; one member must have professional or occupational expertise in e-Prescribing or prescription drug monitoring programs; two members must be. Florida -licensed pharmacists; one member must have professional or occupational expertise in the area of law enforcement and have experience in prescription drug investigations; one member must have professional or occupational expertise as an epidemiologist and have a background in tracking and analyzing drug trends; and two members must have professional or occupational expertise as providers of substance abuse treatment, with priority given to a member who is a former substance abuser. " (c) Members appointed by the Governor shall be appointed to a term of 3 years each. Any vacancy on the task force shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment, and any member appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve only for the unexpired term of the member's predecessor. "(d) . Members of the task force and members of subcommittees appointed under subsection (4) shall serve without compensation, but are entitled to reimbursement for per diem and travel expenses as provided in s. 112,061, Florida Statutes. "(e) The task force shall meet at least quarterly or upon the call of the chair. "(2) The purpose of the task force is to monitor the implementation and safeguarding of the electronic system established for the prescription drug monitoring program under s. 893.055 Florida Statutes, and to ensure privacy, protection of individual medication history, and the electronic system's appropriate use by physicians, dispensers, pharmacies, law enforcement agencies, and those authorized to request information from the electronic system. "(3) The Office of Drug Control shall submit a report to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by December 1 of each year whichcontains a summary of the work of the task force during that year and the recommendations developed in accordance with the task force's purpose as provided in subsection (2). Interim reports may be submitted at the discretion of the chair. "(4) The chair of the task force may appoint subcommittees that include members of state agencies that are not represented on the task force for the purpose of soliciting input and recommendations from those state agencies as needed by the task force to accomplish its purpose as provided in subsection (2). In addition, the chair may appoint subcommittees as necessary from among the members of the task force in order to efficiently address specific issues. If a state agency is to be represented on any subcommittee, the representative shall be the head of the agency or his or her designee. The chair may designate lead and contributing agencies within a subcommittee. "(5) The direct -support organization created in s. 893.055, Florida Statutes, may collect, expend, and provide funds and other assistance to the department for the development, implementation, and operation of the task force. "(6) The task force shall provide a final report in accordance with the task force's purpose as provided in subsection (2) on July 1, 2012, to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Such report shall be prepared using only data that does not identify a patient, a prescriber, or a dispenser. The task force shall expire and this section is repealed on that date unless reenacted by the Legislature." 65 APPENDIX C Chapter 458 Medical Practice 458.309 Rulemaldng authority.-- (1) The board has authority to adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement the provisions of this chapter conferring duties upon it. (2)(a) Any rules which the board adopts relating to the classroom phase of medical education shall not apply to any person who is enrolled in the classroom phase of medical education or has graduated prior to or at the time the rule becomes effective, so long as such person does not interrupt his or her medical education. (b)1. Any rules which the board adopts relating to the clinical clerkship phase of medical education shall not apply to any person who is enrolled in the clinical clerkship phase of medical education prior to or at the time the rule becomes effective, so long as such person does not interrupt his or her medical education. 2. Rules adopted by the Florida Board of Medical Examiners prior to October 1, 1986, and relating to clinical clerkships for graduates of foreign medical schools do not apply to any such sraduate who: a. Had completed a clinical clerkship prior to the effective date of the rule; or b. Had begun a clinical clerkship but had not completed the clinical clerkship prior to the effective date of the rule, so long as the clinical clerkship took no longer than 3 years to complete. (c) Any rules which the board adopts relating to residency shall not apply to any person who has begun his or her residency prior to or at the time the rule becomes effective, so long as such person does not interrupt the residency. (3) All physicians who perform level 2 procedures lasting more than 5 minutes and all level 3 surgical procedures in an office setting must register the office with the department unless that office is licensed as a facility pursuant to chapter 395. The department shall inspect the physician's office annually unless the office is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or an accrediting organization