CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL ANNEX
TUESDAY
7:00 PM
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
Council Members Present:
Mayor Pro Tem Bob Hoog
Council Member Leo Nicholas
Council Member Buzz Petsos
Mayor Rocky
Randels
Council Member Shannon Roberts
Others Present:
City Manager
City Treasurer Andrea
Bowers
Public Works Director Walter
Bandish
Assistant Public Works Director Jeff
Ratliff
Building Official Todd Morley
Recreation Director Robert Lefever
REPORTS:
City
Manager
·
Mr. Boucher
announced that the City received its Non-Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] Federal Stormwater Permit approval.
·
Mr. Boucher
reported on construction of the new
sewer main as follows: boring under
the canal and realignment to the north side of the canal. Trenching was not needed. Mr. Bandish distributed depictions of the job
performed.
·
Mr. Boucher
reported that Duree Alexander, Code Enforcement Officer, and Jeff Ratliff,
Assistant Public Works Director, would make a presentation at the Sea Turtle Committee Meeting over the weekend to talk about the street lighting
grant that they received from the Sea Turtle License Plate fees.
·
Mr. Boucher
reported that he prepared a draft that he submitted to the City Attorney’s
office related to the Ocean Woods sewer
maintenance request. Public Works
would also review and comment. A
finalized draft was forthcoming.
·
Mr. Boucher
reported that the Legislative Delegation
would meet on Wednesday, February 20th. Ms. Roberts asked if the concern that the
City had related to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection related
to notifying the cities prior to utility permitting was on their Agenda. Mayor Randels responded that this item was
included in the Florida League of Cities legislative packet.
·
Mr. Boucher
announced that the Building Department
now handles Business Licensing Taxes.
He commended Andrea Bowers and Todd Morley for making this happen using
the new Financial Software.
Staff
Public
Works Director
·
Mr. Bandish
reported on the successful progress of the new
Building
Official
·
Mr. Morley
reported on the success of the new
Building Department site.
He thanked the Council for their assistance in approving the facility.
City
Treasurer
·
No report.
City Clerk
·
No report.
City
Attorney
City
Council
Council Member Roberts
·
Ms. Roberts inquired about the City’s disaster
preparedness plan other than the hurricane plan. Mr. Boucher related that the Fire Department
recommended for residents to attend the Community Emergency Response Training
[CERT] program. This 12-week course
would equip residents to participate in emergency situations. Norman Moody would prepare a story including
a call for citizen participation as well as information would be provided for
the Condominium Associations.
·
Ms. Roberts recommended consideration of cell
phone notification in which residents would be notified of eminent danger.
·
Ms. Roberts also recommended a Master Plan
for: sidewalks, bikeways, bus shelters, crosswalks, street paving, lighting and
benches.
·
Ms. Roberts expressed concern over clear
articulation of the City Boards’ roles and responsibilities in support
of the Council’s decision-making and planning.
·
Ms. Roberts recommended review of a City Environmental
Ordinance as a high priority to deal with the soot at Port Canaveral, the
red tide issue and any fuel emissions issues.
Mayor Randels asked if there were legitimate legislation that the
Council could use to pursue these issues.
Ms. Roberts requested for staff to find an Environmental Ordinance that
goes beyond the existing Ordinance which relates predominately to litter. Mr.
Bandish informed that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
required a qualified staff person to make determinations related to
environmental issues.
·
Ms. Roberts addressed dilapidated
buildings. Mr. Morley stated
procedures for this were in Ordinances under the Standard Unsafe Building
Abatement Code.
·
Ms. Roberts inquired about the Visioning
Session. Mr. Boucher would schedule
a time.
·
Ms. Roberts inquired about the Master
Internal Management Planning Calendar.
She desired specific information related to meeting attendance. Ms. Roberts stated that the Council needed a
roster of who represented the City and the meeting they planned to attend, as
well as a calendar to assist the Council with those scheduled meetings. Ms. Roberts suggested the management planning
calendar to know when the Council and City Manager attend meetings in order to
know who would be the City’s liaison.
