HomeMy WebLinkAboutTVC Workshop Minutes 08-02-2007BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST/ LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TVC WORKSHOP
Date: August 2, 2007 Convened: 2:00 p.m.
Adjourned: 4:05 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Chairman Chris Craft, Joseph Smith, Paula A. Lewis, Doug
Coward, Charles Grande
Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Faye Outlaw, Asst. County.
Administrator, Don West, Public works Director, Michael Brillhart, Eco. & Strategic
Development Director, Terry Lewis, Consultant, Katherine McKenzie Smith, Asst,
County Attorney, Millie Delgado -Feliciano, Deputy Clerk
Mr. Brillhart made opening remarks and stated they had met with the Indrio Road stakeholders to
discuss funding mechanisms with the TVC. There are some issue the county has not reach
consensus with.
Mr. Terry Lewis, Consultant gave an overview of the options presented in December of last year.
He advised the Board he felt they needed to add to item # 2 to create multi -purpose improvement
district by the legislature.
Com. Craft stated he believed the Board had narrowed this down to crating a dependent district.
Mr. Brillhart gave the reason for this meeting today.
Com. Coward stated he believed staff had policy direction from the Board..
The Board was informed that the stakeholders wanted an independent district.
Com. Lewis stated she felt staff and the stakeholders were at an impass.
Mr. Gates, representing Ft. Pierce Farms Water Control District stated the difference between an
independent and a dependent district is that the whole county will pay for staff unless it is
segregated out. He asked the Board to not make a decision today.
Com. Grande stated his objection to the statement that they could do it cheaper.
The County Administrator recommended a fee be set for the developers to pay to cover the cost
of county staff and the work they perform for the TVC concept.
Con. Coward stated his support to have the control by the elected officials not the large land
owners. The vote would not be equal, the large land owners would feel they have more to say on
the issue and this is why it should be under the control of the elected officials.
Staff was directed to move forward and place this item on the Board Agenda.
# 3 Participation with Indrio Road Stakeholders
Mr. Scott Morton, Kolter Communities, representing 13 land owners today, addressed the Board
and stated the most important issue today is, "how is this going to be paid for"?
Com. Coward stated the Board was not looking to create anymore bureaucracy.
Mr. Morton stated he believed they could come up with something. He stated the 13 stakeholders
represent 30,000 residential units.
Com. Coward stated there was so much lack of infrastructure that one landowner could not do it
all so they have to come together.
Mr. Morton stated they needed some assurance from the County in order to be able to go the
lenders (bank). He stated Kings Highway was in at this time, and he is not sure where to put it or
how to plug it into the road system.
Com. Coward stated Kings Highway needed to be built into the equation.
Mr. Tom Babcock, area developer addressed the Board with his concerns and asked for some
direction. He also addressed road concurrency additional commercial space etc.
Com. Coward stated he was not ready to give direction. The Board needed to digest what was
presented as well as receiving staff input and RPC input about the document presented.
Mr. Morton stated they have a long way to go and hopefully they can work together.
Mr. Lewis advised the Board that at this time no challenge has been filed by any of the
landowners.
Com. Coward stated they needed to discuss in the future the projects outside of the TVC and the
area pending DRI `s on the borders of the TVC.
The County Administrator requested the cost of consultants be provided to him.
Staff was directed to continue to work with stakeholders..
Com. Craft requested Mr. Morton schedule a meeting with him so that he could get more clarity
in the numbers.
The meeting was adjourned.
0
vw.
2. Background on TVC Stewardship District Implementation
A. Purpose — the purpose in creating a TVC Stewardship Improvement District is to
provide a means by which developers can finance necessary capital improvements
needed within the boundaries of the TVC area. As per the adopted TVC Element,
future development will be required to finance the improvements needed to sustain
public facilities.
B. Previously Identified Options - At the December 19, 2006 meeting, the BOCC was
presented with options by Terry Lewis on implementing the TVC Element. These three
include:
1. Option #1 — County could pursue an MSBU or MSTU. Through this option, capital
improvements could be financed with ad valorum or non -ad valorum tax levies
and/or assessments (see attachment 1b).
2. Option #2 — Under this option, the County would create an independent
Community Development District (CDD) covering the entire TVC boundary. The
CDD would use assessments within the TVC boundaries to finance improvements.
3. Option #3 — Under this option, the County would petition the State Legislature to
approve the creation of a multi -powered independent improvement district that
would administer improvements within the TVC boundary. This District would be
able to levy ad-valorum, non-ad-valorum taxes, and special assessments.
4. Option #4 — Another independent district alternative is an amendment to the
State's Ch. 298 district charter to give FPFWCD additional power.
C. Prior Board Discussion and Direction - In discussion among Board members it was
recommended that Option #3 (Independent District authorized by the Legislature) be
dropped from consideration at this time. It was also recommended that other options
be given.
D. Draft MSTU Resolution - As follow-up to the December 19th meeting, a draft MSTU
Resolution was prepared as a potential option to the Independent Special District. The
MSTU, as drafted, would include financing both capital and long-term operating and
maintenance costs.
