Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 05-12-09 regular — reading text

Patterson in favor (Rynearson absent). MINUTES Approval of the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of April 14, 2009. 166 Regular Council 4 -28 -09 GENERAL PUBLIC Comments from the general public to be heard on items not on the agenda. Mike Minich, 106 Waynel Circle, offered to answer any questions regarding his golf course payment. No questions were asked of Mr. Minich. RESOLUTION 2009 -10— TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA; AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICIES OF THE OKALOOSA WALTON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Missy McKim, Development Services Director, discussed the two proposed projects, crosswalks at Mooney Road and Lewis Turner Boulevard and the Wright Parkway sidewalk, and advised that these projects were originally submitted to the Okaloosa- Walton Transportation Planning Organization ( TPO) in 1995 and as of this date remain unfunded. Ms. McKim explained in order to request funding for the projects, the Council must authorize the re- submittal of the applications and approve the resolution, and if it is approved, will be forwarded to the TPO. The Mayor asked for public input. There was none. Mr. Garvie moved to adopt Res. 2009 -10. Mr. Reeves seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Nabors, and Patterson in favor Rynearson absent). RESOLUTION 2009 -13— BUDGET FOR US MARSHALL SERVICE COMPENSATION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR OCTOBER 1, 2008 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 BUDGET TO MAKE CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO APPROPRIATIONS OF CITY FUNDS FOR UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE COMPENSATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Police Chief Ted Litschauer informed that a budget amendment in the amount of $ 30, 000 is proposed to record the revenue and expense associated with the US Marshals Memorandum of Understanding previously approved by Council, and that the US Marshals Service will reimburse up to $ 30, 000 for overtime work on a quarterly basis, with the City responsible for associated social security, Medicare and workman' s compensation taxes, and retirement. The Mayor asked for public input. There was none. Mr. Garvie moved to adopt Res. 2009 -13. Mr. Patterson seconded motion and it carried unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Nabors, and Patterson in favor Rynearson absent). RESOLUTION 2009 -14— PROCEED WITH FDEP CLEAN WATER APPLICATION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE REMAINING PHASES OF THE HURLBURT FIELD /CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH JOINT USE REUSE WATER MAIN PROJECT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR INCLUSION IN THE CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND PROGRAM AS PART OF THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT THE STATE REVOLVING FUND LOAN APPLICATION; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.  167 Regular Council 4 -28 -09 RES 2009 -14 ( CONT) Michael Beedie, City Engineer, advised Council' s approval and acceptance of Res. 2009 -14 is requested to authorize the City Manager to submit the application for funding for the remaining 20,000 feet of re -use water line as part of the American Recovery Reinvestment Act of 2009. Discussion included that once the project is complete the City would proceed with developing a reclaimed water system rate study to eventually implement a new reclaimed water enterprise fund which would be advantageous to the citizens, and would take some of the demand off of the Florida Aquifer system. Also discussed was that the grant opportunities are not there and that if the application is approved it will be brought back to Council to make a decision on whether or not to proceed. The Mayor asked for public input. There was none. Mr. Reeves moved to adopt Res. 2009 -14. Mr. Garvie seconded motion and it carried Patterson in favor unanimously with Holmes, Miller, Reeves, Garvie, Nabors, and Rynearson absent). ORD. 1793— CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN MITIGATION AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR AUTHORITY; ADOPTING SECTION 1. 05.08, ENTITLED CODE ENFORCEMENT ORDER MITIGATION PROCEDURES; RESOLVING CONFLICTING PROVISIONS AND SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Attorney informed this issue was discussed in January and since that time she has been working with Staff on the draft ordinance. If approved, the ordinance will assist in providing an equitable, expeditious, effective and inexpensive method of enforcing City codes. The City Attorney explained the ordinance will clarify language regarding satisfaction and releases of orders and liens; set policy on a suggested mitigation percentage schedule; authorize the Code Enforcement Board Chairman to execute and have filed a satisfaction of an order or lien so long as the property is in compliance with all the Codes; authorize the Code Enforcement Board to reduce a fine within ten days of issuance of an order imposing a fine; authorize the Code Enforcement Board to review, within 3 months after issuance, a request for release of some requirements of an order imposing a fine; authorize the Code Enforcement Board to hear a staff request to file an order into the court records; and establish the procedures by