MINUTES OF MEETING
PORT OF THE
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The regular meeting of the Board of
Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District was held
on
Present and constituting a quorum
were:
Ted
Bissell Chairman
Dale
Lambert Vice Chairman
Norine
Dillon Secretary
Richard
Gatti Assistant
Secretary
Richard
Ziko Assistant
Secretary
Also present were:
Cal
Teague District
Manager
Dan
Cox Attorney
Ron
Benson Engineer
Robert
Edge Field
Operator
Tom
Mack Staff
James
Shucart POI Hotel &
Mr.
Backus Resident
Roger
Ducoffre Resident
Barbara
Henry Resident
Jean
Kungle Resident
David
Naske Resident
Jerry
Winters Resident
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll
Call
Mr. Bissell called the meeting to
order and called the roll.
SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the
Minutes of the
April 13, 2007 Meeting
Mr. Bissell stated each Board member
received a copy of the minutes of the
Ms. Dillon stated on Page 20 in the
fifth paragraph do not want should
replace prefer. On Page 21 in the tenth paragraph plant should be added before failing.
In the next to last paragraph Genung
should replace Dick. On Page 22 in the paragraph before the fifth
order of business U.S.41 should
replace
On MOTION by Mr. Lambert
seconded by Mr. Ziko with all in favor the minutes of the
THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Consideration of a
Request for a Variance of the Signage Rule
Mr. Teague stated we have a request
which was submitted by Mr. Shucart for a variance for two signs, of which
copies of both signs are attached.
Mr. Lambert stated I do not recall
these signs being there for a number of years as the letter states.
Mr. Ziko stated I do not know of
this Angler’s Cove Restaurant which
is stated on the sign.
Mr. Shucart stated we repainted the
sign, but the restaurant used to be there.
Mr. Lambert asked was the sign there
with different wording?
Mr. Shucart responded that is
correct.
Mr. Lambert stated I do not believe
we should have signage on our property relating to specific items such as the
name of a restaurant. I do not mind a directional
sign for the hotel or boat launch, but it must be generic and informational if
it is going to be on CID property.
Mr. Gatti stated although we always agreed
our signs should have the Heron and Egret
logo, I am not certain how this one got off track. I believe we should reestablish the fact this
is the image we want to maintain and all of our signage throughout the
community should be in the same mode.
Mr. Ziko stated I agree. I took pictures of the signs at Sanctuary Point, Sunrise Cay, The Cays of Port
of the Islands as well as Eveningstar
Cay. I superimposed upon the sign at
Sunrise Cay because I believe the
signs which are looking to be grandfathered in should be replaced by these types
of signs. I will present this to Board
members and see if they agree with me.
Ms. Dillon stated I also agree they should
look alike. I am not certain how they
got off track, but I thought we decided we were not going to have any signs on
our property relating to a specific business.
They were going to be directional signage for the hotel, marina and boat
launches, which should be covered by the marina.
Mr. Gatti stated I believe we should
encourage any commercial enterprises here to ensure their signage adheres to
our standards even though it is on their property.
Ms. Dillon stated I agree.
Mr. Ziko stated I also agree.
Mr. Lambert stated I believe the
marina sign is too close to the road.
Ms. Dillon asked are you referring
to the one on the right which is on the edge of the pavement?
Mr. Lambert responded if someone
were riding a bicycle there and had to move off of the road in an emergency, they
may hit the sign.
Mr. Bissell stated I would like to
see the two photographs you just distributed since they go along with my
proposal.
Mr. Lambert stated perhaps we should
deal with this specific sign.
Mr. Bissell stated perhaps we can
put Port of the Islands with our logo
on the front entrance sign along with Hotel/Marina
in order to identify the area. On the
right-hand side we can have a sign which says, Hotel Entrance, along with a sign which says, Marina Entrance at the marina.
Mr. Gatti asked should we
reestablish or create a policy in order to ensure all signs on CID property are
in compliance with this image?
Mr. Cox responded the rule we
adopted should cover this, and Mr. Shucart stated they were willing to add the
logo to the signs.
Ms. Dillon stated the signs will
have to be redone if you add the logos.
Mr. Shucart stated this may be true.
Ms. Dillon stated we are proposing
to have the entire sign redone in order for them to look like the others.
Mr. Lambert stated the other signs
in POI have raised lettering. Perhaps they
can be repainted to reflect our preferred signs.
Mr. Shucart stated we will be happy
to repaint them.
Mr. Lambert asked do any Board
members have a problem with the size or shape of the sign?
Mr. Ziko responded it is probably a
little large to say Hotel Entrance on
it. I do not want to see any signs with Ecotours or Marina Store on them. I only
want to see Hotel Entrance and Marina Entrance along with our logo.
Mr. Shucart stated I would like to
request the first sign to say
Mr. Ziko stated the arrow can go
underneath Entrance and Marina Entrance pointing this way.
Mr. Shucart stated if the sign does
not state Marina Forward or Straight Ahead, people will be confused.
Ms. Dillon stated perhaps you can
have a sign which states Marina Straight
Ahead.
Mr. Ziko stated I do not want the
wording to be in red. It should be in
the same colors we use on all our other signs with the logo.
Mr. Lambert asked do you object to
the hotel putting the sign on the right-hand side as opposed to the middle
area?
Ms. Dillon responded it should be on
the same side as the
Mr. Ziko stated I believe the hotel
owner should inquire about this. Are you
representing the hotel again?