3. Participation with Indrio Road Stakeholders
A. Identified Concerns - The Indrio Road Stakeholders, a group of developers with
property in the TVC Boundaries, have met with County staff on May 16th, June 13th, and
July 9th to discuss the fiscal impacts of each option presented by Terry Lewis upon the
development community. Among the concerns raised by Stakeholders that reviewed
the 3 options include:
• An MSTU is beneficial for implementing capital improvements with identified
projects, but not for financing unknown operating and maintenance costs. At these
meetings, Stakeholders noted that they will not support an MSTU for maintenance
and operation without knowing the specific cost therein.
• It is crucial for both the County and the Stakeholders to have a Stewardship
District in place within one year of final TVC adoption.
The County and Stakeholders need o reach an agreement as to whica p tal
improvements need to be implemented within the next five years. County staff has
suggested that the Stakeholders come forward with a conceptual proposal in order
to determine which facilities will be impacted and what concurrency mitigation
efforts need to occur.
B. Recommendations - The Indrio Road Stakeholders have agreed to support the re -
designation of the FPFWCD as an independent improvement district on a conceptual
basis with restructuring of the Board membership acceptable to the Board of County
Commissioners.
4. Revised Implementation Options
A. Use of CDD and MSTU as a Independent District (!toff This
revised option includes combining Options #1 and #2 that were originally prepared by
Terry Lewis as outlined in his memorandum to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council (TCRPC) dated September 28, 2005.
Under this revised option, a CDD would be created through State Legislative action to
oversee the capital construction of public facilities through levied taxes and
assessments. At a later time, an MSTU would be created to finance the operations and
maintenance costs of public facilities.
B. Re -designation of Fort Pierce Farms Water Control District (FPFWCD) as an
Independent Improvement District - The Indrio Road Stakeholders are conceptually
recommending the legislative re -designation of FPFWCD as an independent
improvement district consistent with the requirements under Florida Statue, Chapter
189.
The FPFWCD has previously presented this option for consideration by the Indrio Road
Stakeholders and the Board of County Commissioners.
This action would require legislation approved by the State similar to that undertaken
within Palm Beach County with the creation of the South Indian River Water Control
District under House Bill 879 (see attachment 3b).
This would expand the authority of Fort Pierce Farms beyond that of a Water Control
District. It would provide the revised District with the ability to administer multi -tasked
improvements within the TVC boundaries. Staff concurs with the recommendation by
Terry Lewis that any such legislative authorization of an Improvement District should
provide the County with the ability to appoint members on the District Board.
cn
r
r.
0
FD
0
O
rwfL
vo
O
tU
MMI
CL
O
-,
0
O
c
room
O
U)
U)
CD
MN
U)
G
C)
O p
-0 CD
O
� Cfl
C7 N
O �
T
in
L.
o
(D �.
cn CD
(D �.
O (a
-3 �.
CD
CD �
Q.
n
n
O
Q
in
CD
CD
W
O
r+
r+
O
CD
CD
Z3
--iD
<^
:_ T
b
O
S_
p
c.n C/)
3 E;
CD
CD
3 r- -
O
(D
S �
00 v
O 0
N �
O CD
C 0
CD
CD
O �
cn
Q
GJ CD
G
O
< Q
CD �
O
Sv
O 0
Q
m
v
CD
(D
O
O
�
:.
C)
,-+
CD
O-0
C:
0.
m
0
m
CD
O
�
Cp
CD
(D
Q
141
COD
Z)
CD
cn
r+
O
cn
C
cn
m
C
v
o
cn
CD
0
•
r.t,
sv
CD
'
Q
N
O
O
C)
(DO
U
O
CD
cn
D
(D
CD
o
`C
n
Q.)
cn
U)
.
CD
cn
cn
C(D
CQ
O
I
CD
�
cn
CD
=7'
CD
O
��
Q
O
�
Z
�
C
O
�
O
�
CD
CD
Z
—
Z-
CD
"
O
Z3
CC/)
O
Z
O
O
Q
�
LV
U
H
t
.cn
J
L
0
00
o -C
N
L Ado _Y
4) O O� O lb-z� o
+jo Z
}' •U °- �' j
if
� ku �
N � n
O x � (TJ
•
U) U C:
4-a CD
.� L c� O U r—
O O
CO 70 > O O— O
O O U)
_Q • — � 0 -�,_, O L
O> v U 0 U O 'L cn M O
(n 4-�
a� '> c� x
4) o -0 M c�
0 � c� a�
~ Un��Q 0-0 Q z
N co
0 CL
0
N
La
N N O
U U
if � J�o
•L
� Cn NoLL Q �
U c C) p
L o � —�
O � m O .L
L
c U L
O � U � 70
� -
= O co o
c_a
O ■— >_
Q Cn a Q)
> c� -0 O
.— E -u) E
O - U
U 00
U � � c6 —
' 0 .- O O Q)� d7 •- O
(n U
VQ Q-0 0 0 0 E
`O, O a) � },
E 0� cn o � .� � o o a�
`�— o N U) 0) -1.- -+=
E 00 Q)
00cL
U U U �U� aQ) aD
cn >�� U v ��U � I c
0 cn O COO ULL )�U
Q Q J O co m n U)
Q U �LLLL
■
■
■
Ul
Z
`J
J=O
N-
�U
Q