subsequently approved by the Board of Medicine. The actual costs for registration and inspection or accreditation shall be paid by the person seeking to register and operate the office setting in which office surgery is performed. (4) All privately owned pain -management clinics, facilities, or offices, hereinafter referred to as "clinics," which advertise in any medium for any type of pain -management services, or employ a physician who is primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications, must register with the department by January 4, 2010, unless that clinic is licensed as a facility pursuant to chapter 395. A physician may not practice medicine in a.pain-management clinic that is required to but has not registered with the department. Each clinic location shall be registered separately regardless of whether the clinic is operated under the same business name or management as another clinic. If the clinic is licensed as a health care clinic under chapter 400, the medical director is responsible for registering the facility with the department. If the clinic is not registered pursuant to chapter 395 or chapter 400, the clinic shall, upon registration with the department, designate a physician who is responsible for complying with all requirements related to registration of the clinic. The designated physician shall be licensed under this chapter or chapter 459 and shall practice at the office location for which the physician has assumed responsibility. The department shall inspect the clinic annually to ensure that it complies with rules of the Board of Medicine adopted pursuant to this subsection and subsection (5) unless the office is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency approved by the Board of Medicine. The actual costs for registration and inspection or accreditation shall be paid by the physician seeking to register the clinic. (5) The Board of Medicine shall adopt rules setting forth standards of practice for physicians practicing in privately owned pain -management clinics that primarily engage in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications. Such rules shall address, but need not be limited to, the following subjects: (a) Facility operations; (b) Physical operations; (c) Infection control requirements, (d) Health and safety requirements; (e) Quality assurance requirements; (f) Patient records; (g) Training requirements for all facility health care practitioners who are not regulated by another board; (h) Inspections; and (i) Data collection and reporting requirements. A physician is primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications when the majority of the patients seen are prescribed or dispensed controlled substance medications for the treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain. Chronic nonmalignant pain is pain unrelated to cancer which persists beyond the usual course of the disease or the injury that is the cause of the pain or more than 90 days after 67 surgery. (6) A privately owned clinic, facility, or office that advertises in any medium for any type of pain -management services or employs one or more physicians who are primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substances is exempt from the registration provisions in subsection (4) if the maj ority of the physicians who provide services in the clinic, facility, or office primarily provide surgical services. History.--ss. 1, 8, ch. 79-302; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 5, 22, 25, 26, ch. 86-245; s. 4, ch. 91- 429; s. 200, ch. 97-103; s. 120, ch. 98-200; s. 92, ch. 99-397; s. 3, ch. 2009-198. APPENDIX D Chanter 459 OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE 459.005 Rulemaking authority.-- (1) The board has authority to adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement the provisions of this chapter conferring duties upon it. (2) All physicians who perform level 2 procedures lasting more than 5 minutes and all level 3 surgical procedures in an office setting must register the office with the department unless that office is licensed as a facility pursuant to chapter 395. The department shall inspect the physician's office annually unless the office is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or an accrediting organization subsequently approved by the Board of Osteopathic Medicine. The actual costs for registration and inspection or accreditation shall be paid by the person seeking to register and operate the office setting in which office surgery is performed. (3) All privately owned pain -management clinics, facilities, or offices, hereinafter referred to as "clinics," which advertise in any medium for any type of;pain-management services, or employ a physician who is licensed under this chapter and who is primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications, must register with the department by January 4, 2010, unless that clinic is licensed as a facility under chapter 395. A physician may not practice osteopathic medicine in a pain -management clinic that is required to but has not registered with the department. Each clinic location shall be registered separately regardless of whether the clinic is operated under the same business name or management as another clinic. If the clinic is licensed as a health care clinic under chapter 400, the medical director is