Mr. Shucart responded I am
representing the marina since it is indicated on the sign.
Mr. Lambert moved to
reject the request by Mr. James Shucart of the Islands Marina, LLC for a
variance to the signage rule pending submission of a revised request and Ms.
Dillon seconded the motion.
Mr. Ziko stated I believe we need
directional signs to the marina and hotel.
They should be modified to our approved format and presented as soon as
possible.
Mr. Shucart stated I am happy to
modify them for your approval as long as I know what you want in detail.
Ms. Dillon stated I personally do
not have a problem if they repaint the existing sign as opposed to making them
build a new sign. It must be in this
shape and say, Port of the Islands along
with our logo; Hotel with an arrow;
and
Mr. Lambert stated alternatively, we
can have the signs built, put up and maintained.
Mr. Ziko stated there is a sign
which says Manatee Ecotours at Hotel. I want to make a motion later to have it
removed today since it is an eyesore.
Mr. Bissell stated Mr. Gatti took
several pictures of these signs which are all wooden with the logo. Perhaps this Hotel Entrance sign can be made the same as the other signs with
wood along with the logo. The Hotel Entrance and
Ms. Dillon asked do you want them to
replace the existing signs?
Mr. Bissell responded absolutely. The one in the entrance should say Hotel Entrance, and
Mr. Ziko stated I agree we want them
to conform to the other signs we have.
If you look at Sanctuary Point,
The Cays, Sunrise Cay and Eveningstar
Cay, I do not believe we should divert from what is already here.
On VOICE vote with all in
favor the previous motion was approved as amended.
Mr. Gatti asked does your motion
approve this sign?
Mr. Ziko responded we are rejecting
the sign.
Mr. Lambert I have a motion it was
rejected as submitted but open to a new submittal.
Mr. Lambert stated we should ensure
Mr. Shucart knows what we want.
Mr. Bissell stated I want to see a
wooden sign with our logo; Hotel Entrance
with an arrow; and
Mr. Gatti stated I believe your
intent is for all of our signs to look like this, which I support. Therefore, we are not changing anything and
we have been discussing this for three years.
What motion is necessary?
Mr. Bissell responded the Board
needs to discuss my proposal. Does each
of you have different proposals?
Mr. Gatti responded we all agree
with your proposal.
Ms. Dillon stated the first sign
coming in would be this but it would have secondary directional arrows for the
marina.
Mr. Gatti stated I do not believe we
should be designing the signs. However,
we should dictate their appearance.
Mr. Ziko stated I believe we need to
give direction.
Mr. Bissell stated the residents
have been extremely vocal with regards to signage.
Ms. Dillon asked can we agree we are
going to give Mr. Shucart direction as to what the signs should say and what
they should look like in order to avoid revisiting this again?
Mr. Bissell responded I agree.
Mr. Ziko stated I believe he is already
aware of our requirements.
Mr. Shucart stated I have a general
idea, but I am not certain about the size.
Mr. Ziko stated the sizes are all
different. For example, the Eveningstar Cay sign is quite wide and The Cays sign is not as wide.
Mr. Shucart asked is The Cays sign a painted or raised-letter
sign?
Mr. Ziko responded it is a
raised-letter sign and my wife repainted The
Sanctuary sign.
Mr. Shucart asked are those
raised-letter signs?
Ms. Dillon responded that is correct
and the logo is gray.
Mr. Bissell stated if Mr. Shucart
agrees, I believe the CID should hire someone to make the signs since we want them
to be the same.
Ms. Dillon asked should we pay for
the signs?
Mr. Bissell responded I believe so.
Ms. Dillon stated by erecting and
paying for the signs, we will get what we want as well as being responsible for
maintenance.
Mr. Lambert stated there was a size
qualification.
Ms. Dillon stated it is limited to
15 square feet in size and four feet in height.
Mr. Cox stated this does not apply
to your exempt signs.
Ms. Dillon stated we want all signs
to resemble the exempt signs.
Mr. Ziko stated I believe three by five
is sufficient to put anything on it.
Ms. Dillon asked how big is this
one?
Mr. Ziko responded I do not believe
it is three by five.
Ms. Dillon stated I do not believe
any of them are this size.
Mr. Gatti moved to approve
the format for all signs on CID property to be three feet by five feet in size
and contain the Heron and Egret logo
with raised lettering in blue and white coloring.
Ms. Dillon stated 15 square feet is
the basic size.
Mr. Gatti asked what if someone
wants to put up a huge sign?
Mr. Lambert responded it will not be
approved.
Mr. Gatti restated the
previous motion as discussed with all sign requests to be submitted to the Board
of Supervisors for approval before they are erected.
Ms. Dillon asked who will submit
them for approval if we are going to put them up?
Mr. Ziko responded we are missing
signs at Eveningstar Cay,
Mr. Gatti stated you are confusing
directional and informational signs.
Mr. Ziko stated this is not a
directional sign. It is an entrance sign
to The Cays.
Mr. Bissell asked what is your
opinion about the sign at the marina with an arrow?
Mr. Shucart responded it looks architecturally
plain and I would select something more colorful, but it looks fine. However, since it is your property you have
the right to designate any type of sign you choose.
Mr. Bissell asked do you have any
objection to it?
Mr. Shucart responded I do not.