Mr. Boucher replied that he would give this task to his Executive
Assistant to maintain each Council Members memberships and meeting attendance.
·
Ms. Roberts asked if discussion of a Developer’s
Agreement were an Action Item.
Attorney Garganese explained that the City had discussion on the processes that
the City follows for Land Development permits and Developers Agreements were
included into the discussion. The City
could also use Home Rule Powers to require Development Agreements. Ms. Roberts concluded that this complements
the Citizen Awareness Participation Plan and she did not desire to lose this as
a potential action.
·
Ms. Roberts inquired about the Business
Survey. Mr. Boucher stated that this
was on his actions list.
·
Ms. Roberts asked for an updated list of
Condominium Associations and contact
information for condominiums in the City of
·
Ms. Roberts suggested purchasing the two
acres of land north of the Country Inns and Suites. She requested to add this to the Council
Actions list.
Council Member Nicholas
·
No report.
Council Member Petsos
·
Mr. Petsos reported that 5,000 sea oats
were successfully planted using 59 volunteers on Saturday, February
16th. He thanked Jeff Ratliff for his
coordination.
·
Mr. Petsos asked if there were any further information
on using the Library. Mr. Boucher
replied that he met with Ms. Catherine Schweinsberg, Library Administrator and
Mrs. Isabel Escapa, Library Director. He
asked them to review their $485,000 budget.
He stated that there was no charge back to record how the $4 million
related to county wide services was used among 17 libraries. Mr. Petsos, Mayor Pro Tem Hoog and Ms.
Roberts stated the desire to express their concern with the lack of County
funds accountability. Mr. Boucher
related that the Library Administration was concerned with City functions
conflicting with Library patronage. He
asked them to provide a cost analysis of keeping the Library open an additional
night. Mr. Boucher related how he
suggested having the City’s architect review space and find joint-use
purposes. Ms. Roberts requested a report
from the Library related to usage. Mr.
Lefever stated that the Recreation Department charged use of their Meeting Room. He said that there were available time
periods for community associations to use it.
Mr. Boucher would coordinate a review of Meeting Room usage between the
Library and the
·
Mr. Petsos asked if the City had heard from
the
·
Mr. Petsos requested pricing on additional
sand fencing and for staff to return to another Council Meeting said
pricing for Council’s review and approval.
This would be an inmate and volunteer project. Mr. Boucher stated that he would have staff
inquire of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for field
permits. He assigned the inquiry to Mr. Ratliff.
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog
·
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog requested a Resolution
related to Bright House Networks to put the government channels back on
Channel 99 and Channel 199. Mr. Boucher
replied that this would be placed on the next City Council Agenda for approval
before the next Space Coast League of Cities meeting.
·
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog inquired about the manatee
statue. Mr. Bandish replied that the
crack was repaired.
·
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog noticed the No Parking
Signs on the right-of-ways being installed and requested increased law
enforcement.
Mayor Randels
·
No report.
AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD:
·
Mr. Jim Tuggle, Operations Manager, Waste
Management, Inc. addressed the question related to dumpster deodorization. He stated that during his 18 year tenure many
products have been used in the deodorization process and he displayed the Isis
Deodorant Dry Crystal 601 product which is used now. He informed that the
product was used at hotels, restaurants, and condominiums with chute
rooms. Mr. Tuggle replied to Mayor
Randels that there was a noticeable decrease in recyclables since inception of
the One Sort Program; however, he did not have statistics at this time.
Ms.
Roberts asked if there was a way to steam wash and return the dumpsters. Mr. Tuggle replied that condominium property
management staff performed that duty; however, the dumpsters were replaced when
necessary. Mr. Tuggle stated that the
trucks were washed every week. Ms. Roberts informed that the residue under the
trucks was deteriorating the pavement on the driveways. Mr. Tuggle explained how the seals were
replaced on the trucks and drivers were coached to break off their routes, go
to the dump and return to their route.