responsible for registering the facility with the department. If the clinic is not registered under chapter 395 or chapter 400, the clinic shall, upon registration with the department, designate a physician who is responsible for complying with all requirements related to registration of the clinic. The designated physician shall be licensed under. chapter 458 or this chapter and shall practice at the office location for which the physician has assumed responsibility. The department shall inspect the clinic annually to ensure that it complies with rules of the Board of Osteopathic Medicine adopted pursuant to this subsection and subsection (4) unless the office is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency approved by the Board of Osteopathic Medicine. The actual costs for registration and inspection or accreditation shall be paid by the physician seeking to register the clinic. (4) The Board of Osteopathic Medicine shall adopt rules setting forth standards of practice for physicians who practice in privately owned pain -management clinics that primarily engage in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications. Such rules shall address, but need not be limited to, the following subjects: (a) Facility operations; (b) Physical operations; .• (c) Infection control requirements; (d) Health and safety requirements; (e) Quality assurance requirements; (f) Patient records; (g) Training requirements for all facility health care practitioners who are not regulated by another board; (h) Inspections; and (i) Data collection and reporting requirements. A physician is primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substance medications when the majority of the patients seen are prescribed or dispensed controlled substance medications for the treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain. Chronic nonmalignant pain is pain unrelated to cancer which persists beyond the usual course of the disease or the injury that is the cause of the pain or more than 90 days after surgery. (5) A privately owned clinic, facility, or office that advertises in any medium for any type of pain -management services or employs one or more physicians who are primarily engaged in the treatment of pain by prescribing or dispensing controlled substances is exempt from the registration provisions in subsection (3) if the majority of the physicians who provide services in the clinic, facility, or office primarily provide surgical services. History.--ss. 1, 6, ch. 79-230; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 27, 29, ch. 86-290; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s 121, ch. 98-200; s. 101, ch. 99-397; s. 4, ch. 2009-198. 70 AGENDA REQUEST TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ITEM NQ-.=-- DATE: June 1, 2010 REGULAR [XX] PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT[] PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Daniel S. McIntyre SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement - Treasure Coast Research Park BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum FUNDS AVAILABLE, PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the Interlocal Agreement and authorize the Chairman to sign the Agreement. COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: APPROVED [ ] DENIED [ ] OTHER: Approved 5-0 County Attorney: Daniel S. McIntyre Originating Dept. Finance: (Check for copy only, if applicable) ;;4 Faye W. Outlaw, MPA County Administrator Review and Approvals 101&- Ping. & Dev. Services Dir Purchasing: _ I tterlee TCERDA Exec.Dir: County Eng.: Ben DeVries Eff. 5/96 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THIS IS AN AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of , 2010, by and between ST. LUCIE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (the "County"), the TREASURE COAST EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, an authority established pursuant to Chapter 159, Florida Statutes (the "TCERDA"), the FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY, an authority created and established by the City Commission of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida (the "FPUA"), and the CITY OF FORT PIERCE, a municipality organized under the laws of the State of Florida (the "City"). WHEREAS, the County owns property within the Treasure Coast Research Park (the "Park") as identified in Exhibit "A" and graphically depicted on the map attached as Exhibit "B" and WHEREAS, the St. Lucie County School District ("District") and the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund ("TIITF") also own property within the Park; and WHEREAS, TCERDA leases property in the Park from the County and operates the Park pursuant to Chapter 159, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, in order to develop the Park, water and wastewater service must be provided; and WHEREAS, the Park is located in FPUA's retail service area and FPUA has the capability to provide water and wastewater service to the Park; and WHEREAS, as a prerequisite for the County and TCERDA to use the FPUA utility services, the City requires the County to enter into a Voluntary Annexation Agreement, a copy of said Agreement being attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein; and WHEREAS, in order for the Park to be successful, the Park must be competitive economically; and WHEREAS, to ensure the Park's success, the County represents that it has: previously invested over $10 million in acquiring land needed for the development of the park; and 5: \ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Uti Iitiesmpd Page 1 10 budgeted $4.2 million to pay for infrastructure needed to develop the Park; and WHEREAS, the County intends to spend the $4.2 million for infrastructure improvements in the Park upon completion of the Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, FPUA, County, TCERDA and City hereby agree and covenant on the terms and conditions hereinafter stated. 