HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 8, 2013 BOCC-PSL Joint Meeting Agenda PacketBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
BOCC-City of Port St. Lucie Joint Board Meeting
Tuesday, October, 8, 2013
2:00 PM
St. Lucie County Commission Chambers
2300 Virginia Avenue
3rd Floor of Roger Poitras Building
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
District No. 2, Chair
TOD MOWERY
District No. 4, Vice-Chair
PRANNIE I-IUTCHINSON
District No. 1
CHRIS DZADOVSKY
District No. 3
PAULA A. LEW[S
District No. 5
KIM JOHNSON
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Mayor
JOANN M. EAIELLA
Vice Mayor- District No. 1
LINDA BARTZ
Councihvoman -District No. 2
MICHELLE LEE BERGER
Councilwoman- District No. 3
SAANNON M. MARTIN
Councilman -District No. 4
RON BOWEN
County Mission Statement
To provide service, i~zfi•astrueture and Ieadersl:ip necessary to advance a safe and sustainable
community, maintain a hdglt gaa[ity of life, and protect the natma[ environmwtt for all our citizens
Generated 10/4/2013 3:18 PM
BOCC-City of Port St. Lucie Joint Board Meeting Tuesday, October 8, 2013 2:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER -COMMISSIONER MOWERY, CHAIRMAN BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS / JOANN FAIELLA, MAYOR CITY
OF PORT ST. LUCIE
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
DISCUSSION ITEMS
1. BOCC Discussion on Proposed Resolution to the Annexation Conflict.
2. PSL Discussion on Proposed Resolution to the Annexation Conflict.
ADJOURNMENT
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 sworn 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 Safety & Risk
Manager at (772) 462-1783 or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting.
2~Page
NOISSn~S10) '3a!I;uo~ uoi;exauuy ay; o; uoi;niosaa pasodoad uo uoissnosid ~~08 :uoi;ea!unwwo0
INTER-OFFICE MEMOI2gNDUM
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
TO:
FROM:
G.A. NO.:
DATE:
Board of County Commissioners
Daniel S. McIntyre, County
13-1335..
October 8, 201.3
Attorriey~
SUBJECT: City of Port St. Lucie Proposed Annexation -
Ordinance No. 13-16 - point Public Meeting -October
8, 201'8
BACKGROUND
The City filed a petition to voluntarily annex the McCarty Ranch parcel into the
City. Pursuant to a Joint Planning Agreement between the County and the City,
City -staff notified County staff of the proposed annexation and the proposed
adoption of Glty Ordinance No, 13-16, County staff responded to the notification
of the proposed annexation in a letter dated April 19, 2013 From County
Planning & Development Services Director Mark- Satterlee (copy attached,
Exhibit 1), As indicated by Mr. Satterlee, County staff does not believe that the
City's proposed annexation meets the requirements of state law. Specifically,
County staff does not believe-that the property is cohtiguous along a substantial
part of Its boundary. Rather, 'it is contiguous to the City only by a narrow strip
of land extending eastward nearly a tulle from the buli< of the parcel and
touching the City limits along about 642 feet fronting on Rangeline Road, This
amounts to less than 4% of the parcel's overall north/south dimensions of
16,239 feet. In addition to the lack of contiguity, Mr. Satterlee also pointed out
that the proposed annexation includes two long narrow appendages over a mile
in length radiating out from the parcel which creates two large pockets of land
surrounded by the Clty on three sites. From a County staff perspecClve, this
appears to be contrary to the definition of compactness in Florida law.
on May 7, 2013, the Board initiated conflict resolution procedures provided by
Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, with the City by adopting Resolution No. 13-084
(copy attached, Exhibit 2). There are three stages to conflict resolution. The
first stage Is a conflict assessment meeting between the staffs of the
governmental entities involved in the conflict process. The second stage is a
joint public meeting between the governing bodies of the participating entities.
The third and final stage is traditional mediation with an independent mediator.
NOISS(lOSl4) 'ia!IbuoO uo!;exauuy ay; o; uo!;nlosaa pasodoad uo uassnas!p 0008 :uo!;eo!unwwo0
In this case, County and City staff held a conflict assessment meeting on July
17.