Mr. Nicholas stated that a Contract provision stated that the dumpsters
would be washed and spray cleaned once per month. Mr. Tuggle replied that drivers remove and
replace the containers. Mayor Randels
stated that Mr. Nicholas was correct in that Page 21 read, “the contractor
shall spray all mechanical containers with disinfectant every 30 days.” Ms. Roberts requested more detail in the
Quarterly Reports relating to the content of a customer’s complaint and
subsequent follow-up action.
·
Mr. John Gedney, of Solana Lake, stated that
the crystals were no longer being done.
Mr. Tuggle informed that the driver left the premises with several
canisters. Ms. Roberts stated that
Solana Shores had the same issue. Mr.
Tuggle stated that the crystals assisted with the odor; however, they did not
eliminate it. Mr. Boucher requested
consistency on the deodorization process.
Mayor Randels thanked Waste Management for the recently delivered
recycle bins.
·
Mr. Frank Kuhn expressed his thoughts on declining
property values due to lack of law enforcement. Mr. Kuhn related on how his home’s property
appraisal decreased and how it was based on the surrounding neighborhood. He stated that the class of property renters
was declining and leading to those who disturb the peace. Mr. Kuhn stated that the former Precinct
Commander, George McGee was well-known in the community, unlike the new
Administration. Mr. Kuhn informed that
Law Enforcement has diminished in the residential community; however, law
enforcement was evident on State Road A1A, which was not a City road,
monitoring speeders.
Mr.
Kuhn addressed the issues of prostitution and narcotic activity saying that the
Council was not directing Law Enforcement to make arrests. Mr. Kuhn emphasized his concern over his
declining property values based on the surrounding population. Mr. Kuhn concluded that he desired to see
criminals arrested and taken off the street.
In response to Mr. Kuhn’s remarks, Mr. Boucher stated that based on the
statistics in the Canaveral Precinct Annual Report, crime in the community was
down. He encouraged Council to read the
report.
·
Ms. Joyce Hamilton announced that Mr. Jerry Hudephol,
a former Police Chief, passed away.
·
Ms. Hamilton distributed a letter that she
wrote after the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting on February 13th. Ms. Hamilton read her letter in its entirety. In summary, Ms. Hamilton’s letter
encouraged the Council to proceed with the Sheldon Cove project as an
aesthetic and economic benefit to the Cape Canaveral community. A petition was attached to the letter in
which she secured up to 50 signatures from those in favor of proceeding with
the Sheldon Cove project. Ms. Hamilton
informed that the two concerns she heard were that one person did not desire
the business competition and the other did not desire to see this type of
project. Mayor Randels commended Ms. Hamilton on her participatory interest in
the City.
·
Mr. Arthur Berger addressed the Council and
asked what the City Council cared to see in the Sheldon Cove project.
Mr. Berger noted the project’s explanatory brochure that would allow for
citizen input to a web site.
·
Ms. Dawn Mays distributed the brochure which was one of a
four-part plan to introduce the project to the public, which would include a
web site, a series of town meetings and feedback from the web site. Sheldon Cove would then contract a
third-party provider to receive the web site feedback in order to avoid
conflict of interest.
·
Mr. Bill Mays stated that as an investor he
felt that the firm had done what was expected for the Sheldon Cove project. Mr. Mays stated that the Sheldon Cove project,
however, was shut down at the Planning and Zoning Board level by two persons
based on political opinion. Mr.
Nicholas stated that under the City’s existing code, the Sheldon Cove project
required a Variance. However, a Variance
depends on a hardship. Their other
alternative was for Council to change the Ordinance. Otherwise, they would need to request a
Zoning Code change before the Planning and Zoning Board which would then come
to the City Council.
Mr.