Mr. Bissell stated with regards to
the hotel sign we were discussing, you wanted to have
Mr. Shucart stated this is
acceptable.
Ms. Dillon asked do we have to
obtain a permit for these signs in order to have them redone on our property?
Mr. Cox responded I am inclined to
say we do not have to obtain a permit, but I want to look at the sign ordinance
and get back to you.
Mr. Ziko asked does this involve a
call to the county?
Mr. Cox responded I do not believe
so, but I will verify it. However, the
county does not usually get involved with directional sign issues for internal
subdivisions.
Ms. Dillon asked can we get a sign
company to make these up without going through a permitting process?
Mr. Cox responded I will verify
this.
Mr. Bissell asked can you let us
know by Wednesday?
Mr. Cox responded since I have other
work to be done, perhaps I can get back to you toward the end of the week.
Mr. Bissell stated I wish to
designate Mr. Ziko to design a sign in the manner we discussed and send it to
Mr. Teague, after which Mr. Teague can e-mail it to us. If it is acceptable to us, we can respond via
e-mail to Mr. Teague.
Mr. Ziko stated we need to find a professional
sign designer and give them direction as to what we are looking for.
Mr. Lambert stated we need to decide
whether the CID or Mr. Shucart is going to put them up.
Mr. Bissell stated they should state
what we want since they are our signs on our property.
Mr. Shucart stated at this point it
is different than before. I also believe
people will keep on driving when they are looking for the hotel as opposed to
driving through the community and creating more traffic.
Ms. Dillon stated for example, people
are going to turn left into the marina.
You may want a sign inside which says Marina Store or whatever you are going to have there. Therefore, it may be nice to get everyone to
have the same type of signs which will be on your property. However, I am not certain if you are planning
anything.
Mr. Shucart stated we will
definitely have signs on our property indicating various areas as required for
safety and other issues.
Ms. Dillon stated I am not certain
if we should get involved in this.
Mr. Ziko stated the signs which
state Marina Store and Ecotours are at the forward entrance of
your marina. The main entrance to the
marina is an additional 100 yards down
Mr. Shucart responded this is a good
point.
Mr. Ziko stated since your forward
entrance is blocked off no one can enter there anyway.
Mr. Shucart stated since the
structure was already there and we never re-did the signs, I never thought about
the location.
Mr. Ziko stated the island separates
at the marina entrance in which there is a sign on the median as you turn into
the marina stating, Cays of Port of the
Islands. Therefore, we actually
cannot put the marina sign there anyway.
Mr. Shucart asked what do you
suggest?
Mr. Ziko responded perhaps we can
put the marina sign on the other side of
Mr. Shucart stated this probably
makes more sense.
Mr. Ziko asked do you want to have
it at the forward entrance or the entrance near the boat ramp?
Mr. Shucart responded I believe the
main entrance s for the boat launch is appropriate.
Ms. Dillon stated I believe the sign
company doing the signs for The Cays already
designed the logo for those signs. I am
certain they should already have a template.
Mr. Lambert stated I believe it is
slightly different.
Ms. Dillon stated it is still the
same logo.
Mr. Teague stated I believe enough
direction has been given in which we know exactly what you want the sign to say
and how it should look. However, we must
determine who is going to own the sign; whether the Board is going to give
direction to the applicant; or if the Board is going to take on this task.
Mr. Cox stated the other issue is if
we do these signs for this project we must determine whether or not we are going
to clear the signs for the North Hotel
since Mr. Motwani wants to put up his sign since he also owns this property.
Mr. Ziko stated he cannot put up a
sign with commercial information. It
should just say Hotel. Since we are going to put up a sign which
says Port of the Islands on
Ms. Dillon stated I believe we will
have to design the sign on Union Road
the same way we design the sign out front.
Mr. Ziko asked are those signs
already designed?
Ms. Dillon responded that is
correct. I agree with Mr. Bissell we
should purchase the signs and put them up.
Mr. Lambert asked what happens if the
Stella Maris Drive HOA asks us to put
up a sign in their area?
Ms. Dillon responded we will have to
do the same thing.
Mr. Lambert asked is the Board
willing to take on all of these requests?
Ms. Dillon responded I do not
believe there are many more.
Mr. Lambert stated I can think of
two areas.
Mr. Bissell asked why would they
want a sign?
Ms. Dillon responded they will want
one if everyone else has one.
Mr. Lambert stated they already
discussed it at the last Board meeting.
Mr. Ziko stated I do not know where
they are going to put it. We are referring
to specifics of our property. I do not
believe the CID has any property approaching
Mr. Gatti restated the
motion that all signs on CID property contain the appropriate image and logo as
discussed and be put up, paid for and maintained by the CID and Ms. Dillon
seconded the motion.
Mr. Ziko stated I want to ensure we
are going to get these signs done as soon as possible in order to keep up with
the continuity of the community and remove the other ones which I consider
eyesores.
Mr. Lambert asked are you going to
use the same firm you are currently contracted with?
Mr. Ziko responded we need to
determine whether or not they can do this.
Mr. Cox stated I am certain they
can. Perhaps you can leave me the signs which
are currently there until we can get thee new signs made.
Mr. Lambert asked are you going to leave
the Ecotours sign?
Mr. Ziko responded this is a
separate sign.
On VOICE vote with all in
favor the previous motion was approved.
Mr. Bissell asked are we going to do
anything with the entrance sign?
