NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION
City Hall, 542 Main Street
JULY 23, 2019
9:00 AM
AGENDA
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
1. PRESENTATIONS
CITIZEN INPUT
2. CONSENT AGENDA
2.a. Approve the minutes for: A. May 14, 2019 Work Session B. May 16, 2019 Regular Meeting
Staff recommends to approve the minutes. EXHIBIT: A. 19-05-14 CCWS.pdf EXHIBIT: B. 19-05-16 RCM.pdf
2.b. Board and Committee Appointments/Reappointments
A. Stormwater Advisory Committee Reappoint Regular members: Larri Gerson to her 1st full term that expires June 1, 2022, Belle Gruber to her 2nd full term that expires June 1, 2022 & Susanne Gow to her 4th and final term that expires June 1, 2022.
Staff recommends to approve all reappointments. EXHIBIT: A. Stormwater Advisory Committee Roster.pdf 1
1 2.c. Renewal of the Lease Agreement with Pinellas County for the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office North Fleet Building
Staff recommends the Commission approve the Lease Agreement for an initial five-year period.. EXHIBIT: A. Dunedin PCSO Fleet Lease v.05 AATF for Dunedin Signature 7-01-19.pdf
2.d. Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project Staff recommends to Award the Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project to G.A. Nichols Company, a Florida Corporation, in the amount of $281,815.60 EXHIBIT: A. Memo of Recommendation (CA).pdf EXHIBIT: B. Memo of Recommendation (RF).pdf EXHIBIT: C. Ardurra letter Bid Recommendation.pdf EXHIBIT: D. Bid 19-1130 Tabulation.pdf EXHIBIT: E. Budget Amendment Form.PDF
2.e. Award of Bid 19-2347 – Marina Sailboat Ramp Launch Improvements Project
Staff recommends to approve the award of a construction contract to Midcoast Marine Group, LLC of Largo, FL, in the amount of $88,135, for the Marina Sailboat Ramp Launch Improvements Project (Bid #19-2347). EXHIBIT: A. Memo of Recommendation (CA).pdf EXHIBIT: B. Memo of Recommendation (BW).pdf EXHIBIT: C. Bid 2347 Tabulation.pdf EXHIBIT: D. Budget Amendment Form.pdf
3. ACTION ITEMS
3.a. Resolution 19-39 Investment Policy Amendment Staff recommends to adopt Resolution 19-39. EXHIBIT: A. Resolution 19-39 EXHIBIT: B. Exhibit A- Investment Policy EXHIBIT: C. Investment Policy Proposed Final red line vesion 7.14.pdf EXHIBIT: D. Exhibit C- Eligible and Suitable Investments
3.b. Resolution 19-33, Establishes a Maximum Millage Rate for FY 2020
Staff recommends to adopt Resolution 19-33. EXHIBIT: A. Res 19-33 Proposed Maximum Millage Rate for Fiscal Year 2020.docx EXHIBIT: B. Form DR-420 EXHIBIT: C. Form DR-420TIF 2 2 EXHIBIT: D. Form DR-420MM-P
3.c. RFP 19-112X Award of contract to the Gehring Group for Employee Benefits Broker and Consulting Services
Staff recommends Commission approval of the proposed contract with the Gehring Group.. EXHIBIT: A. COD Benefits Consultant Contract - 072319 signed by GG.pdf EXHIBIT: B. SUPPLEMENT FOR ITEM 3.c. 19-07-22 Memorandum from Chuck Ankney re RFP -1125 Employee Benefits Brokerage and Consulting Services.pdf
3.d. Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical System Upgrades Design Services. Staff recommends to Award the Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical System Upgrades Design Contract to Engineering Design Technologies Corporation, of Tampa, FL, in the amount of $843,484. EXHIBIT: A. Memo of Recommendation (CA).pdf EXHIBIT: B. Memo of Recommendation (RF).pdf EXHIBIT: C. Dunedin WWTP Electrical System Upgrades Proposal - 06-25-19.pdf EXHIBIT: D. Dunedin WWTP Fee Worksheet - 06-25-19.pdf EXHIBIT: E. RFQ Summary Score Sheet.pdf EXHIBIT: F. Budget Amendment Form.pdf
3.e. STARRED ITEM: Code Enforcement Lien at 977 Victor Drive, Dunedin, Florida regarding DCEB Case Nos. 16-612, 16-614, 16-1048, 16-1049, 17-162 and 17-441 (Estate Buyers LLC} for a Partial Release of Code Enforcement Board Liens