Berger then requested to know the recommended venue in which the project should
proceed. Mr. Boucher brought up the
height limitation might be in the City’s Comprehensive Plan which would require
an Amendment. Staff would need to
ascertain if it were. Mr. Boucher stated
that the issue was more than addressing height but also: 1) a matter of
economics, 2) was it desirable to enhance the value in that part of the
community, and 3) would it infringe on other uses in that area. Mr. Boucher
stated that he expected the Board seek beyond a yes or no and address the
project’s viability. Mr. Boucher was
told that Mr. Russell laid out the possibility for a Code change which to him
was part of the Board’s evaluation and, perhaps, the Board should consider this
more than just the height.
Ms.
Roberts expressed the concern after the Planning and Zoning Board meeting that
the Sheldon Cove representatives were not certain of their alternative actions
once the Board voted to table the project.
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog related some of the concerns raised to him such as
the impact of traffic and parking. Mr.
Berger informed that the design included a five-story parking garage behind the
building. Mr. Berger replied to Mayor
Pro Tem Hoog that the Mixed-Use related to commercial and retail shops
only. Mr. Mays replied that many of
these concerns were discussed at the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting which
was fruitful up to the first motion. At
the second motion, Mr. Russell presented an alternative which did not pass and the
third motion tabled discussion.
Mr. Boucher read the City
Planner’s Summary as:
·
There was a motion to deny a height increase
which failed two to three;
·
There was a motion to allow a height increase
to 65-feet by Special Exception on State Road A1A which failed two to three;
·
The Board tabled the Item until the next
meeting pending further discussion.
Mr. Donald Dunn,
Planning and Zoning Board Member, recollected one of the reasons the vote was
tabled as the building’s 1,230 person traffic count which exceeded the maximum
allowable on State Road A1A. If the
count were accepted, it would hinder future development. He recalled the reason was to bringing the
issue to a Referendum. Mr. Petsos
brought out that a majority of the Council desired for this issue to proceed to
a Referendum, as he noted in previous Minutes.
Mr. Dunn concluded that the Board tabled the Item in order to seek
information from the Building Official related to traffic concurrency. Mr. Dunn replied to Mayor Randels that the
Referendum and traffic were outstanding issues for the Board. Mr. Dunn clarified that the Board did not
recommend a Citizens Awareness Participation Plan[CAPP] as a requirement. Mr.
Mays stated that the CAPP was denied, but with no alternative.
Mr.
Petsos stated that at the time of the Planning and Zoning Board meeting, the
Board was not sure of the Council’s standing for a Referendum, of which he
thought was four to one. He desired to
re-clarify the Council’s stance of a Referendum to the Board. Mr. Petsos stated that he was still in
support of a Referendum and he desired to hear from the rest of Council. Ms. Roberts stated that she was not in favor
of a Referendum; she was in favor of the CAPP.
Mr. Mays expressed that he would prefer to remove the project than to
delay it further by waiting for a Referendum in November. Mr. Boucher replied to Mayor Pro Tem Hoog’s
question on cost that a Referendum could be included in the General Election;
however, they could request a Special Election.
Discussion
followed on a Referendum. Discussion
also came up related to a district for that specific purpose. Mr. Tom Garboski stated that the project’s
traffic concurrency would create a hardship for the next developer and he
expressed that a Special Exception was risky for the City given its current
history with Special Exceptions. Mr.
Dunn said that the Planning and Zoning Board discussed the prospect of a
specific height limitation Referendum.
Ms.
Roberts stated that the survey, workshops, and a web site were more
comprehensive from a citizen participation standpoint than a Referendum. These venues allowed for participatory
dialogue which could not take place with a Referendum. Mr. Nicholas replied that those venues could
be done in addition to a Referendum.
Ms.
Mays reviewed the Citizen Awareness Participation Plan approach format as
follows: 1) a mailer would be sent to property and business owners within the
City limits directly impacted by the project, 2) the mailer would include a
rendition and brief description of the project and information regarding the
upcoming public meeting, 3) the mailer would also include contact information
to facilitate feedback from the recipient, and 4) the mailer would direct the
recipient to a web site and also a public meeting for further information on
the project.
