CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL ANNEX
TUESDAY
7:00 PM
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER:
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
Public Works Director Walter Bandish
Assistant Public Works Director Jeff
Ratliff
Building Official Todd Morley
Recreation Director Robert Lefever
REPORTS:
City
Manager
·
Mr. Boucher reported that the
·
Mr. Boucher reported that the beachside
City Managers and the Brevard County Fire Rescue Department would meet concerning
the lifeguards on Thursday, April 17th. One
point of discussion was an Interlocal Agreement for
rip-tide warning sign placement.
·
Mr. Boucher announced the Annual Trash
Bash sponsored by Keep Brevard Beautiful on Saturday, April 19th. Area site volunteers will meet at
·
Mr. Boucher reminded the Council of the meeting
with the City Treasurer on April 30th for a Revenue Analysis
discussion.
·
Mr. Boucher reported on the Town Meeting
and the discussion related to height limitations and Minutes were available in
the City Clerk’s Office. Ms.
Roberts thanked staff for holding the meeting and asked what would occur
next. Mr. Petsos also requested
additional notice for any subsequent meetings including articles in the
newspaper. Mr. Tom Garboski,
Mr. Petsos stated that in the essence of time he would
like to see the City Attorney begin to work on Referendum language in preparation
for the upcoming Election. Ms. Roberts pointed
out that a voter referendum would only apply to registered voters and would not
consider the views of non-resident property owners, many of whom have second
homes in
Mr. Ray Osborne of
City
Council
Council
Member Roberts
·
Ms. Roberts
requested a panel interview Board
for the new Planning and Development Director. Brief Council discussion
concluded that this would counter the City’s Charter as the City Manager was
responsible for hiring staff.
·
Ms. Roberts addressed
peacock relocation as a safety
issue. Mr. Boucher explained that residents
were informed of transfer locations; however, the requestor would need to
employ a trapper.
·
Ms. Roberts
reported that
·
Ms. Roberts
reported that elderly residents were having difficulty crossing the dunes in places where that sand was higher
than 3-feet. She requested that Public
Works clear those high dune areas.
·
Ms. Roberts
announced that Cape Canaveral would host the
Council
Member Nicholas
·
Mr. Nicholas requested
to know the cost of a trapper.
Council
Members Petsos
·
Mr. Petsos
commended the City Clerk’s Office on a
successful Board Appreciation Dinner.
Mayor
Pro Tem Hoog
·
No report.
Mayor
Randels
·
Mayor Randels
questioned the value of maintaining a collective
Calendar for City Council members. Ms. Roberts stated that a year-long calendar
would benefit the Council with each Member being made aware of the activity of
the other. Also, the City would be able
to plan more effectively long term for events such as budget, visioning, and
code review. Mayor Randels explained
that the meetings Council Members attend were subject to change daily. Brief discussion concluded that the Meeting
Calendar would be difficult to plan and maintain from an annual perspective.
·
Mayor Randels commended the Recreation Director on the
Department’s upcoming events.
·
Mayor Randels commended the Finance Office on the
condensed monthly Budget books.
·
Mayor Randels
reported that he met with Mr. DeLucia, building
owner of
·
Mayor Randels
announced that he became a member of the Space
Coast Lighthouse Association and conveyed their intent to conduct upcoming
tours of the Lighthouse.
·
Mayor Randels
reported that he spoke to the
Staff
Public Works Director
·
No report.
Recreation Director
·
No report.
City Clerk
·
Ms. Stills thanked all who attended the Annual
Board Member Appreciation Dinner.
She placed for consideration of future events for the Council to use the
City Attorney
·
No report.
AUDIENCE TO BE HEARD:
·
Mr. Ray Osborne explained how he planned to
emulate the Satellite Beach DVD and to
interview a number of noted
Mayor Randels explained the revised Council
Meeting format and how the City Attorney would read the Ordinance titles and
either the City Attorney or the sponsoring Department Head would explain the Ordinance
or any amendments to an Ordinance.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. City Council
Regular Meeting Minutes of
2. Outdoor Entertainment Permit for the
March of Dimes: March for Babies.