As a result of the July 17 conflict assessment meeting, City staff submitted some
draft settlement language to County -staff for consideration. The proposed
settlement language proposed by City staff was unacceptable to the Board. The
Board did (by a vote of 3-2) authorize the submittal of a settlement counteroffer
to the City. The City adopted the proposed ordinance on First reading and,
notwithstanding the fact that the conflict resolution process had not been
completed, scheduled a public hearing on Monday, August 12, 2013 to consider
final adoption of the annexation ordinance. The Board Chairman and County
staff appeared at the City's August 12, 2013 meeting and requested that the
City defer action on the adoption of the annexation ordinance until the confl(cC
resolution process was complete. Unfortunately, the.City Council proceeded to
adopt the annexation ordinance without discussing the. County`s settlement
counteroffer. Subsequent to the adoption of the City's annexation ordinance,
County staff coordinated the scheduling of a joint public meeting required by
Section 164.1055, Florida Statutes, with City staff for October 8, 2013. A copy
of this statute is attached as Exhibit 3. After the October 8 joint public meeting
was scheduled, the County Attorney received a letter from the Assistaht City
Attorney dated September 25; 2013, notifying the County that the City did not
intend to participate in the October 8, 2013 joint public meeting. A copy of the
September 25, 2013 letter Is attached as Exhibit 4. A copy of the County
Attorney's October 1, 2013 response is attached as Exhibit 5.
DSM/caf
Attachments
NOISSnOSId) ';D!I;uo~ uoi;exauuy ay; o; uol;n~osab pasodoad uo uoissnosid OOOg :uoi;eDiunuiuio0
.. ...,
.... , ,
BOARD OF PLANNING 8 DEVELOPMENT
COUNTY
COkpMISSIONERS ® SERVICES DEPARTRfiENT
e Planning Division
0
April 19, 2013
Daniel Holbrook, AICP `~ l' ~ `''~~"'1
Director of Planning and Zoning 1 ~~ ~ J , , ;> `r`
City of Port 5t. ~ucie APR ' •9 2013
121 SVV Port St. Lucie Boulevard
Port St. Lucie, Fbrida 34884 CCuNT'vATTOitNEv
RE; PgL Annexation -Ordinance No.13-1B
DeaY Mr. Holbrook;
Thank you for providing County staff With the opportunity to provide comments on
proposed Ordinanoe No. 13-1 B. From a County staff perepec4ive, it does rwt appear that
the City's action meets the requirernents of Section 171.044, Voluntary Annexation,
Fkxkle Statutes, to annex the property into the City. The proposed annexation is not
consistent with the folkrwing portions of Florida Statutes;
Contiguity -According to the material presented, the subject 3,100 +/. acne
parcel measures roughly 3 miles north and south (or over 15,000 feet),
However, tiro propertyts not contiguous abng a substantial part of its boundary,
Rather, n is contiguous to the City only by a narrow strip of land extending
eastwani Hearty a mile from the bulk of the parr;el and touching the City limits
abng about 650 feet fronting on Range Line Road. Thia amounts to about 4% of
the parcel's overall north/south dimension. Otherwise, the vast and substantial
weste~m of ~ P~rtY Iles a mile further west of Range Line Road and the
171.031(lldjywhl~cfi definecontiguity as follows rs to ~ COnirary to Chapter
D f 1) "Contiguous" means That a substantial pert of a boundary a1 the
~~rY sought to be annexed byy a municipa/lty is cote»rNnous wl<t- a pelt
of the boundary of the munkipallty...
• amass - In addition to lack of mnttguity, the parcel includes two
a ppendages over a mite in length radiating out irorri the pacel. ~,
ppears to aeate two .large podtets of land surrounded by the City on three
sides. This appears to be contrary to the definition of compadneas found in
Chapter 171.031(12).
GHRI3 D7ADOUSKY, pistriq No.i TOD MOWfR4 DIStAct No.2 PAUtq A. tEW15, Dishigt Nq,9 FRANNIE HUTCHINSON, DISMR Nq.4 KIMIOHNSON, D(sUkt No.S
CqunryAdministratgr-Faye W..OUHaW, MPA, ICMA~cM Webske; www sd,__ i~lec~oy
230p Nr8inla AVebpd•fgrt Pierce, FL ylgg2-565?
