Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformal Minutes 05-08-2009BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA INFORMAL WORKSHOP Date: May 8, 2009 Convened: 3:00 p.m. Adjourned: 4:20 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairperson, Paula A. Lewis, Charles Grande, Chris Dzadovsky, Chris Craft, Doug Coward Others Present: Faye Outlaw, County Administrator, Lee Lowery, Asst. County Administrator, Dan McIntyre, County Attorney, Marie Gouin, OMB Director, Robin Myers, Asst. Growth Management Director, Lauri Case, Utilities Director, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy Clerk The County Attorney made opening remarks and reviewed the points discussed at the last meeting. He advised the Board he had received a revised draft agreement from the City as late as yesterday and advised the Board he and the Growth Management Director had developed a matrix. This matrix is current. The County Attorney stated the County has a draft agreement as well as the City of Ft. Pierce however the County's draft goes past the Research and Education Park where the city's agreement talks solely about the Research and Education Park. The agreement seems to be focused solely on the Park. The County had stated a term of 20 years and the city did not state a term. The County's map was broad where the city's map was on the pazk itself. The city's agreement designates annexing all parcels east of the Turnpike with no county objection as well as annexing west of the Pazk without county objection where the area urbanizes and contiguity is needed. The city's position is that the county cannot issue permits once the area is annexed into the city. The Board was concerned with the county issuing the permit in its early infancy stages of the park they put in that the city would not annex the pazk. This is an issue for the city. The city has a strong desire to annex the Park. This is the fundamental difference. The city will allow the county to comment on the permits. The County Attorney stated the annexation within the JPA (outside the park) they have broaden this on Page 3 where it states the county would waive contiguity to all property annexed by the city inside the FPUA retail service area. His recollection was that it was in the context of a broader agreement. If they could reach an agreement on a broader set of goals, they would be willing to discuss waiver of contiguity on certain properties, not in the context of an agreement just on the park. Com. Coward alluded to the language in the matrix and the Board's position. The County Attorney stated they needed to revise the language in the agreement and the matrix to reflect the Boazd's position. Com. Coward stated they reached some consensus on the Research Park, but not on the global issues. Com. Craft stated he had an issue with the fact that this agreement had nothing of what they had discussed at the last meeting. The County gave a lot of input as to what the document should have and this is not even close. He is not interested in entertaining this issue anymore. He knows what the Board had offered and the city's agreement is not based on what the County had sent them. Com.Grande stated he believed what the Board may have offered may be confusing. The city's agreement was much simpler and direct. Com. Grande stated he had a discussion with everyone at the city. He believes at the end of the day if they can get the city their tax base they can begin to understand the park comes with a huge bill that they aze not in a desire of paying. Com. Coward stated he wished to talk about ~rocess, strategy and approach since they have this issue on the agenda for the May 18 meeting. The County Administrator stated in speaking with the City Manager he stated the city was not desirous of going through the 171 process and dealing with all the other issues in our resolution at this time. They only wish to focus on the park and proceed with the annexation and their agreement track with this. He asked after this meeting to give him feed back if the Boazd was not close to what they presented. He felt another joint meeting prior to the 18`h would be needed. Com. Grande stated in the last city meeting Com. Beck stated that he felt the City Attorney had failed to react to the county's gracious offer of 171 reliefs and it did not appear in any documentation. Com. Coke requested this item be delayed and made the motion to do so. She was of the same mind. She believed as did the other Commissioners they were not sure the Attorney and the Administrator had heard the City Commission's in their last meeting because what they were representing the Tuesday before did not track with the Commissions desires. The Attorney concurred and stated they would be bringing back updated. The County Attorney stated the revised agreement; in the language he believes this was an attempt to address the 171 concept by the City Attorney. The revised agreement as they have sent it still focuses on the pazk. It still says they will annex it, they will issue permits. The county can do joint planning and the charrette but, without any of the other benefits, the county would waive contiguity and this is their deal. Com. Dzadovsky stated he recalled the city had requested legislative annexation and the county had stated they were against it. The next idea was a global agreement concerning pazks, beach transfers, and hold harmless the Research Pazk, the Jail, the Airport and the Landfill. He recalled the Commission stating they could enter into an interlocal agreement and they do not want to do anything with the Reseazch Park except annex the properties to the north. It was his impression this was to be part of a much lazger picture. Com. Dzadovsky stated f the city goes through with voting on this issue on May 18`h he would like for the County Attorney to show them the county is ready to file suit to stop it due to lack of contiguity. If it moves forwazd then he would like to drop all funding for the Research Park, abolish the TCERDA Board and withdraw from the project. The city does not have the means, the staff as the BOCC does. Unless the City of Ft. Pierce comes to the table with $11 million as the county has plus the money for the infrastructure, he would not be willing to move forwazd with the project and the city of Ft. Pierce is putting the taxpayers at risk. Com. Craft stated he did not agree with Com. Dzadovsky's comments and they cannot go back on a project they have invested in. He believes they can work things out with the city. He is not happy with how the things have gone at this point, however he believes in many of the points made, the reason the conversation was changed was because their attorney stated it was based on their annexation agreements signed by FPUA customers. Com. Craft recommended obtaining an Attorney General's opinion. The County Attorney advised the Boazd that in his opinion the current annexation proposal does not meet state law. Com. Coward