1. GENERAL, This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Section 163.01, Florida Statutes, the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act. This Agreement embodies the whole understanding of the parties. There are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained herein, and other than those contained in the Annexation Agreement attached hereto. This Agreement shall supersede all previous telecommunications, representations, or agreements, either verbal or written, between the parties hereto. 2. WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE. The FPUA agrees that it shall provide water and wastewater.service to parcels in the Park under the terms and conditions of the attached Agreement. 3. CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION. If required by the City, the County agrees to sign the City's standard annexation agreement on a parcel by parcel basis as that parcel needs water and wastewater service. For the purpose of this Agreement, the term "parcel" means individual parcels as leased by TCERDA to tenants approved by TCERDA. The City agrees that the City will not exercise any rights to annex the specific County -owned parcel referenced in the annexation agreement sooner than ten (10) years from the date that a certificate of occupancy is issued for a specif is parcel. After ten (10) years from the date of a certificate of occupancy is issued for a specific parcel, that parcel shall automatically be eligible for annexation and may be immediately annexed by the City upon request regardless of contiguity. The City shall only require the County to sign annexation agreements on County -owned parcels that are leased by TCERDA to a tenant approved by TCERDA requiring water and wastewater service. The City agrees to apply the same policy to those parcels within the Park that are owned by the District and TIITF. The City further agrees to offer to enter into agreements similar to this Agreement with the District and TIITF within six months from the date of this Agreement. The offer shall remain open for a period of five (5) years from the date it was made. The City agrees to modify annexation agreements for parcels within the Park upon which buildings and improvements have been constructed that are in effect on the date this 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Utilities.wpd Page 2 Agreement becomes effective so that the City will not exercise any rights to annex those parcels within ten (10) years from the effective date of this Agreement. If the City annexes a parcel within the Park into the jurisdiction of the City, the City agrees that it shall not prevent the operation of a Research Park without the express written consent of the County or unless the City is specifically required to do so by clear mandate of a State or Federal court or administrative agency. Upon annexation, the City may consider utilizing economic development incentives such as ad valorem tax abatements on a case -by -case basis for targeted industries, to the extent the incentives are available. The County will meet or exceed the total economic development incentive package granted by the City to the extent those incentives are available through JGIG, impact fee waivers, ad valorem tax abatement, rent abatement, concurrency waivers and other incentives as appropriate. The parties stipulate and agree that this agreement on behalf of the City with respect to the Conditions of Annexation is a material consideration for the County to enter into this Agreement and except for the City's agreement to the Conditions of Annexation, the County would not have entered into this Agreement. 4. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall begin upon approval of this Agreement by both the City and the County and shall terminate no later than f ifty (50) years from the date of this Agreement. At the end of the term, any parcel within the Park not previously annexed shall automatically be eligible for annexation and may be immediately annexed by the City upon request regardless of contiguity. If at any time during the term of this Agreement the County conveys a parcel within the Park to a non-public entity, said parcel shall also be eligible to be annexed within the City regardless of contiguity. 