3. Outdoor Entertainment Permit for an Outdoor Permit for the
2008 Earned Respect Tour, Promoted by
4. Proclamation in
Recognition of 2008 National Public Works Week.
Mayor Randels questioned if any Council member, staff
or interested party desired to remove any of the items for discussion.
Mr. Nicholas requested to remove Item No. 3 for
discussion.
Mr. Roberts requested to remove Item No. 4 for
discussion.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mr. Nicholas to approve
Consent Agenda Item No. 1 and 2. The vote on
the motion carried 5-0 with voting as: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas,
For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For, and Ms. Roberts, For.
3. Outdoor Entertainment
Permit for an Outdoor Permit for the 2008 Earned Respect Tour, Promoted by
Mr. Lefever introduced Mr.
Clinton Thomas to explain the Earned Respect Tour. Clinton Thomas, of
Mr. Thomas replied to Ms.
Roberts’ that there was a charge to participate in the Basketball Tournament;
however, all other activities were at no cost.
He informed that he would hire three deputies for the event. Mr. Thomas explained that people could
register for the Basketball Tournament from a web site. He replied to Mr. Nicholas that he identified
specific counties for the event. Mr.
Thomas explained how he planned to use flyers, radio, and the Recreation
Director’s help through the Parks and Youth organizations for promotional
coverage. Ms. Roberts raised the need to
purchase an Electronic Message Board and not to rent the Board due to its
expense. Mr. Bandish stated that the
cost was $100 per day for rental with a $50 delivery charge. Mr. Boucher said that staff would look into
the potential of the City purchasing an electronic message board.
Mr. Petsos asked Mr. Thomas if
he were working with the schools and law enforcement. Mr. Thomas replied that he contacted the
local schools, law enforcement, and the Brevard County Health Department for the
Tour. He assured Mr. Petsos that the
event would be monitored for litter. Mr.
Clinton informed that the fee was $150 for a child and one male parent. Since
the event was countywide, Mr. Petsos requested that Mr. Lefever notify the Brevard
County School Board. Mr. Lefever stated
that he would handle the local contacts.
Mr. Lefever stated that he had discussed the event with Mr. Thomas several
months prior to the request and the Recreation Board had also discussed the
event.
A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to approve
Consent Agenda Item No. 3 to Waive the Outdoor Entertainment Permit Fee and to
Rent an Electronic Message Board for One Week.
The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as:
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels,
For, and Ms. Roberts, For.
4. Proclamation in Recognition of 2008 National Public Works
Week.
Ms. Roberts asked if there
would be an Open House at the Water Reclamation Plant to recognize the City’s
Public Works employees and their service during National Public Works Week. Mr. Bandish affirmed that Public Works would conduct
an Open House between 12
A motion was made by Ms. Roberts and seconded by Mr. Nicholas to
approve Consent Agenda Item No. 1 and 2.
The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as:
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels,
For, and Ms. Roberts, For.
ORDINANCES: Second Public
5. Motion to Adopt:
Ordinance No. 05-2008; Amending Chapter 22, Community Development of the City
Code Related to Community Appearance Review; Amending Section 22-40 to Clarify
Which Properties are Subject to Community Appearance Board Review Prior to Any
Building Permit Being Issued, at Second Reading.
Attorney Garganese read
Ordinance No. 05-2008 by title.
AN ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING
ARTICLE III OF CHAPTER 22, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, OF THE CITY CODE RELATED TO
COMMUNITY APEARANCE REVIEW TO CLARIFY WHICH DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ARE SUBJECT TO
COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD REVIEW; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR
INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE,
SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mayor Randels stated that all the
amendments from the previous meeting were included in the revised Ordinance. Ms. Roberts referred to Page 2, Section 22-40,
and questioned if City Council’s role was under limited circumstances. Attorney Garganese clarified that the Council
still had the right to review Appeals. Ms.