Mr. Gatti responded since the
entrance sign is important to the entire community, from both a commercial and
residential aspect, we should really think about this and have someone come up an
appropriate design.
Mr. Cox stated perhaps you can ask
the sign company for which you have the contract proposal to provide their
suggestions for design which they will be able to get permitted since it is
going to be a key issue and they are aware of the rules. They should submit a uniform proposal for
what you are doing at The Cays,
Mr. Ziko stated perhaps we can
authorize someone to approach the hotel and ask them to pay for the new sign
going up since our sign on the arch was removed by them and replaced illegally
with their sign on our property.
Mr. Teague asked have we definitely
decided the arch is our property?
Mr. Cox responded although I am
going to discuss it during my report, I am still looking into this. It is basically going to come down to whether
or not you want this done. I will be
more comfortable if we got an abstract from attorney’s title or handle the entire
project out here. Since we cut it off at
the point in which different parcels were platted, I am not tracking a change
of title for the individual properties.
However, we should get all parcels squared up, along with the dimensions
of the identified properties. This will amount
to approximately $2,500 to $3,000.
Ms. Dillon stated you told us last
month you were going to speak to Mr. Vogel.
Mr. Cox stated I gave him the
information I had, but I was out of town over the last couple of weeks and have
not had an opportunity to follow up with him.
However, we asked him to proceed and he has done a Title Search Report which he is going to share with me. The Title
Search Report will identify only certain items in the chain of title. An abstract search will allow me to obtain
all documents of title affecting everything within District boundaries. It will be in chronological order after which
I will have to do the analysis.
Ms. Dillon asked is this in
conjunction with Mr. Benson’s work on the plat?
Mr. Cox responded that is
correct. If I spend a couple of days at
the courthouse searching the title records myself, you are going to pay me more
than what I am going to pay the Abstractor for the Attorney’s Title. They charged $75 per hour to prepare an
abstract the last time they did this, which is significantly lower than my
rate.
Mr. Ziko stated I want to know how
the county determines the boundary lines which show up on the Property
Appraiser’s site and show the arch is on our property. This is published information which is on the
Internet.
Mr. Cox stated their website contains
a disclaimer which states this is based on non-bill verified information. There can be a variance from actual property
lines. If you abide by the Property
Appraiser’s lines on this map, you have some parcels of property between the
area which the North Hotel owns and
what we own. I can amend this through
the chain of title. I can identify the
owner of these small 10’ by 35’ or 40’ strips of land. The best way to go about this is to have an Abstractor
do the report after which we can do the analysis.
Mr. Lambert asked will this cover
the entire District out to the north side of the road?
Mr. Cox responded that is correct. I will search it from the point at which Port of the Islands, Inc. platted Phase II of The Cays because once it is platted we know the locations of the
lots as well as what we have an interest in.
The same holds true for all platted areas on this side. We cut it off at the filing of the
declaration on the condominium properties in order to avoid having individual lot
transactions.
Mr. Ziko asked are you referring to
the first 1,400’ of
Mr. Cox responded I want to do the
entire property.
Mr. Lambert stated we will have no
further questions regardless of the issue.
Mr. Cox stated we can work with Mr.
Benson to put together a definitive map showing every easement you have whether
it was created by plat or Declaration of Condominium.
Ms. Dillon asked how long will this
take?
Mr. Cox responded it is going to take
approximately two months. It will
probably take one month to receive the abstract back, and I hope it will not be
as bad as the worst one I dealt with which came in four bankers’ boxes.
Mr.
Ziko asked can we push the abstract to start with the arch in order to be able
to remove the sign as soon as possible?
Mr. Cox responded I can probably
narrow this down for them. We will give
them the property identification numbers which the property appraiser says we
own along with the deed containing the identification number. If I can obtain the chain of title from Mr.
Vogel and provide it to them, perhaps they can help us reconcile it.
Mr. Teague stated once this is done,
Mr. Benson knows where to send his surveyors to stake it out, after which we will
know what can be done.
Mr. Ziko stated we will definitely
set the monuments as well.
Mr. Bissell asked is the work which
is being done today null and void?
Mr. Benson responded the work they
are doing is for a private client out here.
On MOTION by Mr. Lambert
seconded by Ms. Dillon with all in favor Mr. Cox was authorized to proceed with
the Abstract Report in order to determine the location of CID property boundaries.
Mr. Gatti asked can we authorize the
sign company to commence work in the meantime?
Mr. Cox responded perhaps you should
get them to do the design in order for it to get permitted in a timely fashion.
Ms. Dillon stated they should do the
same for the other signs.
Mr. Bissell stated we should let
them know what we want on the signs we own.
Mr. Ziko stated I penciled in what I
want to see on the arch and perhaps the sign company can come up with something
when you approach them. It should say Port of the Islands over the top of the
arch; have our logo in the middle; with Hotel
and Marina at the bottom. It is
generic and has everything we want to tell people coming down the road.
Mr. Cox stated it has been a while
since I looked at the Ordinance, and the only concern I have when you are doing
these is the signage must be correct. When
you have a number of signs which are close together in the same area, there are
some specific standards which apply and we must ensure we are in compliance in
order for the sign company to get it permitted since they do this on a daily
basis.
Ms. Dillon asked what is the sign on
Mr. Ziko responded I am not
certain. I thought it was going to say Port of the Islands/Union Road. This is a large sign and someone should have
a copy of it.