Phone 1772)462-2822 FAX p72J 462-]581
EXHIBLT
„~„
D
9
NOISSf1DS14) '3o!1)uo~ uoi;exauuy ay} o; uo!;nlosaa pasodoad uo uo!ssnasi^ X008 :uol}eo!unwwo0
~, - _ ..
Danes 1-'cib~ook, AFCP
RSL Anneraclon-Ordinance. fro. 13-i6
F.pril 14, 2413
Paoe 2
Based upon the preceding analysis, County staff objects to the proposed annexation as
it does not appear consistent with Florida Statutes,
Sincerely,
Mark , AICP, Director
Planning & Devebpmeni Services
Copy to: County Administrator
County Altomey~/
attachments
NOISSf10S10) '3o!I;uoO uo!;exauuy ay} o; uo!;nlosaa pasodoad uo uo!ssnos!a OOpg :uo!;eo!unwwo0
~ 4
B Ls~~
~ ~ ~
a
fi ,~
~ o rj~
m
N
F V
~
~
r
"~~+ O ~
n
n '~
c
~ ~
S~
n
T
~_~ 0
'
a
,_~,,, ~
NOISSf1~S10) 'lo!I;uo~ uol;exauuy ay} o; uol;nlosaa pasodoad uo uo!ssnosla X008 :uol;eo!unwwo~
_..- _.. -
i ~
~_ _- I ~_-.l
Rd
rn
FF
L
_ _ I~11~---- --~-~-
~~ ~1' .-
b
5
O
N
N q
~ ~-
` G
~
a A
~
~:
m
3 ~
a
n ('
N
O
~
Z d
V`
~
i
v.
{
5
~
4
'
'~
i
NOISSf10S10) '3o!I~uoO uo!;exauuy ay; o; uo!;nlosaa pasodoad uo uo!ssnos!O 0008 :uo!;eo!unwwo0
NOISSf10Sld) '~a!I~uoO uoi;exauuy ay; o; uo!;nlosab pasodoad uo uo!ssnos!Q 0008 :uo!;eo!unwwo0
RESOLUTION NO. 13-084
A RESOLUTION INITIATING CONFLICT
RESOLUTION PROCEDURES PROVIDED BY
SECTION 7.64.1052, FLORIDA STATUTES
(2012) PERTAINING TO THE DISPUTE
OVER THE CITY OF PART ST LUCiE'S
PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE
McCARTY RANCH PROPERTY BY
ADOPTING CITY ORDINANCE N0. 13-16.
WHEREAS, the Board of Couhty Commissioners pf St: t_ucie County, Florida, has
made the following determinations:
1, The City of Port St, Lucie, Florida (City), has advertised a certain
ordlhance (identified as City Ordinance 13.16), hereinafter referred to as the "City's
Proposed Annexation" where the City proposes to annex certaih property; and,
2, The County delivered its Notice. of objectiohs to the City's .Proposed
Annexation on April 19, 2013, in accordahcewith the Joint Planning Agreement, which
pbjectlons were not accepted by the City,
3, The Cpuntybelieves thatthe City's prpposed annexation is contrary to the
interests of the County and iks residences and businesses. The Gourttyalsp believes
that the voluntary annexation prov!slohs of Section 171.044, Florida Statutes, provides
'that only owners of property contiguous to a municipality and reasonably compact may
petition a municipality to vpluntarily annex into the municipality, The County also
believes that the City's property that is the subject of the request for voluntary
annexation is not contiguous to the City's municipal boundaries, is not reasonably
compact, and would create: pockets and de facto enclaves in violation of State law.
Accordingly, the County belleyes that since the City owned property Is not contiguous
pr reasonably compact, the City, as property owner, did not have the right to petition
for voluntary annexation under SecCion 171.044, Florida Statutes, and therefore, the
City, as municipal. governing body, did hot have the right#o consider and approve the
request for voluntary annexation.
4. It is the intehtion of the Board to initiate cohflict resolution procedures
provided by Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, prior to initiating court proceedings or
prosecuting action oh a previously filed court prpceeding to resolve the cohflict.