Roberts questioned the location of Item B, under Approval Prerequisite for
Permits, as it was not in the text.
Attorney Garganese explained that the asterisks at the end of the strike
out portion of the document indicated, for purposes of Codification, where the
existing language would continue; therefore, Item B was still included however after
the stricken language.
There was no public comment.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to
Adopt Ordinance No. 05-2008 at Second
ORDINANCES: First Public
6. Motion
to Approve: Ordinance No. 04-2008; Amending Chapter 110, Zoning, Related to
Courtesy Notices for Public Hearings; Providing that Courtesy Notices May be
Sent by Regular Mail or Postcard, at First Reading.
Attorney Garganese read Ordinance No. 04-2008 by title.
AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, REGARDING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS;
AMENDING CHAPTER 58, PLANNING TO REQUIRE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS RELATED
TO AMENDMENT OF THE CITY’S FUTURE LAND USE MAP; AMENDING CHPATER 110, ZONING,
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF “COURTESY NOTICE;” AMENDING SECTION 110-28 REGARDING
THE TIMING AND MANNER IN WHICH THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARINGS; MAKING CONFORMING AMENDMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR
INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE;
SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Attorney Garganese stated that
this Ordinance proposed additional Notice requirements. He stated that the Ordinance amends Chapter
58, Planning, and would require that all Amendments to the Future Land
Use Map be given Notice as follows: 1) Notice at least 30 calendar days prior
to the Hearing, 2) posting the affected property, 3) posting at City Hall, 4)
posting on the City’s Official Web site, 5) notifying by Certified Mail all
affected owners within 500-feet of the subject property, and 6) notifying by
Certified Mail the owners of the subject property.
In addition, amendments to
Chapter 110, Zoning, were proposed and there were currently Notice requirements
regarding amendments to the Zoning Map, Variances, and Special Exceptions. This Ordinance would require that: 1) all
Public Hearings provide Notice at least 30 calendar days prior to Re-zonings,
Variances, and Special Exceptions, 2) posting the affected property, 3) posting
at City Hall and, in addition 4) posting on the City’s Official Web site.
The Ordinance proposed to
delete the Certified Mail requirement of all property owners and condominiums
within 500-feet of the subject property for Special Exceptions and Variances;
however, Notices for Re-zonings would require mailing by Certified Mail with
Return Receipt. Because of the 30-day Notice
requirement, applications for Re-zonings, Variances, and Special Exceptions
would require submittal at least 60-days in advance of the Planning and Zoning
Board meeting for staff review and Public Meeting notification.
Mr. Petsos requested that the
language clearly state that “the City” shall post the affected property. Attorney Garganese recommended the following
language, “The City shall post Notice
the Public Hearings in the following manner.”
Ms. Roberts expressed her
concern with the extension of the whole process. Attorney Garganese explained how in order to
accommodate the 30-day window and allow for advertisement, the process required
an extension. He explained further how
multiple public meetings, one Planning and Zoning Meeting and two City Council
meetings, required a 30-day Notice.
Mr. John Grandlich, of Ron Jon
Cape Caribe, Inc., stated that their firm’s meeting Notices were sent
approximately 10-days to two weeks prior to the meeting and he suggested a
two-week time frame. He commended the
City’s web site and stated that the Board and City Council Agendas and Agenda
Packets were posted to the City’s web site and readily available for access to any
needed Public Meeting information.
Ms. Roberts again expressed the
concern that the intent was to provide adequate Notice; not to extend the
overall process. Discussion followed related
to amending Section 110-28 to 14-days.