5. NOTICE. All notices or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly given if delivered in person or sent by certified mail return receipt requested and addressed as follows: If to County: 5t. Lucie County Administrator 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 With a copy to: St. Lucie County Attorney 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Public Works Director 2300 Virginia Avenue, Annex Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 5: \ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Uti litiesmpd Page 3 If to FPUA : Director of Utilities Fort Pierce Utilities Authority 206 South Sixth Street Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 If to TCERDA : With a copy to: FPUA Attorney Fort Pierce Utilities Authority 206 South Sixth Street Fort Pierce, Florida 34950 With a copy to: Executive Director R.I. MacLaren, Esq. Indian River Research & Education Center Post Office Drawer 40 University of Florida - IFAS Boca Raton, Florida 33429-9974 2199 South Rock Road Fort Pierce, Florida 34945 6. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party shall assign this Agreement to any other persons or firm without first obtaining the other parties' approval. 7. FILING. This Agreement and any subsequent amendments thereto shall be filed with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St. Lucie County pursuant to Section 163.01(11), Florida Statutes. ATTEST: Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: County Attorney 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-UtiIitiesmpd Page 4 ATTEST: FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY BY: Secretary Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS BY: FPUA Attorney ATTEST: CITY OF FORT PIERCE BY: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS BY: City Attorney TREASURE COAST EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY: Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS BY: Attorney 5:\ATTY\AGREEMNT\INTERLOC\TCERDA-FPUA-FP-Utilities.wpd Page 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION DUNN PARCEL Tract #1: The NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, less the West 10 feet and less the North 53 feet and a parcel of land lying in the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, described as follows: From the 1/4 comer of the North line of said Section 14, run South 00043'30" East along the 1/4 line a distance of 53.0 feet to a point on the South right of way line of Canal #46 of the North St. Lucie River Drainage District; then run North 89049'55" East along said right of way line a distance of 10.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continue North 8904955" East along said right of way line a distance of 70.84 feet; thence run South 10014'55" West a distance of 366.35 feet to a point on the East right of way line of Coolidge Road, said point being 10 feet perpendicular distance from the 114 Section line; thence North 00043'30" West along said East right of way line a distance of 394.5 feet to the point of beginning, St. Lucie County, Florida. Tract #2: The NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, EXCEPTING therefrom rights of way for public roads and drainage canals, said land lying and being in St. Lucie County, Florida. Tract #3: The E 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, LESS the North 263 feet of the South 353 feet, AND the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, less the North 263 feet of the South 353 feet, and the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, less road and canal rights -of -way, containing 53.75 acres, more or less. AND NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, LESS the West 10 feet for road right-of-way, containing 10.59 acres, more or less. LESS AND EXCEPT: A parcel of land located in Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida; said parcel being more particularly described as follows: The North 41' feet of the South 90' feet of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, less and except the East 104' feet for canal and road right of way. AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT: EXHIBIT A parcel of land located in Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida; said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Southeast corner of the NE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East; thence S 89°44'25" W along the south line of the Northeast 1/4 a distance of 580.06' feet; thence N 00015'34" W a distance of 90.00' feet to the Point of Beginning; thence S 89044'25" W a distance of 200.00' feet; thence N 00015'34" W a distance of 315.00' feet; thence N 8904425" E a distance of 200.00' feet; thence S 00015'34" E a distance of 315.00' feet to the Point of Beginning. AND ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT: The North 189.44 feet of the South 542.44 feet of the East 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 lying and being in Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida. BOLIN PARCEL PARCEL 1: The East 14.0 acres of the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, less rights -of -way for public roads and drainage canals. PARCEL 2: The West 14.0 acres of the East 28 acres of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, less rights -of -way for public roads and drainage canals. PARCEL 3: The Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, less rights -of -way for public roads and drainage canals and further less and except the East 28 acres thereof. PARCEL 4: The North 100 feet of that parcel described as the South 1 /2 of the South 1 /2 of Section 10, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, lying East of the Sunshine State Parkway; said lands lying and being in St. Lucie County, Florida, excepting there from all rights -of -way for public roads and drainage canals. 