Mr. Cox stated we had some proposals
which circulated back when we first started this. Although I do not remember what they are, I
am certain the sign company should still have them.
Ms. Dillon stated I do not believe
it is in the letter.
Mr. Cox stated they had some
proposals.
Mr. Lambert stated all it says is Port of the Islands.
Mr. Ziko stated this was when Mr.
Motwani told us he wanted to put Hotel
on it, at which time we told him anything on the sign must be generic. It is a large sign in a different area of POI
on the south side of Route 41.
Mr. Bissell stated there is also
going to be a mobile home park back there.
Mr. Ziko stated you can put RV Park, which is generic.
Mr. Lambert stated we must ensure
the code allows it.
Ms. Dillon stated you also have the
gun club.
Mr. Ziko asked are those generic
enough to put on there?
Mr. Cox responded I am not certain.
Ms. Dillon stated they may have to state
Port of the Islands, and when you
turn in you may have signs which say Hotel
and Gun Club with an arrow in order to avoid having signage on Route 41. Perhaps the arch should just say Port of the Islands with our logo.
Mr. Ziko stated I want it to say Hotel and Marina.
Mr. Cox stated this is more
complicated due to the mixed use nature of this development, and we will have
to work with the county to get this done.
Ms. Dillon stated you have
residences on this side and in The Cays,
as well as a hotel, gun club and possible RV Park on the other side. Therefore, anything which is done on this
side will have to apply to the other side.
FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney’s
Report
Mr. Mack asked have you heard back?
Mr. Cox responded I have not heard
back since I sent the request to their attorney approximately three weeks
ago. I was out of the office on business
most of last week, but I e-mailed him again on Wednesday and did not receive a
response by the time I left yesterday. The
owner’s representative, Mr. Wanklin, travels quite frequently. The end of the due diligence period is May 21st. I requested an extension through July 20th
with no change to the closing date. The major
issue which the county is concerned with as they very well should be is the
discussions which are taking place in the legislature with regards to restructuring
funding of local government, and I do not believe we are going to get an answer
from the county until the legislature resolves these issues in June.
Mr. Ziko asked do you believe we
will be able to get this done quickly?
Mr. Cox responded they are calling a
special session which will focus entirely on this issue. Historically, there have been
complications. However, something will
be done.
Mr. Mack stated I discovered
Mr. Ziko asked does this have to be
approved by the Board of Commissioners?
Mr. Cox responded it must be
approved by the
Mr. Ziko stated I do not know of any
other community in
Mr. Mack stated I think it has
something to do with being incorporated.
Mr. Cox stated the county funds all
components for fire services and fire stations, through a special assessment on
the tax roll. Since they each have their
own area of jurisdiction, each community pays for their own fire station
through the special assessment process, and they do not use general revenue
fund dollars to build them.
Mr. Ziko asked are we already paying
for this on our tax bill at 4.1%?
Mr. Cox responded this is for your
existing fire services. It is well
within your powers as a District to purchase this land, build a fire station
and fund out the special assessment. However,
it depends on how quickly you want to accomplish this. You may not get an answer in time to do this
project if you wait for the county. You
have to decide whether you want to purchase the land and hold onto it until the
fire district is ready to proceed.
Mr. Ziko stated if we go through
this process and purchase the land, we do not have any ERCs. If the county and fire district back out, we may
have to hold onto this land for an indefinite period if we cannot sell it because
there are no ERCs and we do not have the funds to build a fire station.
Mr. Cox stated you have a valid
concern.
Mr. Ziko stated if this gentleman is
really interested in selling this property, I believe he should include
ERCs. I do not want to be financially
responsible to this community for raising $200,000 to $300,000 and having it
sit there.
Ms. Dillon stated if we cannot get
an extension beyond May 21st, I believe we should wait until we get
permission from the county. I do not
believe we should proceed with this purchase until we have a clear
understanding of what the county is going to do. Will we lose $5,000 if we back out of the process
now?
Mr. Cox responded you are currently
not at risk of losing any money.
Ms. Dillon moved to renege
on the land purchase for the fire station if the District cannot be granted an
extension on the contract to July 31, 2007 subject to reconsideration upon
approval by the county.
Mr. Mack stated I can tell them we
discussed this with Mr. Gatti and you may want to come back when and get a
better price later. Therefore, I
recommend you cancel it and start over if we cannot get their attention.
Mr. Lambert asked can Chief Wilson
guarantee we are not going to be in this by ourselves?
Mr. Mack responded I am trying to
get permission through Mr. Colletta in which he can talk directly to Mr. Mudd
without getting Chief Wilson involved.
Mr. Lambert asked is there enough
room for him to set up a temporary station behind the lot where they are going
to put the new building?
Mr. Mack responded there is plenty
of room.
Mr. Lambert asked will he be able to
locate it in such a way that they could finish the building once the time came
without having to find another location?
Mr. Mack responded there is 2.1
acres, which allows plenty of room.
Mr. Lambert stated this is not all
usable land.
Mr. Mack stated I believe 2.1 acres
is usable. He is prepared to proceed
with this project, but he must get permission and he is currently blocked by
Mr. Lambert stated he only has funds
budgeted for the fire station, two-thirds of the property and anything
necessary to set up a temporary station.
Mr. Mack stated that is
correct. However, it is going to take
three to five years to build a permanent station.