Attorney Garganese reminded that the City’s meetings were within a
two-week cycle. He reminded that after
the First Reading the Public Notice requirement was 10-days before the Second
Reading. Ms. Roberts questioned the
Notice requirement prior to the first City Council Meeting and stated that
feedback from the community warranted Notice prior to that meeting. Attorney Garganese explained that a Certified
Mail Notice prior to the Planning and Zoning Meeting and the first City Council
Meeting would be adequate.
Attorney Garganese suggested reducing the amount of Certified Mail
Notice time to
at least 14 calendar days prior to the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting and
the First Public Reading at City Council and to eliminate the Certified Mailing
Notice before the Second Reading.
An amendment to the Main Motion was made by Ms. Roberts and seconded by
Mr. Nicholas: 1) to reduce the number of calendar days from thirty to fourteen,
2) to eliminate Certified Mailing Return Receipt prior to the second and final
readings, and 3) to strike “to provide notice” and insert “the City
shall post notice” on the affected property, in Section 58-1 and Section
110-28, subparagraph (b). The vote on the motion carried 5-0 with voting as:
Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels,
For, and Ms. Roberts, For.
A motion was made by Mr. Nicholas and seconded by Mr. Petsos to Approve
Ordinance No. 04-2008 at First
7. Motion to Approve: Ordinance No. 06-2008; Amending Chapter
2, Article VI of the City Code Related to Code Enforcement; Creating a New
Division Entitled Public Nuisance Abatement.”
Attorney Garganese read
Ordinance No. 06-2008 by title.
AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING
CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VI, OF THE CITY CODE RELATED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT; CREATING A
NEW DIVISION ENTITLED “PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT”; ESTABLISHING A PURPOSE AND
INTENT; ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD; PROVIDING FOR THE
BOARD’S MEMBERSHIP AND MEETING REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING
POWERS OF THE BOARD; ESTABLISHING THE NUISANCES SUBJECT TO ENFORCEMENT BY THE
BOARD; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT, NOTICE AND HEARING PROCEDURES; PROVIDING FOR
PENALTIES, FINES, AND LIENS; PROVIDING FOR AN APPEAL; PROVIDING FOR THE
REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCORPORATION INTO THE
CODE; SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Attorney Garganese stated how
this Ordinance was relative to State law by definition and content and adoption
would enable the Ordinance’s use in the City code. The Ordinance would delegate the City’s
Nuisance Abatement Ordinance Enforcement to the City’s Code Enforcement
Board. He explained that the Brevard
County Sheriff’s Office would assume the duties of Nuisance Abatement
Enforcement. Attorney Garganese
explained how the Nuisance Abatement Coordinator would monitor specific
activities that have occurred. If the
established threshold of violations were met, then the violation would proceed
to the Nuisance Abatement Enforcement Board and prosecuted similar to a Code
Enforcement Board action.
Attorney Garganese referred to changes
on Page 5 of 10, Section 292-76 subparagraph (a) and noted that it should read,
“the City Manager.” shall review
all complaints and subparagraph (b) should read, if “the City Manager” shall
review all complaints received from the Nuisance Abatement Coordinator and if
“the City Manager” deems the complaint sufficient. These insertions would replace the words, “City Attorney.” Attorney Garganese referred to Page 6,
subparagraph (e), recommending to add the sentence
“the Board shall approve all Settlement Agreements by Written Order.”
A representative of the Cape
Canaveral Sheriff’s Precinct was present and acknowledged the Precinct’s favor
of the Ordinance as a valuable prosecution tool. Ms. Roberts asked if the Code Enforcement Board
had reviewed the Ordinance. Mr. Boucher
stated that Attorney Garganese would discuss the Ordinance with the Board at
their meeting on Thursday, April 17th. Attorney Garganese replied to Ms. Roberts’
question related to the term Public Nuisance saying that the Council could
choose another name other than “Nuisance Abatement.” Mr. Lamar Russell, Planning and Zoning Board
Vice Chairperson, recalled the Board’s discussion that prosecution was relative
to the number of calls and not based on the type of nuisance activity, such as
whether it was criminal or not. He emphasized
that this Ordinance would provide the Code Enforcement Board with a necessary tool.