2 PARCEL 5: The South 1/2 of the South 1/2 of Section 10, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, lying East of the Sunshine State Parkway; said lands lying and being in St. Lucie County, Florida, excepting there from all rights -of -way for public roads and drainage canals; less and excepting there from the North 100 feet thereof. DONES PARCEL The South 1269.37 feet of the West 1/2, of the Southeast 1/4, of the Southwest 1/4, of Section 11, Township 35 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida. LESS AND EXCEPT the South 56.50 feet for drainage rights -of -way. WAS PARCEL The South 251.20 feet of the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 14, Township 35 South, Range 39 East. Less and except the East 70.00 Feet thereof for Rock Road" / "Coolidge Road" right of way and less and except the South 90.00 Feet thereof for "Picos Road" right of way. HISTORIC POOR FARM PARCEL The East half of the Southeast quarter, and the South half of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section Fourteen (14), Township Thirty-five (35) South and Range Thirty-nine (39) East containing one hundred acres, more or less. 5AACQ\WP\JoAnn\Research d6 Education ParMegal bescription.docx 3 AGENDA REQUEST TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ITEM NO. Ix DATE: Junel , 2010 REGULAR [x ] PUBLIC HEARING [I CONSENT[] PRESENTED BY: SUBMITTED BY(DEPT): County Attorney Katherine Mackenzie -Smith Assistant County Attorney SUBJECT: Code Enforcement Case No. 65167- 7704 Salerno, Fort Pierce, FL - Unsightly and Unsanitary Matters BACKGROUND: See attached memorandum FUNDS AVAILABLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: RECOMMENDATION CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize a 30 day notice be sent to the property owners ordering them to remove the unsightly and unsanitary matters on the property or St. Lucie County will have it abated, including, but not limited to, removing the dead trees, killing or removing the bees, and place a lien on the property. COMMISSION ACTION: CONCURRENCE: [� APPROVED [ ] DENIED f� [ ] OTHER: - Faye W. Outlaw, MPA Approved 5-0 County Administrator Review and Approvals [XI County Attorney. [ x ]Code CompliaVc�j_Daniel S. McIntyre er INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Katherine Mackenzie -Smith, Assistant County Attorney C.A. NO: 10-0676 DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Code Enforcement Case No. 65167- 7704 Salerno, Fort Pierce, FL - Unsightly and Unsanitary Matters BACKGROUND: St. Lucie County has received code compliance complaints from the neighbors of this property at 7704 Salerno in Fort Pierce and have exhausted all avenues to gain compliance. The property was cited by Code Enforcement on May 4, 2010. The property was found to be in violation of Section 1-9-32 St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances, Public Nuisance -numerous dead trees, including tree debris, and a large bees nest. The property was also found in violation of Section 13.09.0 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code - Exterior Property Maintenance - the exterior of the property needs repair, repaint or cleaning due to chipped and peeling paint, mold/mildew and discolored areas. Chapter 67-1998, Laws of Florida, Section 5 finds that all lots in recorded subdivisions in St. Lucie County, outside of municipalities, shall be kept free from debris or any other matter which by reason of physical conditions or other peculiar characteristics might cause damage to life or property within the immediate area surrounding the same. The neighbors have stated that the bees have created nests in the garage door creating honeycombs and hundreds of bees. Neighborhood children have been stung. If the Board of County Commissioners finds it wise and expedient and serves a public health or safety purpose for such property to be cleaned of junk, trash and debris, weeds or other growth or materials, including, dead trees, honeycombs and bees, the Board of County Commissioners shall cause a notice to be delivered requiring abatement of this nuisance. If the nuisance is not abated, the Board may order those lots to be cleared of materials. RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize a 30 day notice be sent to the property owners ordering them to remove the unsightly and unsanitary matters on the property or St. Lucie County will have it abated, including, but not limited to, removing the dead trees, killing or removing the bees, and place a lien on the property. KMS/cb Encl. HAAgendaMemo-KMS-7704 Salemo.wpd Respectfully submitted, Katherine Mackenzie -Smith Assistant County Attorney T NOTICE To: Kurt Runge Kristen McConnell 7704 Salerno Fort Pierce, FL 34951 Property: 7704 Salerno, Fort Pierce, FL As the owner of record of the property above described, you are hereby notified that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, on Tuesday, June 1, 2010 determined that a public nuisance exists upon such property, because your lot is in an unsightly and unsanitary condition, caused by overgrown vegetation, dead trees and a large bees nest. Neighborhood children have been stung. You are hereby notified that you must abate this nuisance within thirty (30) days. If you fail to abate the nuisance, the Board of County Commissioners will have it done and the cost thereof will