Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWorkshop Minutes 01-13-2009BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA ANNEXATION AGREEMENT WORKSHOP Date: January 13, 2009 Convened: 4:00 p.m. Adjourned: 6:05 p.m. Commissioners Present: Chairperson, Paula A Lewis, Charles Grande, Chris Craft, Chris Dzadovsky, Doug Coward Others Present: Faye Outlaw, County Administrator, Lee Ann Lowery, Asst. County Administrator, Dan McIntyre, County Attomey, Lauri Case, Utilities Director, Mark Satterlee, Growth Management Director, Don West, Public Works Director, Leo Cordeiro, Solid Waste Director, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy Clerk City of Ft. Pierce: City Manager Mr. Recor The County Attorney gave a brief summary of where the county presently stands and reviewed the new statute. This statute was not in existence when the county entered into the agreement with the City of Ft. Pierce. He advised the Board he had notified the City in resolution form and they have 60 days to review and comment. They are now in the middle of the process. He stated he believed the city was more interested in the legislative process of annexations and these are non voluntary. Process 171 does not permit legislative annexations the following are the 171 issues outlined by the County Attorney. Term: Would be a maximum of 20 years per Section 171.203(12) renegotiations must begin at least 18 months before the termination date. Parties: St. Lucie County City of Ft. Pierce Note: the City of Port St. Lucie and any independent taxing districts within unincorporated service area may request participation in the negotiations per Section 171.203(2) and (3). Service Areas: Identify municipal service area Identify unincorporated service area Services: Public Safety Water and Wastewater (Existing Interlocal Agreement) Fire, emergency rescue and medial (St. Lucie County Fire District) Road ownership, construction and maintenance Conservation, parks and recreation Stormwater Management and drainage Service Delivery Issues: Transfer of services and infrastructure, e.g. roads, drainage, Parks Report by City and City's planned service delivery Joint use of facilities Annexation Area: Tied to service areas? Process and schedule Voluntary Annexations within the municipal service area: Eliminate contiguity requirement? Effect on service delivery Eliminate compactness requirement? Effect on service delivery Allow creation of enclaves? Effect on service delivery Exempt County facilities/properties from annexation? Involuntary (Legislative) Annexations: Develop "flexible process" for securing consents to annexations. Statute does not empower the parties to waive "consent" by Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement. At initial meeting, City staff seemed to "tie" City agreement on the Interlocal service boundary agreement to agreement by County on Specified "legislative" annexations. Require the City to undertake/fund a fiscal analysis impact upon the County regarding annexations under their process Special Sites: Research Park Agreement not to annex? Void previous consent to annex? Joint planning/charette of area surrounding park Infrastructure delivery and services Airport: Agreement not to annex? Void previous consent to annex? Identify unincorporated service area? Discuss permitting land-use control (Airport Industrial Park West) Landfill: Current agreement allows City to annex in 2009 Renegotiate Discuss permitting land use control Jail: Agreement not to annex? Voids previous consent to annex Discuss permitting land use control Land Use/Zoning/Concurrency Incorporate service areas into comprehensive plans Clarify when city may rezone annexed property (after inclusion in City's Comprehensive plan or upon annexation Joint planning? Concurrency management system agreement 2 Com. Coward commented on the Wal Mart Distribution site agreement. The County Attorney stated there was an agreement reached with the city that deferred annexation for a certain period of years. Mr. Recor, City Manager, addressed the Board's questions and stated the city has provided Wal-Mart with written notice that they became adjacent to the city in 2004. There was an addition 10 year annexation deferral as well as paying full advalorem taxes for another 10 years so it would be close to 20 years before they would be paying full taxes and would be considered annexed in the year 2014. He stated the city is interested in Provinces and have contacted the city of Port St. Lucie regarding this issue. Com. Coward commented on this project and stated they felt this project was detrimental to the county and is one of the worst projects they have seen. Mr. Recor stated the project has not been approved and he does not know if they would make the same mistake in an annexation agreement that they would agree to certain things. Com. Coward stated the project has serious problems and has a school site outside the urban service boundary that would set precedent to the entire county. Mr. Recor stated the county will know on the 20`t' of January what the city's intent will be. Com. Coward stated he understands the city's motive however one main concern is the concept of involuntary annexations. He stated he would not support any issues that would include involuntary annexations this would be his deal breaker. The County Attorney stated in terms of the 171 process he does not believe the agreement would allow the county to waive consent on behalf of the property owner. He believes the city did not want the county to waive, but not to object to their legislative proposal. Com. Dzadovsky concurred with Com. Coward he has heard from his district residents that this would not be acceptable and would prefer to be considered on a voluntary basis. Forced annexation would be problematic for him. Com. Coward stated in reviewing the document he did not see an emphasis on economic development and would like to see strategies included. Com. Grande stated he believes they need to follow through since it has been identified and it is difficult to bring businesses to an area that is not stable and not settled or resolved. They need to work out what that area will be like whether it is through a charette or another methodology. It is important to create an environment that would be positive for tax paying business to come in. Com.Craft stated he believes if they can find a document they can agree upon identify what is their top priority and for him it is the Research Park, the Landfill and the Airport. He does not have an issue with expanding the city's utility box up to the urban service boundary area. Com. Coward stated he does not wish to dismantle any project or years of work to reach consensus. The county has put in too many hours and money. He is not opposed to annexation he is opposed to bad annexation and a development coming to the county and the county saying "no" and then them going to the city. Com. Grande stated he did not wish to lose site of the fact all are interrelated. They need to have an agreement that covers all overtime. 