Attorney Garganese explained
that the meetings for this Board would occur prior to the meetings of the Code
Enforcement Board. Mayor Randels stated
that this would allow the City to effectively address criminal activity. Attorney Garganese stated that this Ordinance
addressed prostitution, drugs, stolen property, and gang-related activity. Ms. Roberts referred to Page 2, and requested
to add, “the quality of life” in the Section that addresses the Ordinances
Purpose and Intent. Ms. Roberts referred
to Page 3, related to meeting frequency and asked if the Ordinance were
stipulating a meeting if there were no business. Attorney Garganese clarified that the Chairperson
could cancel the meeting if there was no business to discuss. Ms. Roberts also referred to Page 4, Section
2-295, and if the language could be changed from “on more than two occasions
within a six month period.” Attorney
Garganese stated that the Council did not have the prerogative to change
that language.
Ms. Roberts suggested a review
of the Ordinance related to the timeframes, for notifying the property owner of
violations. Ms. Roberts also suggested
clarification of calendar days in Section (g), Page 7. Ms. Roberts then referred to Page 8 and the
allowable fee of $15,000. Attorney
Garganese stated that the fee was per incident, based on Statutes, and
therefore, not subject to change. Ms.
Roberts questioned the timeframe of a foreclosure action. Attorney Garganese explained how under the
Code Enforcement statute the Lien was required to be recorded in Public Records
within 90-days and he added that the City could not foreclose on homestead
property. Attorney Garganese explained
how the Statute requires three days written Notice be given to the property
owner; however, the City could extend the number of days and specifically state
“calendar” days. Attorney Garganese
recommended posting and mailing for Notice requirements.
A motion was made by Mr. Petsos and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Hoog to
Approve Ordinance No. 06-2008 at First Reading with the City Attorney’s
recommended Amendments. The vote on
the motion carried 5-0 with voting as: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas,
For; Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For, and Ms. Roberts, For.
CONSIDERATION:
8. Motion
to Approve: A Cooperative Purchase of Sewer Lift Station Construction Services
for the Rehabilitation of Lift Station #3.
Mr.
Petsos requested to use Impact Fee Funds for this repair relating on the new
development in the northern part of the City.
Mr. Boucher affirmed that Impact Fee Funds could be used for the upsize portion.
A motion was made by Ms. Roberts and
seconded by Mr. Petsos to Approve a Cooperative Purchase of Sewer Lift Station
Construction Services for the Rehabilitation of Lift Station #3, in an Amount
Not to Exceed $38,278. The vote on the
motion carried 5-0 with voting as: Mayor Pro Tem Hoog, For; Mr. Nicholas, For;
Mr. Petsos, For; Mayor Randels, For, and Ms. Roberts, For.
DISCUSSION:
9. Joint-Use
Library Meeting Room Concepts.
Mr. Boucher referred to the designs identified
as A through D and stated how modular furnishings were part of the conceptual
plan. He stated that the main intent was
the Library Meeting Room overall use for the Library, the City, and the general
public. Some of the scenarios included a
fixed or collapsible dais. Mr. Boucher
stated how he needed Council’s decision on a concept to proceed for discussion
purposes. Council stated their Preference for Option A. Discussion continued on the Meeting Room use. Mr. Jim Brown asked if the City Council were aware
of the Board’s position to which Council members affirmed that they were. Ms. Jean Deck reminded that the public used
the Library Meeting Room up to 50 percent on Tuesday evenings and this would
diminish public access if the City intended to use the room on that night. Mr. Boucher informed that keeping the Library
open for an additional evening was under consideration as well as using the
Recreation Meeting Room.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further
business, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M.
_______________________________
Rocky
Randels, MAYOR
________________________________
Susan Stills, CMC, CITY CLERK