Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/23/1994� MINUTES11ITTACH ED = BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGEN,•DA SPECIAL MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1994 9:00 A.M. - COUNTY COMMISSION CHAMBER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1840 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS John W. Tippin, Chairman ( Dist. 4) James E. Chandler, County Administrator Kenneth R. Macht, Vice Chairman (Dist. 3) Fran B. Adams ( Dist. 1) Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Richard N. Bird (Dist. 5) Carolyn K. Eggert (Dist. 2) Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board 9:00 A. M. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SALES TAX PROJECT SECOND FIVE YEARS ( Backup Previously Distributed) ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EV-IDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED. ANYONE WHO,NEEDS A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR THIS MEETING MAY CONTACT THE COUNTY'S AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COORDINATOR AT 567-8000 X 408 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF MEETING. FEB 23 1994 BOOK 91 PAGE 81 SPECIAL MEETING Wednesday, February 23, 1994 The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Wednesday, February 23, 1994, at 9:00 a.m. Present were John W. Tippin, Chairman; Kenneth R. Macht, Vice Chairman; Fran B. Adams; Richard N. Bird; and Carolyn K. Eggert. Also present were James E. Chandler, County Administrator; Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney; and Patricia Held, Deputy Clerk. The Chairman called the meeting to order. OPTIONAL SALES TAB - SECOND FIVE YEARS The hour of 9:00 a.m. having passed, the County Attorney announced that this public hearing has been properly advertised as follows: VERO BEACH PRESS -JOURNAL Published Daily Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida COUNTY OF IkDIAN RIVER: STATE OF FLORIDA Before the undersigned authority personally appeared J. J. Schumann, Jr. who on oath says that he Is Business Manager of the Vero Beach Press -Journal, a daily newspaper published at Vero Beach In Indian River County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a i In the natter of G in the Court, was pub. lished In said newspaper in the issues o1 IIJ, I'aw Affiant further says that the said Vero Beach Press -Journal is a newspaper published at Vero Beach, in said Indian River County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in sold Indian River County, Florida, each daily and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office In Vero Beach, In said Indian River Coun• ty, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and alfiant luither says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication In the said newspaper. ,�P�vQrt;iosa .7ubacribed before rmsea'this � :ilaq o .D. 19 .!p7f._ '• G = RBARA C. Sr n GUF.. NOTAny PUDIIC. BUsinr19,1v fd'anager) My Comm. Expires •, m i S of Florida. MY (, rrmissbn I xp. jw. 29.1997 June 29,1997 "^i88 on Niinil n CC300572 FF '.Nola^`"RBARAc 265P"A;rlu4E� FEB 23 1994 PUBLIC NOTICE • " The Board of County Cormnissi nm will hold ' a free" on the proposed five-year plan for the one - cent optional sales tax. The mee will be held at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, February 23, 1994 'In the County Commission Chambers, County, Administra- tion Building, 1840 25th Street, Vero ieadh. Thepurpose of the meets will be to discilss the most productive utilization of the one -cent opdoniti sales tax over the text be years. The pLft Is In- vited to attend. Anyone who may wish to . appeal any decision whlch may be made at this meeting Will need to en- sure - tilat a verbatim record of the pros eaft s is made," which Includes testimony and evidence' upon. which the appeal Is based. Anyone who needs a special accomrtrodation for thisQ��may contact the County's Amerkans with Act Coordinator at 567-8000, .ext. 223 at Wast 48 horn In advance of the meeting. Feb.18,1994 1073585 BOOK 91 F,, Gc815 BOOK Chairman Tippin turned the meeting over to Administrator Jim Chandler and OMB Director Joe Baird. 