which a violator can request a release of a lien from the City Council. The City Attorney advised the Code Enforcement reviewed the ordinance at its April 8 meeting and had no objections to it. Discussion included that the ordinance should be fair to both the City and to the individuals to bring the property into compliance without undue burden; that this ordinance gives individuals one more opportunity and gives the Board an opportunity to encourage that compliance; and that the mitigation schedule was designed to encourage compliance and is only a suggested schedule. Mr. Garvie discussed the verbiage in Section E titled ' No Waiver or Reduction of Administrative Fees or Costs,' and the City Attorney explained that is administrative fees that have been expended for bringing the case through the code enforcement board process, and is Staff time and those expenditures have been made by the City. Regular Council 4 -28 -09 ORD. 1793 ( CONT) Mr. Garvie stated his displeasure at the phrase ' At no time shall any reduction or fine or release of order or lien include the waiver or reduction of administrative fees or costs...' Mr. Garvie stated there may be some unforeseen situation that might come up but the City would be bound by this language. Mr. Reeves stated the ordinance gives the Council a little more teeth to enforce compliance and stated his support of the ordinance. The Mayor asked for public input. Ray Seip, 121 Nebraska Avenue, discussed the $ 250 to $ 500 per day fine if there is no compliance, that it is the Code Enforcement officer who recommends the fine amount to the Board, and Mr. Seip' s opinion that the amount is not based on the severity of the violation but on numbers. There was no one else who wished to speak. Mr. Holmes moved to adopt Ord. 1793. Mr. Reeves seconded motion. Mr. Garvie amended the motion to change the verbiage in Section E from `At no time' to Only on very rare occasions should there be any reduction of fine or release of order... ' Mr. Miller offered a friendly amendment to state `City Council may consider a reduction' and to delete the word ` No' from the title to read ` Waiver or Reduction of Administrative Fees or Costs,' and to add the word `to' after the word lien on Line 206 to read .. ` order or lien to include the waiver... Mr. Garvie accepted the amendment. The City Attorney advised because of the way the ordinance is written, the word `Board' needs to be included, to state `City Council or Board may consider...' An exchange of views by Council included the pros and cons of the proposed amendment to the ordinance. The Mayor called for the vote on the amendment to the ordinance to state ` City Council or Board may consider a reduction...' to delete the word ` No' from the title to read Waiver or Reduction of Administrative Fees or Costs,' and to add the word `to' after the word lien on Line 206 to read .. ` order or lien to include the waiver and it carried by a vote of 4 to 2 with Miller, Garvie, Nabors, and Patterson in favor and Holmes and Reeves opposed ( Rynearson absent). Mr. Garvie moved to adopt Ord. 1793 on first reading as amended. Mr. Miller seconded motion and it carried by a vote of 4 to 2 with Miller, Garvie, Nabors, and Patterson in favor and Holmes and Reeves opposed ( Rynearson absent). ORD. 1795 —RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS TO SERVE ON THE CRA AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA; PROVIDING AUTHORITY; CLARIFYING SECTION 2. 06. 01 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERSHIP ON THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.  169 Regular Council 4 -28 -09 ORD. 1795 ( CONT) The City Attorney explained this ordinance will make the section of the Code regarding the CRA consistent with other board provisions and with state statutes by inserting the proper language regarding residency. She continued it will also enable citizens to more easily determine if they meet the residency requirements for membership on the CRA. Mr. Garvie expressed his confusion over the verbiage that `members may be a resident of the City. . . .' and questioned whether the verbiage should read ` must be.' The City Attorney advised it is in Council' s purview to change the verbiage if they so desire, but that state statutes says that a person may be appointed commissioner if he or she resides or is engaged in business. The Mayor asked for public input. Mike Minich, 106 Waynell Circle, clarified that the City Attorney advised that State statute requires an individual to be either a resident or doing business within the City, and stated that much of the CRA is in the downtown business district and people should be either businesspersons or residents and should not be required to be a resident and exclude businesspersons, in his opinion, and encouraged Council not to change the ordinance. There was no one else who wished to speak. Mr. Miller suggested that verbiage be added under Sec. 2.06. 01, Establishment, that a member shall be a resident of the United States of America as well as a resident of the City, or persons engaged in business within the City limits, for at least 365 consecutive days. The City Attorney objected as being completely legally insufficient because the statute controls the membership of the CRA, and all the ordinance is intended to do is simply track the statutory language into the code so it is in a convenient place, and the statutory requirement of the membership