Mr. Cox stated this can be done
through the assessment levy process, but since the project has never been funded
before, you will have to send certified letters to each property owner
describing the project. Since the estimated
cost amounts to $800,000, funding over three or four years will cost
approximately $200 per year for an ERC.
A public hearing will have to be held.
You have to prepare an assessment methodology which can be funded as
part of your powers in the statute to do so, but it probably involves a four to
six month process in order to get the assessments levied. Since we will not be able to put them on this
year’s tax roll, you will not start to generate revenue until next year unless
you decided to do this off roll which will be an administrative nightmare for
Mr. Teague. I am certain it will be more
costly than paying the taxes.
Mr. Mack stated the fire department
can borrow the money from the county and you will be paying this back as if you
were leasing the property. Therefore,
you will benefit from the county’s tax revenues.
Mr. Cox stated they will probably
adjust your assessment levy over the course of time when they do this project.
Mr. Mack stated we are up against
the combination of these different factions together into one with the ultimate
goal of getting the Commissioner’s approval, which is going to change down the
line.
Mr. Bissell asked does Chief Wilson
have $400,000?
Mr. Mack responded he told me he has
$350,000, and if possible, we can try to come up with the additional $30,000 to
$40,000 in order to proceed.
Mr. Bissell stated this is going to
cost us close to $600,000 after we pay all fees and get everything taken care of.
Mr. Cox stated I believe the actual
sales price of the property is $485,000.
The cost for document stamps at 70 cents per $100 amounts to $3,300.
Mr. Ziko stated I thought it was
more than $485,000.
Mr. Bissell stated I thought the
cost was $550,000 plus expenses.
Mr. Cox stated title insurance fees
are approximately $3,000 and miscellaneous recording fees are approximately
$200. You do not have any issues with
intangible third documents on the mortgage.
Mr. Bissell asked what about your
fees?
Mr. Cox responded I will not charge
any fees because I receive part of the title insurance premium since I am
acting as the agent on this transaction, which is sufficient.
Ms. Dillon stated we agreed it was
going to cost $550,000, but I still maintain it is important we know all of
this information. However, we have until
May 21st on our current offer, and if we do not hear back from them
on an extension I still want to adhere to the motion I just made.
Mr. Cox stated I can write them a
detailed letter with regards to the purchase and explain to them the county and
the CID are ready to proceed. However,
the county is not willing to extend until the legislature issues are resolved
which will show how everything is going to be affected, which is currently out
of our control. Therefore, we do not
want to be locked into a deal which dictates planning with no ERCs.
Mr. Ziko stated it may possibly sit
there for an indefinite period.
Ms. Dillon stated I will not
authorize the purchase of this land unless we have a commitment from the
county.
Mr. Lambert seconded the
previous motion.
Mr. Ziko stated this is now going to
be dependent on a July 31st extension date.
On VOICE vote with all in
favor reneging on land purchase for the fire station if the District is not
granted an extension on the contract until July 31, 2007 subject to
reconsideration upon approval by the county was approved.
Mr. Mack stated I hope to get a
response from Mr. Colletta and Chief Wilson by the next meeting.
Ms. Dillon stated Chief Wilson has a
Fire Board meeting on Monday evening.
Mr. Cox stated the county is
absolutely not going to do anything until the legislature acts and restructures
their budget.
Mr. Ziko stated they do not come
back until June 15th.
Mr. Cox stated we are probably not
going to know anything until the July meeting.
Mr. Ziko stated perhaps July 31st
is a tight timeframe since we are not meeting until the second Friday, in which
case we are going to be in the same situation with the county.
Mr. Cox stated the actual closing is
scheduled for August 20th. We
can extend the closing date which always poses more difficulties. However, when I represent a seller during a
transaction in which the party asks for an extension, I usually tell them to
make a second deposit. A July 31st
extension puts you at approximately $20,000 at risk if they ask for it, but I
am not going to offer it unless they request it. Therefore, I need some direction since I may
not have time to get back to you.
Ms. Dillon stated I believe we should
withdraw the offer and start over.
Mr. Ziko asked does this gentleman
understand what we are going through?
Does he really want to sell the property?
Mr. Cox responded I believe he
thinks he has a good deal here since he is willing to sign the contract, but
you should not give anything away.
However, since I previously represented him, I have a great deal of
respect for him and I know he is a reasonable person. Basically, we either must get the extension
through July 31st or we will have to back out.
Mr. Lambert asked do you require
anything else from the Board?
Mr. Cox responded if he asks about
deposits going forward, I need direction.
Ms. Dillon stated he should not be
given anything else at this time.
FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager’s Report
A.
Distribution
of the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2008 and Consideration of Resolution
2007-4 Approving the Budget and Setting the Public Hearing
Mr.
Teague stated I cannot attend next month’s meeting. However, Mr. Goscicki will attend. Recently, Management Services restructured
itself and Mr. Bob Koncar was appointed General Manager. Therefore, on Friday, June 8th, he
is holding his first meeting with all District Managers with
Mr. Cox stated I will have to attend
next month’s meeting via telephone. A
city which I represent is meeting at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 7th,
and we do not get out until after 11:00 p.m.