91 pm,H816 County County Administrator Chandler and Director Baird made the following presentation: TO: Members of the Board of County Commissioners DATE: January 19, 1994 SUBJECT: OPTIONAL SALES TAX - SECOND FIVE YEARS FROM: James E. Chandler I*e- Joseph A. Baird County Administrator OMB Director Background Information Chapter 87-239 Laws of Florida initiated the "Local Government Infrastructure Commitment Act", which allowed counties to levy, for a period of up to fifteen years, a one cent tax on all transactions subject to taxation under Chapter 212.054 of the Florida statutes. In order to enact the surtax, an ordinance must be passed by the majority of the members of the Board of County Commissioners and then approved by a majority of votes in a referendum or passed by governing bodies of municipalities, representing a majority of the County's population, and approved by a majority of voters in a referendum. The Optional Sales Tax revenues are distributed to Indian River County and to the Cities within the County based on the same formula provided for under Chapter 218.62 Florida Statutes. This means Indian River County and the municipalities (Vero Beach, Sebastian, Indian River Shores, Town of Orchid and Fellsmere) shall receive a proportion of monies earmarked for distribution within the County. The proportion each municipal government receives is computed by dividing the population of that municipality by the sum of the total County population plus two-thirds of the incorporated areas' population. The county's portion is computed by dividing the sum of the .unincorporated area's population plus two- thirds of the incorporated area population by the sum of the total. County population plus two-thirds of the incorporated areas' population. According to the information provided by the State, in the 1993/94 year the revenue breakdown will be as follows: Indian River County *$5,637,867 Vero Beach 1,190,265 Sebastian 789,439 Indian River Shores 161,450 Fellsmere 155,513 Town of Orchid 1,160 TOTAL $7,935,694 *We budget 95% of the estimated amount Proceeds of the surtax may be expended on infrastructure as defined in the bill as "any fixed capital expenditure or fixed capital costs associated with the construction, reconstruction or improvement of public facilities which have a life expectancy of 5 or more years and any land acquisition, land improvement, design and engineering costs related thereto." �— 2 Analysis In the late 1980's Indian River County found itself in an infrastructure dilemma when developing its Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Based on the capital improvement element at that time, the County had over $400 million of infrastructure improvements over the next twenty years and was seeking adequate revenue sources to meet the levels of service set -forth. A review was begun of additional revenue alternatives available to fund future infrastructure needs. After, studying the alternatives, Indian River County found the Optional Sales Tax appealing for the following reasons: L FAIR ALTERNATIVE - ALL USERS CONTRIBUTE - Everyone pays, including tourists and non-residents; not just the property owners of Indian River County. The roads and other infrastructure within the County are built for peak demand. Tourists and non-residents use the County's roads, parks, and facilities. Optional Sales Tax does not hit just one specific group of people, unlike user or impact fees. 2. DOLLARS GENERATED - There were no other revenue sources, besides ad valorem taxes, that could generate approximately $7 million a year in revenues. 3. INCLUDED EXEMPTIONS - Sales tax is exempted on purchases of medicine and food. 4. CITIES AND COUNTY SHARE - The sales tax is not just received by the County. The Cities get a proportionate share to help them in their infrastructure needs. S. PAY AS YOU GO - It gave Indian River County the ability to pay for capital improvements with existing available funds, possibly augmented by short-term borrowings. This would eliminate the need for ten or forty year debt for these type projects and would substantially reduce overall cost of capital improvements by not having to pay huge financing costs (interest) over a long period of time. 6. USED FOR NEEDED CAPITAL PROJECTS - Money could be used for jails, roads, parks and health facilities which would have to'be built regardless if an optional sales tax was in place or not. This would place a burden on other resources (i.e., ad valorem taxes). 7. MONEY CANNOT BE USED FOR OPERATING EXPENSES 8. LIMITED TIME PERIOD - It would be in affect for a maximum of fifteen years. 9. LIKELIHOOD OF STATE GIVING COUNTIES AND CITIES OTHER ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES - The state is in the same position as the County. It cannot keep up with capital improvements and is looking for ways to pay for its infrastructure. In fact, the State mandates more programs to the County every day without a revenue stream that will adequately support them. 3 800K FEB 23 r BOOK 91 PAGE 81,8 10. MINIMIZE ROAD IMPACT FEE INCREASES - In 1988 the County had estimated a shortfall of $60 million dollars to purchase right-of-way and construct roads over the next twenty years. This cost is figured in the calculation of road impact fees adding to the cost of construction within the County. 