be levied as an assessment against your property. If you desire to be heard by the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners on this matter, please contact the St. Lucie County Attorney's Office at 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 34982; 772-462-1441 and you will be scheduled to appear at the July 6, 2010 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 6:00 pm or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Commission Chambers, Third Floor of the County Administration Annex, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. THIS NOTICE DATED AND EXECUTED and dated this 1st day of June, 2010. S:\ATTV\Code Enforcement\Notice-Salernompd Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida t INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TO: Board of County Commissioners Faye W. Outlaw, County Administrator FROM: Daniel S. McIntyre, County Attorney C.A. NO.: 10-0698 DATE: June 1, 2010 SUBJECT: Definition of Contiguous - 153.53, Florida Statutes Sections 153.52 and 153.53 use the term "contiguous" in defining the term "District" which is the subject matter of Chapter 153, Chapter II, Florida Statutes dealing with the establishment and operation of County Utility Districts. The following excerpts of these two statutes are pertinent: 153.52 Definitions. --As used in this law, the following words and terms shall have the following meanings, unless some other meaning is plainly intended: (1) "District" shall mean any unincorporated contiguous area comprising part but not all of the area of any county created into and existing as a water and sewer district pursuant and subject to this law, having the rights, powers and privileges granted in this law. (emphasis added) 153.53 Establishment of districts in unincorporated areas.-- (1) Subject to this law, the board of county commissioners of any county may establish one or more districts as it shall in its discretion determine to be necessary in the public interest. Any such district shall consist of only unincorporated contiguous areas of such county, comprising part but not all of the areas of such county. As used herein, "unincorporated areas" shall mean all lands outside of the incorporated boundaries of towns, cities, or other municipalities of the state whether existing under the general low or special act and shall include any lands, areas, or property within the district of any special tax districts, school district, or any other public corporations or bodies politic of any nature whatsoever, except municipalities. (emphasis added) There are additional definitions within Chapter 153, Part I, that are also pertinent to the analysis of the term "contiguous". These include: a 153.02 Definitions. --As used in this part the following words and terms shall have the following meanings unless some other meaning is plainly indicated: (1) The word "county" shall mean any of the several counties of the state operating under the authority granted by this chapter. 153.03 General grant of power. --Any of the several counties of the state which may hereafter come under the provisions of this chapter as hereinafter provided is hereby authorized and empowered: (1) To purchase and/or construct and to improve, extend, enlarge, and reconstruct a water supply system or systems or sewage disposal system or systems, or both, within such county and any adjoining county or counties and to purchase and/or construct or reconstruct water system improvements or sewer improvements, or both, within such county and any adjoining county or counties and to operate, manage and control all such systems so purchased and/or constructed and all properties pertaining thereto and to furnish and supply water and sewage collection and disposal services to any of such counties and to any municipalities and any persons, firms or corporations, public or private, in any of such counties; provided, however, that none of the facilities provided by this chapter may be constructed, owned, operated or maintained by the county on property located within the corporate limits of any municipality without the consent of the council, commission or body having general legislative authority in the government of such municipality unless such facilities were owned by the county on such property prior to the time such property was included within the corporate limits of such municipality. No county shall furnish any of the facilities provided by this chapter to any property already being furnished like facilities by any municipality without the express consent of the council, commission or body having general legislative authority in the government of such municipality. Finally, the term "County" is defined by Section 7.59 as follows: 7.59 St. Lucie County. --The boundary lines of St. Lucie County are as follows: Beginning on the eastern boundary of the State of Florida at a point where the north section line of section thirteen, township thirty-seven south, range forty-one east, produced easterly, would intersect the same; thence westerly on the north line of said section and other sections to the northwest corner of section eighteen, township thirty-seven south, range forty-one east; thence south on the range line between ranges forty and forty-one east, to the township line between townships thirty-seven and thirty-eight south; thence west on the said