Mr. Teague stated we have Resolution
2007-4 which sets the public hearing and adopts this budget. Although it will be essentially approved with
this resolution, any necessary changes can be made at the public hearing. Today’s meeting will commence the budget process
and we will work from this document in order to make any necessary changes. Since Mr. Benson was out of town when we
started this process, we just received the updated CIP information. The first page should replace Page 9; the
second page should replace Page 10; the third page should replace Page 11; and the
fourth page should replace Page 12, after which there are three pages which
should replace the three documents after the budget narrative. Two projects were added under Capital Improvements, one to be done in
2008 and other to be done in 2009. The
project for 2008 involves construction of the second effluent storage tank as
required by the FDEP in the amount of $400,000 along with permitting and
engineering costs in the amount of $86,250.
The project for 2009 involves electrical upgrades for the new wastewater
treatment plant generator which includes permitting and engineering costs in
the amount of $172,500.
Mr. Benson stated for clarification,
these are projects which have been on our list for a few years, but were
unintentionally delayed. However, I want
to ensure they do not get delayed any further.
Mr. Teague stated the electrical
upgrades are going to start shortly.
Mr. Benson stated they are already
underway.
Mr. Teague asked is the generator
part of this?
Mr. Benson responded this is the
part we delayed, but I want to ensure we deposit some funds in order to prevent
it from being further delayed. I do not
want you to run out of irrigation water once we make these changes, especially
during periods of high salinity which is difficult to predict.
Ms. Dillon asked can you elaborate on
the second storage tank?
Mr. Benson responded it was in the
CIP before we started modifying things.
Ms. Dillon stated we discussed this
last month.
Mr. Teague stated we prepared a
summary of all existing contracts and amounts from the Field and Administrative columns,
which we used to identify many costs within the budget. The change in the budget from previous years
includes an Actual for 2006 which is
the column on the left; after which you have the adopted budget we are currently
working from. The Actuals go through March 2007, after which we forecasted
expenditures for the remainder of the year.
The total projected amount will include the amount we are projecting to
be expended at the end of this current fiscal year and are being proposed for
the Fiscal Year 2008 Budget. There are a
couple of smaller items which will probably need to be adjusted, such as the four
supervisors’ salaries which should be $6,000 in the General Fund. We put the
amount between the two funds. The Capital Reserve figure of $1 million in
the General Fund is just an estimate,
but there is absolutely nothing there. The
Capital Reserve in the Water & Sewer Fund will increase. We have
$150,000 which will increase to $486,250 since we are moving up the CIP project
for the effluent storage tanks.
Mr. Bissell asked do we have to do
anything with our mill rate?
Mr. Teague responded the millage or
assessment is identified collectively one page after the Amortization Schedule.
Ms. Dillon stated since the pages
are not numbered, I recommend pagination once this is redone.
Mr. Teague stated there is a
proposed increase in the General Fund. The service is being proposed to decrease
from $718 to $408. The Water & Sewer Special Assessments will
remain the same. The net effect of the
total assessments per unit will decrease from $2,101 to $1,829.
Mr. Lambert asked how will we reduce
our costs?
Mr.
Cox responded when you levied off the assessments for the RV Park property and
the Motwani property with the March 1st due date, they accrued
interest at the rate of 1% per month, plus the penalty. Those penalties and interest which we
collected were included in the Debt Service
Fund. Therefore, we actually paid
down more debt for those properties, even though it cost us more time and money
to resolve. Therefore, it actually wound
up being a net benefit for all property owners here since this action reduced
everyone’s assessments. This schedule
confirms the bondholders insufficiently paid down the remaining debt.
Mr. Lambert stated this is what we can
expect in years to come until we pay it off.
Mr. Cox stated your annual debt
service is approximately $220,000 for the next three years. Since it was previously closer to $800,000
per year, we made some significant headway.
Mr. Lambert stated I noticed over
the last couple of years we over-estimated Water
& Sewer revenues. I believe we
did it again this year, and I am curious how we determine the correct number.
Mr. Teague stated we took this
consideration and reduced the Water &
Sewer Revenues from what they were budgeted at last year, but it just has
not been holding up to the budget.
Ms. Dillon stated we still are
faking the interest on our investments, but not in the budget.
Mr. Cox stated there are certain
things which should not be budgeted. For
example, you have zero on the line
item for Meter Fees because if the
real estate market continues to bottom out, no one will set a meter next year. You never know when you may have to withdraw interest
on investments in the event there a damaging hurricane takes place. You will have to withdraw on all of those
investments in order to receive your FEMA refund, which will leave you with
zero interest income. Therefore, you
should not put yourself at risk by budgeting for those particular line items.
Mr. Lambert stated with regards to assessment
revenue, I do not believe we accounted for the fact that we never collect our
entire levy, but we are currently at approximately 85% for this year. Therefore, we are past the point of income coming
in for all intents and purposes.
Mr.
Cox stated I thought we put into our budget a line item for uncollectible debt
at some point.
Mr. Teague stated we only receive
the discount prepayment. Although we may
not lose the money, we do not receive it in a budgetary form, but we may be
able to reduce it. I am not certain how
other CDDs determine this, but we apparently received15%.
Mr. Ziko stated we started at
$141,000 on the reduction, but we received $911 out of the $1,053,000. Was this for Mr. Motwani’s property?
Mr. Lambert responded I looked at two
other properties which are delinquent and I believe this just happens
sometimes.
Ms. Dillon stated the number is just
not going to be as high.
Mr. Lambert stated this may be true,
but there are a lot of other properties other than those two.
