READ ALONGSIDE THE SOURCE
Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 02-09-2010 Regular — reading text
Part 2 of 64. These parts divide the reading text for browsing; they are not the source document's page numbers.
Machine-extracted text — fwb-25143-original.pdf
Machine-extracted OCR text · Review label: Machine produced / unreviewed
Compare this copy with the preserved source. Review labels describe the recorded status of this file; they do not guarantee that the text is error-free. Spacing and line breaks are retained, with long lines wrapped to fit the screen.
annexation included the area north of Garmer' s
Beach, the unincorporated areas in Sylvania Heights, - Cinco Bayou;` and' there was brief
discussion on Mary Esther and Hurlburt. Field to -the county line. During discussion on the
Sylvania Heights area it was mentioned they may be interested because they complain they do
not receive City services, their streets are in bad repair, and they have water flooding issues. It
was noted that would be a good area to include in the CRA.
Of
Council Retreat 1 - 16 -10
ANNEXATION cont.
Discussion on Cinco Bayou for potential annexation included the benefits to the residents with
the elimination of the 25% surcharge on water and sewer, the elimination of the payment for a
dedicated deputy, and the elimination of the Ocean City W
/ right Fire District tax. During
discussion it was pointed out each of the neighborhoods have different needs and different
reasons for annexing into the City, and the campaign would need to be individually tailored for
each area.
There was consensus of Council to. focus on three areas: the Kenwood area, Sylvania Heights,
and Cinco Bayou to include the Gamier' s Beach area. Council tasked the City Manager to
prepare an analysis on response times for the police and fire departments, and the reasons each of
the different neighborhoods ( Kenwood, Sylvania Heights, Cinco Bayou, and Gamier' s Beach)
would want to come into the City along with a cost benefit analysis to help them make the
decision. Council also wished to know how much more revenue the City will receive and what it
will cost to annex those areas.
The City Manager said there are a couple of issues he would need to discuss with the City
Attorney, but he has the police and fire information and would prepare something for each of the
areas to bring to Council in about a month.
Council discussed the timeframes in which to place the referendum on the ballot for the
November 2010 general election or on the ballot for the City election in March 2011. It was
noted the ballot for the November election closes in June and that March 2011 may be a more
realistic target date.
BONDS
The City Manager briefly discussed the general obligation bond in which projects are identified,
estimates of cost are established and the matter is placed before the voters in a referendum; and a
revenue bond 'in which a revenue stream is pledged as debt service. He mentioned the only
benefit of the bond market is the Build America Bonds which the federal government will pay
35% of the interest. He mentioned a bond issue will cost a lot of money; a bank qualified note is
about 1 / 10 of the cost. He said in the upcoming budget hearings one of the problems they will be
facing is the question of whether they will have to close some places because of the
environmental conditions, such as mold issues at the Hedrick Center. He said there are going to
be projects in the Capital Improvement Program next year and thought the only way to be able to
fund them is through either revenue bonds or a bank qualified note, which means they will have
to look at additional revenue sources. He requested Council direction on whether they wish to
go forward with a bond issue
Discussion included suggestions that the City Manager prepare an estimate on what type of
funding is available and how much is going to be needed to get the facilities repaired; that a wish
list be prepared ( facility and non -utility infrastructure needs, utility infrastructure needs, fire
trucks /police vehicle needs); that the list be paired with a funding source; that Council prioritize
the wish list, determine the funding needed, then figure out how to fund it; information on who is
using the facilities and how many people are going to be affected by the use of those facilities;
and information on how each alternative would affect the people in the community.
2-
Council Retreat 1 - 16 -10
COUNCIL ITEMS
Mr. Patterson brought up the question of when the County is going to repave Hollywood Blvd.
up to Fort Walton Beach High School. The City Manager mentioned the City has written a letter
to the Department of Transportation requesting to use the excess $ 900,000 in stimulus money for
something else and asked if Council felt the need to direct using the stimulus money to resurface
a county road. It was suggested before spending any City money that the County be called to
find out where Hollywood stands on their road maintenance and improvement schedule so the
City can put pressure on them to move it up on the list.
Mr. Patterson brought up the question of whether the employees are going to be given a raise this
coming year. The City Manager mentioned there are a lot of positions not being filled and
through those unfilled positions and restructuring there are excess funds that would be used to
provide an increase, either across the board or tied to merit.