township line to the range line dividing ranges thirty-six and thirty-seven east; thence north on said range line, concurrent with the east boundary of Okeechobee County, to the northwest corner of township thirty-four south, range thirty-seven east; thence east on the township line dividing townships thirty-three and thirty-four south, to the Atlantic Ocean; thence continuing easterly to the eastern boundary of the State of Florida; thence southerly along said east boundary, including the waters of the Atlantic Ocean within the jurisdiction of the State of Florida, to the place of beginning. Starting with this last statute first, the Legislature defines the County to include all of the property within the stated legal description. Note that there are no exclusions for water bodies located within these boundaries, and note further that the boundary specifically includes, "the waters of the Atlantic Ocean". Thus it is reasonable to conclude that water bodies within the stated legal description are part of the County. Second, Section 153.02, Florida Statutes, confirms that the use of the term "County" in Chapter 153, Florida Statutes, is tied to the term "County" as defined by the Legislature (see above). Third, Section 153.52, Florida Statutes, defines "District" to mean, any unincorporated contiguous area comprising part but not all of the area of any county". Section 153.53, Florida Statutes, then expresses the same concept in a negative construct, "Any such district shall consist of only unincorporated contiguous areas of such county, comprising part but not all of the areas of such county." These statutes use the term "unincorporated". The plain meaning of the term unincorporated, is areas within a county that have not been "incorporated" as municipalities. (See Florida Constitution, Article VIII, Local Government, which delineates between counties and municipalities). The term "contiguous" is not defined in Chapter 153, Florida Statutes. A plain meaning of "contiguous" means "connecting without a break; within a common boundary." The juxtaposition of "unincorporated" next to "contiguous" appears susceptible of only one meaning - that there is no incorporated municipality between unincorporated areas of the District boundary. As there is no incorporated municipality that totally separates the unincorporated land on the mainland due west of the unincorporated land in North Hutchinson Island, for purposes of Chapter 153, Part II, Florida Statutes, North Hutchinson Island is properly within the County's Utility District. It is accurate that outside the contents of Chapter 153, Florida Statutes, the Legislature uses the word "contiguous" in many statutes and in many disparate contexts. Some of these occurrences include definitions of "contiguous" for purposes of its use, but most, like Chapter 153, Florida Statutes, do not contain a definition of the term. In those situations where the term is not defined, it can generally be deduced from the context of the statute. See, for instance, Section 8.0002, Florida Statutes, defining Congressional Districts, and Section 10.00002, defining State Senate and House of Representative Districts. Each of Congressional District 16, State Senate District 28, and State House of Representatives District 80 include Hutchinson Island as contiguous with mainland Fort Pierce, notwithstanding the water body that separates the two land masses. Another statutory example where the term "contiguous" is used that includes intervening water bodies is found in Section 171.031, Florida Statutes: 171.031 Definitions. --As used in this chapter, the following words and terms have the following meanings unless some other meaning is plainly indicated: (11) "Contiguous" means that a substantial part of a boundary of the territory sought to be annexed by a municipality is coterminous with a part of the boundary of the municipality. The separation of the territory sought to be annexed from the annexing municipality by a publicly owned county park; a right-of-way for a highway, road, railroad, canal, or utility; or a body of water, watercourse, or other minor geographical division of a similar nature, running parallel with and between the territory sought to be annexed and the annexing municipality, shall not prevent annexation under this act, provided the presence of such a division does not, as a practical matter, prevent the territory sought to be annexed and the annexing municipality from becoming a unified whole with respect to municipal services or prevent their inhabitants from fully associating and trading with each other, socially and economically. However, nothing herein shall be construed to allow local rights -of -way, utility easements, railroad rights -of -way, or like entities to be annexed in a corridor fashion to gain contiguity; and when any provision or provisions of special law or laws prohibit the annexation of territory that is separated from the annexing municipality by a body of water or watercourse, then that law shall prevent annexation under this act. Based on the above analysis, it appears that the Utility District is properly constituted under Chapter 153, Part II, Florida Statutes, to include the unincorporated areas on North Hutchinson Island as there is no incorporated areas which totally segregate North Hutchinson Island from the mainland unincorporated areas. DSM/caf