Mr. Teague asked does the county
supply this information?
Mr. Cox responded I am not
certain. However, we discussed this
briefly a couple of weeks ago, and they will give us a list of all the other
properties out here which we will check on.
Mr. Teague stated I spoke to someone
at the Tax Collector’s office a couple of days ago when I was looking at the
website, and they have some databases which can be power-loaded.
Mr. Cox stated I believe they
published a list in the newspaper, but they should also be able to plug in
their spreadsheet which will indicate the properties in this township and
range. It should be fairly easy to find
this on their published list.
Mr. Ziko stated there is one on the
first and third pages according to the list in the newspaper.
Ms. Dillon stated it appears they
deliberately opted to do this. Can we
find out who they are and send letters?
Mr. Cox responded we can send a
letter warning them a tax certificate will be auctioned resulting in the
possibility of losing their property within three years if they fail to pay
their taxes. They are going to get it
from the Tax Collector, since it is his job to collect the money, not ours.
Mr. Lambert asked are you going to determine
whether or not we can get these delinquent properties taken care of?
Mr. Teague responded yes.
Mr. Bissell asked what about the
mill rate?
Mr. Cox responded you do not have a
millage rate.
Mr. Bissell asked what about the
assessment?
Mr. Cox responded since you are not
required to include this on the trim notice, since it does not need to be
published separately. However, we will
indicate it when we advertise the public hearing, which will serve as
sufficient notice to property owners.
Mr. Bissell asked are we going to
collect more this year than last year?
Mr. Cox responded it appears you are
going to have a net reduction of special assessments.
Mr. Bissell asked why is this going
to happen when we need the money?
Ms. Dillon responded the debt
service decreased.
Mr. Bissell stated I do not agree
with it since we have additional expenses.
Mr. Cox stated we can discuss this
at the public hearing if you wish to accelerate a couple projects which are in
your Capital Improvement Plan. The possibility of net reductions of 12.9% on
residential assessment rolls gives you the ability to increase your available revenue
to these capital improvement projects without increasing the burden to property
owners.
Mr. Bissell stated several years ago
we made a motion to request a certain amount of money for a certain length of
time which I believe is coming up within one year.
Mr. Cox stated there was no
timeframe. When I looked at those
records, I made it absolutely clear you were not making any promises this would
be the only amount for five years.
Mr. Bissell stated there are many
people here who do not agree with this.
Mr. Ziko stated I do not see these
people at our meetings.
Mr. Lambert stated these people
attended the meeting in which this was passed.
Ms. Dillon asked what does this
reduction in debt service amount to for ERCs on the tax bill?
Mr. Cox responded it amounts to $310
per ERC.
Ms. Dillon stated if we decided to
keep $310 for use on other projects, and at the same time we are paying out
less in debt service, we will see an increase in funds.
Mr. Ziko stated $310 per ERC is much
more than 12%.
Mr. Cox stated it amounts to
43%. There was a 10.7% increase in the General Fund and a 0% increase in the Water & Sewer Fund, which is where
the CIP funds come from. Therefore, it
nets out anywhere from a range of mostly 12% to 13% which looks small and the
increase did not apply to some properties.
The 10.7% increase in the General
Fund only floated to an increase of approximately 2.5% on the tax bill.
Mr. Ziko asked is the real savings on
an ERC going to amount to $300?
Mr. Cox responded that is correct.
Mr. Ziko asked is it going to
decrease the tax bill?
Mr. Cox responded their assessment
per ERC will decrease from $2,100 this year to $1,830 next year for a total of
$270 per ERC. However, they vary by
property because of the type of unit they have.
Mr. Ziko stated it does not vary by
ERC.
Mr. Lambert stated you mentioned an
issue with zoned property in which there was a sewer plant and water plant.
Mr. Cox stated I believe they did
not pay a connection fee. Do you recall
what the connection fee was which you were required to pay when you purchased
your property?
Mr. Gatti responded I do not recall.
Mr. Cox stated it was a certain
amount which they paid when they purchased their property and capacity into the
system. Therefore, they transferred this
capacity into the new systems when the old ones were removed.
Mr. Lambert asked were those
particular lots involved in the bond process?
Mr. Cox responded although they were
involved in the bond process, the assessment methodology determined they paid
their pro rata share.
Mr. Ziko asked are they still paying
the maintenance fee?
Mr. Cox responded that is correct.
Mr. Lambert stated if we obtain
another bond once the previous one is paid off, it will start over again with
everyone, which I was not certain I understood.
Mr. Ziko asked are 22 properties
involved?
Mr. Cox responded I believe 37
properties are involved.
Mr. Gatti stated there are 33
properties which were part of Phase I.
Mr. Lambert asked will we be able to
comment on and discuss this at the next meeting?
Mr. Teague responded absolutely.
Mr. Cox stated several districts
actually hold budget workshops which are separate from the regular monthly
meeting due to the time involved with going through the budget line by
line. You may consider going back to a
zero-based budget in order to build it back up; try to determine exactly where
you are spending and where you may be able to save money; or look at other
options. However, you will have to hold
a budget workshop if decide to pursue any of these options.
Ms. Dillon stated I do not believe
it is necessary to go back to a zero-based budget. Most of our expenses are directly tied to Mr.
Benson and the CIP.
Mr. Lambert stated we have two meetings between now and the public hearing. Does this give us enough time if we discover at the next meeti