5. As a result of the cohflict set out above, the Board believes that It is in the
best interest of the citizens of St. Lucie County to initiate the cohflicC resolution
procedures provided by the Florida Goverhmehtal Conflict Resolution Act between the
County and the City.
EXHIBIT
b ~~~~
a
NOISSf10S10) ';a!I~uo0 uoi;exauuy ay; o; uo!;nlosab pasodoad uo uoissnas!O 0008 :uoi;eoiunuawo0
NO'W, THEREFORE, BE IT RES®LVED, by the Board of County Commissioners
of St. Lucie County, Florida, as follows:
1, The Board expresses its inteht to initiate the Confllct resolution procedures
provided by the Florida Confllct Resolution Act to resolve the cohflict between the
County and the City as to the City's proposed annexation.
2, Within flue (5) days after the adoption of this Resolution., the County
Administrator is directed to send a letter and a certified copy of this Resolution to the
chief administrator of the City by certified mall, retsarn receipt requested,
This Resolution sfiall become effective upon adoption.
After motion and second, the vote on this Resolution was as follows;
Chairman Tod Mowery AYE
Vtce Chair Frannie Hutchinson AYE
Commissioner Chris Dzadovslcy AYE
Commissioner Paula A, Lewis AYE
Commissioner Klm Johnson AYE
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 7'h day of May 2013,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. UCIE C UN ,FLORIDA
~"°c~c~ Y
BY:
Chairman
APPROVED ~ TO FORM AND
NOISSf1DS10) 'ao!I}uo0 uol;exauuy ay; o; uoi;niosab pasodoad uo uoissnosla O~pg :uoi;eoiunuawo0
~:`
Select Year: 2013 ~ ;Go
The 2013 Florida Statutes
Title XI Chanter 1b4 View Entire
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNMENTAL Chapter
TNTERGOVERNMEN7ALI2ELATIONS DISPUTES
164,1055 Joint public meeting.-
(1) Failure to resolve a conflict after following authorized procedures as specified in s. 164,1053
shall require the scheduling of a joint public meeting between the primary conflicting governmental
entities. The governmental entity first initiating the conflict resolution process shall have the
responsibility to schedule the joint public meeting and arrange a location, If the entities in conflict
agree; the assistance of a facilitator may be enlisted to assistthem in conducting the meeting. In this
meeting, the governing bodies of the primary conflicting governmental entities shall:
(a) Consider the statement of issues prepared in the conflict assessment phase,
(b) Seek an agreement.
(c) Schedule additional meetings of the entities in conflict, or of their designees, to continue to seek
resolution of the conflict,
(2) ff no agreement is reached, the primary conflicting governmental entities shall participate in
mediation, the costs of winch shall be equally divided between the primary conflfcting governmental
entities. The primary conflicting governmental entities shall endeavor in good faith to select a mutually
acceptable medjator, If the primary conflicting governmental entities are unable to mutually agree on a
mediator within 14 days after the joint public meeting, the primary conflicting governmental entities
shall arrange. for a mediator to be selected or recommended by an independent conflict resolution
organization, such as the Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium, and shall agree to accept the
recommendation of that independent organization, or shall agree upon an alternate method for
selection of a mediator; within 7$usiness days after the close of that 14-day period, Upon'the selection
of a mediator, the conflicting governmental entities shall schedule mediation to occur within 14 days,
and shall issue a written agreement on the issues in conflict within 10 days of the conclusion of the
mediation proceeding. The written agreement shall not be admissible in any court proceeding
concerning the conflict, except for proceedings to award attorney's fees under s. 164.105II, where the
agreement may be used to demonstrate an entity's refusal to participate in the process in good faith.
History.-s. 6, ch. 99279.