A web
site would be constructed to allow public access to a more in-depth look at the
project, as well as information presented at the Planning and Zoning Board
meeting and City Council meeting, and renderings and aerial photographs. A media release would be sent to notify news
sources, public information venues and resident Associations within the City
limits regarding the project and upcoming meetings. The project team would be available to answer
questions as needed or as requested by the Planning and Zoning Board or the
City Council. A public meeting would be
held within the City limits at an accessible location, such as the Library or
Council Meeting Room and attendees would be requested to register and give
written feedback to the project.
At the
conclusion of the Plan, a summary would be produced for the Planning and Zoning
Board and/or the City Council giving overall participation, feedback and
findings during the Citizens Awareness Participation Plan process. This was the Plan’s structure presented with
the understanding that more specifics would be added such as height, traffic,
accessibility to individuals, and shadow issues.
Mr.
Mays stated that a CAPP would reach 10,000 people at .43 cents per person which
was less costly than $20 per person to reach only 3,000 through a
Referendum. Mayor Randels committed his
position based on an affirmative result of an unbiased survey and his decision
would be to not see a Referendum. Mr.
Nicholas queried why not use a CAPP but also seek a Referendum. Mr. Berger asked for clarification if their
item would return to the Planning and Zoning Board with the understanding that
the project would not go to Referendum but they would develop a feasible
mechanism for development and Sheldon Cove would proceed with the CAPP. Ms. Mays stated that the survey language was
inclusive of any questions and would be a joint venture for a variety of checks
and balances.
Attorney
Garganese stated that the Council should have clear direction on the record as
to Council’s stance on proceeding to a Referendum. Attorney Garganese re-stated that formal
direction on the record should be forthcoming related to the issue. Mr. Nicholas initiated a motion at this point
to change the 45-foot height limitation.
Attorney Garganese stated that the basic fundamental issue was if the
Council would amend the 45-feet height limitation without a Referendum or
present it to the voters by Referendum.
Discussion followed on what would occur as a result of Mr. Nicholas’
motion. Mr. Nicholas requested to
retract his motion. Attorney Garganese
explained that if part of the motion read to increase the 45-feet height
limitation by Referendum, then Council could still exercise its authority;
however, this would convey a mixed signal to the developer and to the voters.
Attorney Garganese reminded the Chair of a
Motion to Extend the Meeting.
A motion
was made by Ms. Roberts and seconded by Mr. Nicholas to Extend the meeting
until 11:00 P.M. The vote on the motion
carried 5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For;
Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For.
Ms.
Roberts summarized her understanding, referencing Mayor Randels position, in
which affirmative feedback from the survey would demonstrate if there was a
need to proceed with a Referendum.
Attorney Garganese said that the firm could proceed with the CAPP at
their expense and return to the Council with the information. Mr. Mays expressed his hesitance with
expending additional funds prior to a decision from the Council. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated his desire to hear
from the City’s citizens and not just the voters. Mr. Mays stated that if the City would
provide a motion that would provide him clear direction as an investor to
proceed or not proceed, he could accept that; however, what he desired was
clear direction from the Council.
Discussion
followed on Council’s level of control over the survey. Ms. Roberts expressed her favor with feedback
from the survey and with a survey they would also hear from the voters. Ms.
Hamilton asked if all the citizens would be included
in the survey. Ms. Roberts replied that
the survey would include registered voters.
Mr. Berger asked if they could return with the web page and the flyers
for the Council’s next Agenda for input.
Mr.
Nicholas asked if the City would then be open to liability. Attorney Garganese stated that there was no
commitment. The Council would agree to say if they would were willing for the
firm to go into the community with the CAPP, then the Council would want
unbiased results. Mr. Berger said that feedback would come from registered
voters, business and property owners.
Ms.