11. OPTIONAL SALES TAX CHARGED UP TO CAP OF $5,000.00 IN PURCHASES (PER TRANSACTION) - (A maximum optional additional sales tax paid on each item purchased of $50.00.) Conclusion The Indian River County Board of County Commissioners, on January 31, 1989 passed ordinance 89-6 calling for a county -wide referendum on the levy of the one cent sales tax to be held on Tuesday, March 14, 1989. Shortly thereafter the Optional Sales Tax was endorsed by every City within Indian River County. The Chamber of Commerce, Taxpayers Association, Civic Association, Gifford Progressive League, Board of Realtors, Association of General Contractors and the Treasure Coast Home Builders Association all endorsed the Optional Sales Tax at that time. The voters passed the Optional Sales Tax to go into effect June 1, 1989. (60.3% voted for the tax and 39.7% voted against the tax.) When promoting the Optional -Sales Tax, the Indian River County Board of County Commissioners put additional constraints on the use of the sales tax by promising that proceeds would be used only for essential capital projects that the County would have used tax dollars to complete (i.e. ad valorem, gas tax). It was also emphasized that in the future a good portion of Optional Sales Tax would go towards the purchase of right-of-way and roads to help offset the deficit in the Comprehensive Plan. An additional commitment was made to have a list of projects approved in five year intervals by the Board of County Commissioners in a public hearing. The projects for the first five years were the Jail (Phase III), Health Department Building and Courthouse. All projects have been completed with the exception of the Courthouse scheduled to be finished in the summer of 1994. The planning of the second five year list of projects has been initiated. The Budget Office requested a list of major projects from each department with the projected estimated cost, the year it will be needed, beginning construction date, length of construction time and estimated annual operating costs for five years after project completion. As expected, more projects were submitted than there was money available in the second five years. The County Administrator and Budget office reviewed the requests and have recommended projects that were felt to be consistent with the original plan. During the review process, a significant emphasis was placed on the projects' affect on the County's operating budget. The net affect of projects recommended will result in a net operating cost increase of only. $517,375 over the next five years. Attached is a list of the recommended projects for the Board of County Commissioners review. A general overview will be presented at the January 25, 1994 Board meeting. Prior to scheduling the public hearing, it is anticipated a more detailed explanation would be presented and Board direction provided at a subsequent meeting or workshop. 4 1AN tm av 0 0 m L ca rn REVISION RECOMMENDED OPTIONAL SALES TAX PROGRAM FOR SECOND FIVE YEAR (JUNE 1, 1993 TO SEPTEMBER 30,1999) QU23RMONECENT%RECLISTSWK4 REVISED: 02-21-94 - 5:30 PAL (1) REPRESENTS FULL YEAR REVENUE AND OPERATING EXPENDITURES (2) TOTAL WITH COURTHOUSE (3) TOTAL WITHOUT COURTHOUSE 1 1 1 AM 1, 1993 SEPT. 30 199 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 OCT. 1998 TO SEPT. 30 1999 1 TOTAL NNE 1, 1993/ SEPT. 30 199 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 OCT. 1998 TO EPT.30 1 TOTAL CAPITAL•EATENDITURES OPERATING EXPENDITURES REVENUE S2.500.000 $5,516,653 S5.692.1521 S5.852.617 $6 086 722 S6,330,191 S31.968.335. $0 EXPENSE S2.500,000 $ 500 000 S5.000.000 $244.008 S1,200,000 S1.200.000 S1,200,0001 $1 200 000 S1,200,000 S6.244.00.81 EMW W ROADS - RIGHT OF WAY S1,149,900 S1,644,400 $ 030 000 S1,587-600 $6,410,800 BRIDGES -S570,000 $0 $565,000 S1,130,000 $1,805,500 $4 070 500 (S570,000 $0 (S565,000 (S1,130, (S4,070,50 PETITION PAVING S300,000 S300,000 $300 000 S300,000 $300 000 S1,500,000 (S300.000' (S300,000! (S300,000 (S300,000 (S300,000 Sl 500 000 PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY SI 500 000 S1,070,600 $° 570 600 S45,000 S45000 STORWWATER DRAINAGE $1 100 000 $1.100 000 5'0 SIDEWALKS AND BIi:E PATHS $100.000 $100 000 $100.000 sloo.0001 $400 000 $0 i 800 MHZ SYSTEM S1,163,617 S7,048,029 $693,589 $3.905,235 $194,800 5200.600 $206.600 $212.600 $814.600 NORTH-WEST STATION $314.000 $0 $314.000 S702.524 S514.113 S536,661 S560.213 $'' 313 511 SOUTH COUNTY PARK PHASE II $635.000 $635.000 $38.000 S40,000 S42.000 $120 000 DONALD MACDONALD PARK $300.000 $300.000 $60.000 S45.000 $45.000 $150.000 ROUND ISLAND PARK - PHASE 11 $255 000 $300,000 $555.000 S25,000 S35.000 S35,0001— S95.000, N. CTY. RECREATION COMPLEX S500,000 $500000 $0 PARK IMPROVEMENTS S140,000 $140.000 $5 000 S5,000 $5,000 $5,000 S3,000 S25.000 RENOVATION OF ANNEX AND CURRENT ADMIN. BLDG. S6171000 $617.000 $45.000 S85,000 S85,000 S85.000 S300,000 REFUND/CAPITAL IMPROV. BONDS S3,636,200 S3,636,206 (S556,5921 ($556,313 $559 000 ($553,800 $2;225.695 TOTAL4 S5,947,429 8 3 7 6 44 S335,0001 7 64 61 (S429.49 4 (3) 86 4 ANNUAL (DEFICITYsURPLus $0 S975,653 $666 465 S5,188 33,133 $33 509 $314 000 CUMULATIVEEFICI URFLU $0 S975,653 $309188 $314,376 S347,509 $314,000 $314 000 QU23RMONECENT%RECLISTSWK4 REVISED: 02-21-94 - 5:30 PAL (1) REPRESENTS FULL YEAR REVENUE AND OPERATING EXPENDITURES (2) TOTAL WITH COURTHOUSE (3) TOTAL WITHOUT COURTHOUSE 1 1 1 FEB 2,,1994 BOOK 91 Face 820 -7 County Administrator Chandler pointed out that the categories to the right of the solid black line represent estimated operating expenses of the facilities after the initial capital outlay. He also recommended that the 5 -year program be adjusted to 5 years and 4 months to correlate with our fiscal year operating budget. County Administrator Chandler described the 5 -year proposal as a road map, with flexibility for changes in priorities. PUBLIC WORKS Public Works Director Jim Davis detailed the proposed projects. Discussion ensued regarding bridges. Director Baird reported that there are 85 bridges under the Board's jurisdiction which are repaired and rebuilt using funds from our operating budget. We can eliminate that expense from our operating budget by using the Sales Tax funds. Under discussion regarding the bridge at CR -510 and the Big Bend, Director Davis advised that the School Board has plans to build an elementary school in that same area and that the extra traffic will affect that bridge. It was the consensus of the Board that the project at CR -510, which includes widening the bridge and straightening the curve in the roadway, be given higher priority. Commissioner Macht recommended coordinating that bridge project with the School Board's acquisition of property in that area. Peter Robinson, owner of property on 58th Avenue which the County is proposing to purchase for right-of-way, suggested the County contact property owners where right-of-way is needed for paving and allow a period of time for them to donate the land. If they donate the land, they should not be charged for paving and utilities if their property is used for agriculture and is not being developed. County Administrator Chandler agreed that the donated right- of-way can be a trade off for impact fees, because when land is donated for right-of-way, other fees and costs are avoided. Jim Granse, concerned citizen, 36 Pine Arbor Lane, addressed the subject of the expense of management of environmentally sensitive land purchased through LAAC and expressed concern about the operating expenses after acquisition of land. Commissioner Eggert assured him that Sales Tax money will be used only for capital expenses. She agreed that management costs are a real concern. Commissioner Macht noted that Mr. Granse's observation is that there will be operational costs, by nature. In order to encourage 6 citizens to vote for the one -cent Sales Tax, a promise was made that the funds would be used only for capital and capital -related expenses. By law we cannot use the Sales Tax for operating expenses. HEALTH Health Director Dr. Bernard Berman stated that when the present Health Building was constructed, he optimistically thought it would serve our needs for the next five years, but there is a need for another medical facility in the North County now. He urged the Board to consider using Sales Tax revenue for a North County Medical building in the next 5 -year program. It was the consensus of the Board to consider including this item in the proposed projects for the 5 -year plan. The Board also discussed the need for transporting patients to the medical facilities. William Roolage, 11 Vista Garden Trail, wondered why the efforts of the Visiting Nurses Association (VNA) in the North County did not eliminate the need for another medical building. He also urged the various governmental units to cooperate in purchasing land, pay one fee, and possibly get it cheaper. Commissioner Eggert agreed that governmental units should cooperate on land purchases. She also noted that Emergency Services, Health, and several other groups have representation on the Ad Hoc Indigent Care Group at the Hospital. The VNA has been working closely with the Health Department in scheduling services, and there are