Copyright o 19952013 The Florida Legislature . Privacy Statement .Contact Us
:~? //
http;//www.legstate.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Seatch_String... 1 01312 0 1 3
NOISSf1DS10) '3o!8uo0 uol;exauuy ay; o; uol;niosaa pasodoad uo uotssnosl0 OOOg :uol;ealunutuao0
C'77"I' OF PC>a~T S'Tm LUCIE
CITY ft TTORNEY
September 25, 2013
VIA U.S MAIL AND EMAIL; MclntvreDna sNucleco.org
Daniel 5. McIntyre, County Attornoy
ST. LUCIE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFIL'E
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, Florida 34982
RE: McCarty Ranch Annexation
Dear Mr. McIntyre
As you are aware, prior to the final public hearing concerning the proposed annexatiorrot the Cilyowned
McCarty Ranch Property, tho Glty; in good faith, extensively discussed and actually met with the County
to try to resolve any Issues the County had with the rd osed annexation of the McCarty Ranch Property,
We thought we hegotiatetl a resolution of the matter after the individuals at the meeting, who among
others included yourself, the County Administrator, ourlnterim City Manager and our City Attorney, had
agreed to make certain revisions to the Joint Planning Agreement At the .County's August 8, 2013
Meeting of the Board of Couhly Commissioners, the.: agreed upon revisions to the Joint Planning
Agreement was presented for approval but was rejected...
On August 12; 2013, the City passed and approved Ordinance 13-16, whtcfi served to annex the McCarty
Ranch Property into fhe City's limits and Jdrisdlctlon (the "Annexation Ordinance'). Thereafter the County
Failed io initiate the statutorily mandated conflict resohition procedures within thirty (30) days following the
City's adoption of the Annexation Ordinance, as required In accordance with Seetion 171,087(2) of the
Florida Statutes. Since the County did not Initiate. the conflict resolution procedures as statutorily
mandated, there is no conflict between fhe Gity and the County coricerning the Annexation Ordinance
that needs tc be resolved. Accordingly, I am writing to inform you that the City Council will not be
attending the County's proposed Chapter 164 Conflict Resolution Joint Public Meeting scheduled for
October 8, 2D13.
Best regards,
Azlina Goldstein Siegel,
Assistant City Atkornoy
AGSIbb
cc: Faye W, Outlaw, County Administrator, ICMA-CM
Jeff Bremer, Interim City Manager
Roger G. Orr, Clty Attorney
Jesus A. Merejo, Utility Systems Director
~r~j ~i
121 SW Port St. Lucie boulevard • Port SL.tucle, Florida 34984•G099 • 772(871.5294 • F2x: 772/344~A298 • TDD: 772!873-6339
NOISSf10SlCi) '}all;uo0 uol}exauuy ay} o} uoi;nlosab pasodoad uo uolssnosl0 0008 :uol;eolunututo0
QOARD OF J ,, COUNTY
COUNTY ATTORNEY
COMMISSIONERS
Doniel S. Mdnryro
VIA EMAIL AND
REGULAR MAIL
Azlina Goldstein Bdl~ Esq,
Assistant City Attorney
City of Port St, Lucie
121 S.W, Port St. Lucie Boulevard
Port St, Lucie, Florida 34984
RE: McCarty Ranch Annexation
Dear Ms, GoldsteinSiegei;
Thank you for your letter of September 25, 2013.
Neorher Young '
Katherine Davis Barbieri
October 1, 2013
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
Please note that the County.disagrees with much of that letter and that aline-item response is
nelthernecessary norjustifled. Inanyeverit, please also note thatSt Lucie County will be holding the Joint
Public Meeting required by Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, on October 8, 2013 at 2:00 p,m. The meeting will
be held in the Commission Chambers located at 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida. While your
letter suggests that the City Council will not be attending, we would hope that de4ween how and thenYhe
City council itself would reconsider the position that you related in your letter: A copy of the October 8
joint public meeting agenda is attached,
Sincerely, ~~
r ~.:
~ ! ^~
Da e15. rlnt r
County Attorney/
DSM/caf
Enclosure
Copy to: Board of County Commissioners
County Administrator
ii~ a
LHQiS D2ADOV5KY Disino No ) • TOD MqV/fRY. pinnn No. 2 PAULA A. tEV/15. Duuul No ~ • FMNNIE HUTCHINSON, Disrncr No. 4 • KIM JOHNSON. D'rsrrin No. 5
Goomy A~'mmrsuoror ~ Faye V/. OUrlow. MPA
2000 Virgfnin Avenue Ft. Pierce, FL 04982-5652 Phone (772) 462-1441
FAX (772) 462-1840 • TDD (772) 462-1428