Mays informed that DCWS, a Network Security and Marketing Firm in Cocoa, would
prepare the survey and develop the web site.
Ms. Mays replied to Mayor Pro Tem Hoog that E-mail verification would
secure the person as a registered voter with an address in the City. Mr. Nicholas asked if they planned to use
U.S. mail. Ms. Mays replied that they
planned to use the web site and the public meeting, but not telephone, or U.S.
Mail. If a person did not have access to
a computer, then they could attend a public meeting. Opinions would be gathered through the web
site or a public meeting as they were seeking a timely process. Ms. Mays clarified that the survey was not
included in the mailer.
Ms.
Roberts stated her concern that the survey was a web survey and not a
mailer. Ms. Mays replied that this would
double the mailing cost. A brief
discussion followed on mailing costs. In
response to Mr. Berger’s suggestion of applying for a zoning change, Attorney
Garganese stated that the issue was not a matter of applying for a zoning
change since no zoning district allowed for the 45-feet height. It would require a text change in the City
code as a text amendment to allow for a height greater than 45-feet in some
circumstances. Council could formulate a
whole new policy which allowed a matter of applying for a zoning change in a certain
zoning district. They would have to
change the scheme and include an overlay zoning district.
Mr.
Mays suggested scheduling a time to address Council’s individual concerns and
with that information they could proceed.
Attorney Garganese explained that one way to proceed would be create an
Overlay Zoning District which would require a Text Change to the Zoning Code.
Once in place, on a case-by-case basis, Council would decide if they wanted to
Overlay that on the zoning map on some property. Mayor Randels placed both concepts, a Text
Change to the Zoning Code and an Overlay, in his motion. Mr. Boucher recommended for the Planning and
Zoning Board to discuss amendments to the Zoning Code from the perspective of
considering the aspects of increasing the height limitation in the community.
A motion
was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to
Change the
45-Foot Height Limitation on the November Ballot.
Mayor
Randels asked if there were unanimous consent to withdraw the motion. The vote on the motion to Withdraw carried
5-0 with voting as follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr.
Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For.
A motion
was made by Mayor Randels [ but not seconded] to Create an Overlay Text Change
To Permit the Construction of the Sheldon Cove Project Based Upon the Majority
of the Survey Responses Being in Favor of the Project.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos
and seconded by Ms. Roberts to Address CONSIDERATIONS in Reverse Order. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as
follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor
Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For.
CONSIDERATIONS:
6. Motion to Approve: Transit Shelter
License Agreement with 20/20 Media Holdings, Inc.
Mr. Ratliff reviewed the two options to fund bus
shelters in the City: 1) a grant from Space Coast Area Transit; however, those
bus shelters would not include advertising, 2) and from 20/20 Media
which would have advertising on them.
Mr. Ratliff responded that he spoke with Space Coast Area Transit [SCAT]
and funding would be available by the end of the year. Mr. Ratliff informed that SCAT funds were
available for eight bus shelters.
Mr. Ratliff introduced Mr. Joel Davis, from 20/20
Media Holdings, Inc. Mr. Davis stated
that the City could not limit the advertising to City business. Mr. Davis informed that no advertising could
be offered to any agency that had products that could not be lawfully sold to
minors, with the exception of the Florida Lottery. However, the Lottery was acceptable based on
educational purposes.
Attorney Garganese reminded that when the City
approves such things as bus shelters, it could not require them to express a
certain viewpoint, and the City could not regulate a private individual’s
speech to promote, or restrain the promotion of, certain businesses or certain
viewpoints that would be prohibited under the Constitution. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog
inquired about off-premise signs.
Attorney Garganese stated that the advertisement on bus shelters
generates some First Amendment issues and he would need to get back to the
Council prior to them imposing further restrictions. Mr. Davis described the two, 24-square foot
signs on both sides. Mr. Davis informed
that if SCAT provided the funding, then maintenance would be a concern.