stated he shared Com. Dzadovsky's frustration. The City of Port St. Lucie invested 40 million of dollars in partnership with the county to make those research areas possible. The City of Ft. Pierce has not invested anything and is not bringing anything to the table but road blocks and obstacles. The Board needs to let them know the County is interested in a global solution and they need to continue to work with the County in good faith. If they proceed on the 18`x' to vote on this issue then the county will have no choice 2 but to move forward to prevent illegal annexation and they should be made aware of this. They should also be made aware the Board wishes to continue the dialogue and move forward with what was started with at the meeting. The County Attorney stated he and the Growth Management Director will be prepared to attend the meeting. A memo has been prepared by the Growth Management Director indicating the issues raised by the Board and maps would be presented as well. If they Adopt, the county will have 30 days to file with the Circuit Courts and be heard by a 3 Judge panel. The way things are going with the docket it could be 1 year or more before it is heard. They could adopt the ordinance but there would be a cloud over it in terms of whether or not it was effective. There would also be mediation required which would also give more opportunity for discussion. He advised the Board the AGO is also a long process. Com. Dzadovsky stated he would like for our Attorney to have a letter in hand indicating they will move forward with the law suit should the City decide to move forward with the adoption of the Ordinance. Com. Craft concurred with sending the city a letter advising them of the Board's position before the 18th and they wish to work on a more global solution and if not, this is the county's only choice. Com. Grande stated there is not an understanding on their part about what a partnership is with the Research Park if they wish to partner with us, they need to take out their checkbook. Com. Coward recommended adding in the letter the fact that the City of Port St. Lucie has partnered with the County providing $40 million for the projects and if the City of Ft. Pierce wishes to be a partner with the county, the Board would expect them to step up financially. Com. Dzadovsky asked if they could have an interlocal agreement giving the county control. The County Attorney stated the statute is new and was adopted in 2006 and there are presently no cases to review. The city cannot delegate its permit responsibility to the county if it annex's. He was advised a city building official contacted Tallahassee and was advised the city would need to issue permits. He also talked to him about dual jurisdiction and he did not even wish to do that, he believed it was not legally possible. Com. Dzadovsky addressed the annexation agreement with the city and the fact that it was due to the utilities. He asked where our closest connection was and if we could utilize our own utilities. The Utilities Director stated the closest would be coming from Holiday Pines if they wished to get out of the bulk agreement. If the Board gives direction they can use Holiday Pines, from a smaller plant, or the other plant they have been talking about at the Airport. Com. Dzadovsky stated he believes this may be an opportunity, and if the only way we can do this is through our utility then they need to investigate it and see what the cost would be. Com. Craft questioned if he was alluding to breaking the agreement and on what grounds. Com. Coward stated the intent of the past agreement had already been violated (i.e. going beyond the box) Com. Craft stated he did not wish to spend taxpayer dollars on law suits and they have discussed this several times. He wants to make sure what is discussed in defensible. Com. Dzadovsky stated they are going to do it whether they annex and the county files the non-contiguity petition and so that will be one aspect, or withdraw from the voluntary annexation agreement with FPUA and bring in our own utility and he believes this would be another solution. Com. Lewis stated the law states we cannot cross the lines and would not want to go there. Com. Dzadovsky stated he was looking for solutions. Com. Coward stated they have tried to negotiate in good faith not only with the past agreement which the intent has been violated, but have recently tried to bring global compromises between the county and city and have not received anything back, not one of the county's single issues. They are not negotiating in good faith. They need to understand the county is not fooling around and the county has invested a lot of money and time along with jeopardizing huge economic opportunities and the county will not sit back and let them continue not to negotiate in good faith. Com. Craft recommended going back and looking at the map. He asked Com. Grande to look beyond Breckenridge. Com. Grande stated what is happening is the county would be facilitating what they want and that is what needs to stop and this is the place to stop it. The Board concurred they wish to have another meeting before the May 18th meeting. Com. Lewis stated she is prepared to go to conflict resolution since point to point does not cut it, but beyond that she would not make any statement about pulling funds. Com. Dzadovsky stated the TCERDA Board deserves more respect as does the Research Park and they need to get through this agreement as soon as possible to make it happen. The County Administrator stated she would contact the Ft. Pierce City Manager regarding the scheduling of a meeting before the 18th. The County Attorney stated that he, the County Administrator and the Growth Management Director would attend the meeting on the 18th, object to the annexation if they proceed, (having a court reporter present), if they decide to proceed they will come back to the Board and recommend initiating conflict resolution and authorize the County Attorney to file a petition for cert. Com. Dzadovsky stated he would like information relating to the county utilizing their own utility and withdrawing from the utility agreement and the voluntary annexation agreement with FPUA. The Utilities Director stated the only plant available to provide water to that area is Holiday Pines and presently there are no funds available. Com. Coward stated his biggest frustration is that he does not wish to spend money and time fighting the city. He felt they are jeopardizing years of investment. He requested the letter stipulate the county's primary interest is to work cooperatively with the city however, he would like the letter to be strong enough to advise them the draft agreement sent forth by the city sends the question to the Commission is the city working in good faith? Or something to that affect. It was the consensus of the Board to send the letter to the city officials and not to staff. With no further issues to discuss the meeting was adjourned. 4