Mr. Reeves brought up the undergrounding of utilities on Eglin Parkway that has been discussed
at previous strategic planning meetings. He mentioned improvements have been made on Eglin
and it is an important corridor. He noted CRA money has been set aside to invest in the parking
situation downtown and if that does not happen, there is extra money. He relayed it is something
on his mind that he would like to see done.
Mr. Reeves discussed his thought that the CRA Board is taking on a lot of decisions that affect
people' s finances on projects where at the meeting there is a big discussion, a wish list of things
they would like to see done, and questions that require the project support people to be there to
answer. He expressed the need to review their scope of responsibilities, and perhaps address
again the issue of Council becoming the CRA. He mentioned people come to him with problems.
and relayed one of the recurring issues is at the CRA meetings they make a lot of
recommendations and give a lot of input into the project that is before them. He expressed his
view that it adds another layer to the process and slows down a project and in this day and time
they do not need that slow down or that input. He expressed his thought that it is something
Council needs to think about and possibly review their duties and abilities, what they actually
have control over and how much control is due them because Council is the one that is ultimately
accountable.
Discussion included an exchange of views on the CRA; that in the past and possibly now there
were members that wanted to impose their own ideas on a project; that under the current code it
would not streamline the process if Council were to become the CRA; that projects can skip the
CRA process and go directly to Council because the CRA is an advisory Board; and that some
ideas for future discussion may come out of the Business Retention Panel recommendations.
Mr. Reeves also expressed he would like to see the pros and cons of closing Station 7 to see if
there is a potential savings and what it does to response times. The City Manager relayed the
Fire Chief has the IAFF report on consolidating services in draft form and Council will receive it
Tuesday.
Mr. Rynearson brought up his desire to find a way to give the employees a raise; his desire to
conceptualize a sports .complex with four to six soccer /football fields, four to six softball/ baseball
fields where the City can host tournaments to bring in huge dollars; and that there needs to be a
way to inform the public how to report street lights that need to be repaired or replaced.
3-
68
Council Retreat 1 - 16 -10
COUNCIL ITEMS cunt.
Mr. Nabors discussed his view that the City recreational complexes, except the golf course, are
old and do not stand up to anything else that is out there. He relayed he requested Jeff Peters to
put together a plan, a wish list, on what he would like to see at the Hedrick Center and ;other
recreational complexes, how to unify them to make a more value added system for the
community, and what they have to offer the unincorporated areas. He said they do not have
anything that stands out that would draw someone outside into the area. He thought it is an
opportunity to step up the programs and create a wonderful facility, to think on a much larger
scale than just repainting Hedrick Center or fixing the walls and it is an opportunity to fund a
first class recreational system.
Mr. Nabors discussed his thoughts regarding employee salary increases or bonuses. He relayed
in his business he does not give a raise based on the fact they have not received one in two years.
He said if he has employees that go above and beyond what he asked them to do, help him do
better what he needs to do to get to the bottom line every month and every year, he will give
them a raise. He said he did not feel pressure to give a raise just based on the fact they have not
received one in two years based on the economic situation
Mr. Holmes discussed the vagrant problem and expressed that something has to be done. He
relayed it is a problem he hears about every week and if they have to hire another police officer
to stay in their face all the time to get rid of them, something has to be done. He commented
unless they get rid of them off the corners and out of the parks, the people will not go down to
use the services and if they will not go to the Landing, there is no opportunity to go to the
businesses downtown.
Mr. Nabors commented the CRA officers downtown are not visible like they used to be and
when he calls to ask where they have been they show up for a little while. He relayed when the
officer is there the vagrants walking around and hanging out on the street do not hang around as
they do not want to deal with a police officer. He thought it is their responsibility to continue to
stay on top of the police force on what they expect from the CRA officer, or to define a CRA
officer or a downtown officer to walk around as their job.
Mr. Holmes discussed the budget process last year that had each department cut 10% which he
thought was unfair to Council. He thought this year instead of saying there is going to be a
shortfall and the department heads come back to say they will have to get rid of employees that
Council look at being more efficient with what they have; not trying to do more with less, do
more with what they have. He stated it is going to be a challenge but they have economized and
reached the point they cannot economize any more without getting rid of the core staff so then
they challenge the core staff to be more efficient.
Mr. Nabors agreed with continuing to streamline, that if the department heads do not come to
Council with great ideas Council will have to say here is what they are going to do, either give
Council a good idea or they are going to pick and choose what they think is best. He thought
they have to continue to put pressure on department heads not to come back with some mindless
idea. He wants to see them come back with how they can make their department better and if the
department heads cannot do that, they should find department heads that do a better job at what
they need them