3 Com. Dzadovsky addressed the fact he felt they were given an ultimatum that if they did not come up with some type of an agreement by the 20`~ the city would move forward with the annexation. The County Attorney stated staff will introduce their objection for the record and staff will recommend the Board initiate a conflict resolution. Com. Dzadovsky requested the jail be also one of the identified items. He believes they need to change the economic dynamics of the county and get away from depending on roof tops. Com. Craft asked Mr. Recor if the felt his Commission would be taking a position on moving forward knowing the issues that were outlined today and asked if he felt the city would defer the annexations. Mr. Recor stated the 171 part 2 agreement does not get the city where it wanted to be and that was yellow to green. He believes if there are too many issues on the table and his elected officials believe there are too many hurdles they are more likely to move forward and press on as opposed if the Board was to identify for example 5 issues that were important they may consider continued discussion. Com. Craft recommended having a smaller 171 agreement allowing the city to leap frog the Research Park and the Jail to get to where they want to go on the other side. Com. Grande stated this would be a two way agreement stating they can go where they were planning to go, but are giving up the right to annex those properties. Com. Coward stated he believed what the County Attorney had previously stated the annexation proposal does not meet state law and the county could challenge this and probably would win. He does not believe they should give up the store and then have the city come back and annex. He felt they had set up an agreement previously and it has been violated. He believes they wish to work together and is optimistic and believes they do not need to do quick steps without thinking it through. He would like to point out priority issues and send city staff back with the information. Com. Grande stated he met with Mr. Recor and various city personnel and he concurs with Com. Coward's remarks. He believes there is no reason to assume they would jump out and take any action. Com. Coward commented on continuing discussions on the contiguity issues and stated he does not wish to have developments come to the county, being denied and going to the city because they no longer have contiguity issues. Com. Grande stated he believes they agree the contiguity issues are up for discussion in the negotiations. He hopes they will not get into discussions where it is one or the other. The County Attorney stated there is a lot of opportunity when discussing the contiguity issues. Mr. Recor stated a good place to start may be if the county was to agree to let the city control land use within the retail service area and they would back off from the Research Park and let the county handle and implement the master plan. Com. Craft stated they could work together around the areas of the Research and Education Park and the landfill in establishing what the future would be, sharing costs etc. Com. Dzadovsky stated he felt they may need some type of accountability on the FPUA Board by adding an additional Board member. Com. Craft stated the Board was formed by referendum and any change to the composition of such a Board would also need to be done by those residents. 4 ~~ ~~ ~..~~ The County Attorney stated chapter 163 there is ~. provision that allows for the city and the county to do a joint planning agreement on which governmental entity control that area. There are different possibilities. Com. Coward stated he was not sure dual authority could take place. He believes they need to identify the geographical boundary. He does not believe the dual authority will fly. He is trying to identify the magnitude of this decision and would like to achieve "one common vision". He believes they need to define the geographical boundary. Com. Craft stated he felt they were going into too much detail and felt they need to detail the issues, 1) do they want to work with the city on the 171 issues, 2) whether or not to withdraw the McClarin agreement. Com. Coward stated he believes the priority issues should be noted. 1. He would like the removal of the involuntary annexation issue and he does not want a hand shake agreement. 2. his issue is also growth management and wants to promote smart growth 3. also wants to promote economic development 4. have a comprehensive strategy 5. county owned lands, he is not opposed to deferred annexation to the Research Park, but is concerned with the Airport and also he does not know why the city Would want the jail. Com. Craft stated he believed they could add the landfill, the jail, the airport into the same category. Mr. Recor asked if they would also include discussing the future land use planning in the retail service area. Com. Coward stated he would also like to have citizen involvement as they go through the process. Com. Coward asked if they felt the city as well as the Board will be prepared to have a valuable discussion. Com. Craft recommended the city manager present the issues to his Board and then advises us as to whether we should reschedule the January 29`h work session. Mr. Recor stated he believed they should contin:ae on schedule. The meeting was adjourned.