representatives of each group on the Primary Care Committee, so there is cooperation. Chairman Tippin added that communication between the groups is an important factor. EMERGENCY SERVICES Captain John Gisler, director of administration for Sheriff Wheeler, described the urgent need for the 800 MHz communications system for Emergency Services. This system is most important during the 24 hours prior to a hurricane because medical, fire and law enforcement services must be coordinated, and there are 41,000 people who must be moved. our current communications system is very fragile. County Administrator Chandler advised that the Board will hear a presentation regarding the 800 MHz communication system within 30 to 60 days. 7 FEB 231994 BOOK 91 F'4uF 8-91 FEB 23 1994 BOOK 91 gar 82.2 1-7 Commissioner Eggert stated that she has been questioned about whether the one -cent Sales Tax can be terminated. She understood that the City of Vero Beach has bonded out their Sales Tax revenue for 15 years and it would be difficult to change the program now. County Attorney Charles Vitunac agreed that one reason for not being able to cease the one -cent Sales Tax would be if it is bonded out. Director Baird reported that the City of Vero Beach has pledged .their Sales Tax revenues for the 15 -year term. Chairman Tippin agreed that some people would like to terminate the one -cent Sales Tax earlier than the 15 -year time frame. Commissioner Adams reported that she has had calls indicating an interest in a convention center. The contention is that we are missing out on trade moving to our county because we do not have facilities to handle 400 -person seminars and conventions. Commissioner Macht noted that "convention center" is mentioned specifically in the tourist tax legislation. GENERAL SERVICES Commissioner Macht led discussion regarding the County Administration Building. He admitted that in the past he did not favor construction of a new County Administration Building but recently has realized that the interests of the citizens would be better served if we build a bigger facility to include all County services and sell our building to the School Board, which will allow them to expand and centralize their activities. We need an emergency operating center during crises, and there was a recommendation for a separate facility for Emergency Services, but it is better to have all departments in one facility. Commissioner Macht did not want to spend funds to renovate the Courthouse Annex for the Utility Services Department if there is a possibility of constructing a new administration building. County Administrator Chandler recounted that staff presented a plan to construct a new administration building on property located north of the present building. The cost of anew facility would be in the neighborhood of $16 to $17 million, and after disposition of the County Administration Building, the old Courthouse and Annex, the State Attorney offices and the old library, the net cost could be as low as $8 million. Alternatives were also presented, but the conclusion was that we must do something within the next few years. 8 _ M Commissioner Bird noted that a critical factor is the disposal of the present administration building at a reasonable cost to the School Board. He asked whether the lease agreement with the School Board might cause problems, but Attorney Vitunac advised that the original plan included the eventual takeover of this building by the School Board. County Administrator Chandler agreed that during preliminary discussions with the School Board about 2 years ago, there was an indication that they had an interest in buying this building, but that issue was never pursued. Commissioner Bird encouraged more conversation with the School Board to come to a decision on this matter. Commissioner Eggert agreed that a new administration building is a wonderful idea but she could not justify construction of a new building in the next five years. Discussion ensued regarding the old Courthouse Annex, and Attorney Vitunac advised that there is no legal reason why the Utility Services Department cannot buy the old Courthouse Annex building and pay for it with utility funds. That would eliminate expenditure of $600,000 of Sales Tax funds. It was the consensus of the Board to get more definitive cost estimates on CR -510 and the bridge, as well as the School Board's answer regarding the sale of the County Administration Building. The date for the next Sales Tax Workshop will be discussed at the next regular BCC meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m. ATTEST: J. arton, Clerk 9 FEB 23 1994 John W. Tippi ,iChairman BOOK 91 F.,v'E 9