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog asked if the seating could be
conformed in order to hinder reclining on them.
Mr. Davis informed that there were arms that could be inserted into the
seating. Ms. Roberts asked who maintains
emptying the waste can. Mr. Davis replied
that Brevard County had an every Tuesday maintenance schedule of emptying the
trash, cleaning the glass and checking for insects. Ms. Roberts expressed that the
non-advertisement bus shelters were more aesthetically pleasing.
Mr. Petsos and Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated that there
were remaining questions on
off-premise signage. Mr. Ratliff
explained that if the City selected SCAT then the City would need to hire the
contractor, perform construction management, and secure easements and SCAT
would reimburse the City. However, 20/20
Media would perform these tasks. Mayor
Randels concluded that the off-premise signage, limitation of verbiage, and
maintenance costs to the City were concerns.
Ms. Roberts asked if staff could get a cost estimate from the City of
Cocoa Beach to maintain their bus shelters.
Mr. Davis replied to Mr. Boucher that they could not
install half panel signs. Mr. Petsos
questioned if SCAT funding was based on Federal or State funding. Mayor Randels replied that some of their funding
was provided through the Florida Department of Transportation. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog asked if the lease time
could be shorter than 10 years. Mr.
Davis replied that the company would invest $12,000 per shelter and 10 years
helps to recoup that investment. Mr.
Davis replied to Mr. Boucher that the bus shelters on Merritt Island were
installed through the Redevelopment Agency.
Staff would follow up with the Merritt Island Redevelopment Agency
regarding their service satisfaction.
Mr. Davis stated that locations were subject to Council’s approval. Mr.
Davis concluded that advertising rotated over a four-week rotation with no
disruption to traffic.
No
Action was Taken on Item No. 6.
5. Motion to Approve a Replica Space Shuttle Purchase.
Mayor
Randels informed that Communication Concepts, Inc. made a presentation to place
100 shuttle replicas at area businesses.
Mr. Petsos mentioned that the businesses would use their replicas for
advertising purposes. Mr. Boucher
stated that the City’s shuttle would be painted to look like an actual space
shuttle and not as an advertisement.
A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and
seconded by Ms. Roberts to Approve a Replica Space Shuttle from Beautification
Funds in an Amount of $5,600. The
vote on the motion carried 5-0 as follows:
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor
Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For.
4. Motion
to Approve: Quarterly Budget Report and Transfers.
Ms. Bowers
informed that Revenues were reduced and she also informed that Ad Valorem taxes
had decreased from the previous year.
Ms. Bowers explained the payments were slow but forthcoming. Ms. Bowers stated that Cash Forward was
available for the Financial Software, the Public Works Maintenance Building and
the City Park. Ms. Bowers explained that
the Sheriff’s Office requested a new Capital Purchase at $8,900. Mr. Petsos requested that Law Enforcement
include Capital Purchases in their budget.
Ms. Roberts also asked for an off-set reduction through other
items. Mr. Boucher reminded that Law
Enforcement provided a cash-back of $120,000.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded
by Mr. Nicholas to Approve the Quarterly Budget Report and Transfers. The vote on the motion carried 5-0 as
follows: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr.
Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For and Ms. Roberts, For.
The remaining items will be placed on the City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda for
March 4th.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. City Council
Regular Meeting Minutes of February 5, 2008.
2. Proclamation
in Honor of Irish-American Heritage Month.
ORDINANCES: First Public Hearing:
3. Motion
to Approve: Ordinance No. 01-2008; Establishing a Fund Balance/ Retained
Earnings Reserve Policy.
DISCUSSION:
7. Dumpster Condition Provisions.
8. Temporary Off-Premises Signs.
9. Central Canal Area.
10. Community Redevelopment Agency
Presentation.
ADJOURNMENT:
There
being no further business, the Meeting adjourned at 11:35 P.M.
__________________________
Rocky
Randels, MAYOR
_______________________________
Susan Stills, CMC, City Clerk