A. Staff recommends to place this item on the agenda.
B. Staff recommends to authorize the City Attorney to accept a $3,500.00 settlement offer from Attorney Ted Topouzis, on behalf of the current property owner, in exchange for a Partial Release of the Code Enforcement Board Liens at 977 Victor Drive, Dunedin. EXHIBIT: A. Code Enforcement Settlement offer re 977 Victor Drive.pdf
3.f. STARRED ITEM: Code Enforcement Lien at 1618 Amberglen Drive, Dunedin regarding DCEB Case No. 18-757 (Carlsbad Funding Mtg Trust)
A. Staff recommends to place this item on the agenda.
B. Staff recommends to authorize the City Attorney to accept a $7,500.00 settlement offer from Attorney Clint Burton, on behalf of the owner's management company , in exchange for the Release of a Code Enforcement Board Lien (DCEB 18-757), on the property located at 1618 Amberglen Drive. 3 3 EXHIBIT: A. DCEB Settlement offer re 1618 Amberglen Drive.pdf
3.g. The proposed agenda for the August 20, 2019 Work Session
Staff recommends to approve the proposed agenda for August 20, 2019 Work Session EXHIBIT: A. 19-08-20 CCWS Proposed Agenda.pdf
4. WORKSHOP ITEMS
4.a. Supplemental Height Amendments
Staff recommends the City Commission review, discuss and provide direction on the proposed code changes. EXHIBIT: A._Building Height Workshop_Background II.docx EXHIBIT: B. Building Height Workshop Presentation 2.pptx EXHIBIT: C. Recommend Building Height Code Changes.doc
4.b. Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance
Following the Staff presentation, Staff would like to solicit comments from the Commission, address questions, and receive consensus direction concerning the draft Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance. EXHIBIT: A. Draft_ARTICLE_IX.___STORMWATER_MANAGEMENT.pdf EXHIBIT: B. Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance Presentation.pdf
5. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
5.a. Commission Discussion The Commission share topics of concerns or future issues they wish to address.
5.b. City Clerk's Update City Clerk's Update
5.c. City Manager's Written Report Review and discuss "City Manager's Written Report" covering June, 2019 EXHIBIT: A. City Manager's Update-July 2019.pdf
5.d. City Attorney's Update City Attorney's Update
5.e. Commission Comments The Commission shares events attended, announcements, liaison updates, etc. 4 4 ADJOURN MEETING
COPIES OF THIS AND ALL COMMISSION AGENDAS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, 750 MILWAUKEE AVENUE, ON THE MONDAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING DATE. COPIES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, 542 MAIN STREET AND THE CITY’S WEBSITE AT WWW.DUNEDINGOV.COM.
5 5 Agenda Item: 2.a
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-12
From: Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
Subject: Approve the minutes for: A. May 14, 2019 Work Session B. May 16, 2019 Regular Meeting
Presenter(s): Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
Recommend: Staff recommends to approve the minutes.
Epic Goal(s): N/A
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. 19-05-14 CCWS.pdf, B. 19-05-16 RCM.pdf,
Background: N/A
6 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA MINUTES OF THE CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION MAY 14, 2019 9:00 A.M.
PRESENT: City Commission: Mayor Julie Ward Bujalski, Vice-Mayor Maureen “Moe” Freaney, Commissioners Heather Gracy, Deborah Kynes and Jeff Gow Also Present: City Manager Jennifer K. Bramley, Deputy City Manager Doug Hutchens, City Attorney Thomas J. Trask, City Clerk Denise M. Kirkpatrick, Finance Director Les Tyler, Planning and Development Director Gregory Rice, Housing and Economic Development/CRA Director Bob Ironsmith, Public Works and Utilities Director/City Engineer Jorge Quintas, Public Services Division Director Keith Fogarty, Assistant Director of Public Works & Utilities Paul Stanek, Community Relations Director Courtney King, TV Production Specialist Justin Catacchio and approximately nineteen people. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Bujalski called the May 14, 2019 City Commission Work Session to order at 9:00 a.m. 1. PRESENTATIONS 1.a. National Public Works Week - May 19-25, 2019 Commissioner Gracy read a proclamation declaring May 19 – 25, 2019, as National Public Works Week; and urged all citizens everywhere to join with representatives of the American Public Works Association/Canadian Public Works Association and government agencies in activities, events and ceremonies designed to pay tribute to our public works professionals, engineers, managers and employees and to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our national health, safety, and quality of life. Public Works and Utilities Director/City Engineer Jorge Quintas, Public Services Division Director Keith Fogarty and Assistant Director of Public Works & Utilities Paul Stanek were in attendance to accept the proclamation and they thanked the Commission for the recognition. Mr. Fogarty on behalf of 152.83 employees of the Public Works Department he expressed it was an honor to accept the proclamation. There are over 30,000 members of the APWA and as the resolution indicated it stretches to Canada and Norway with 73 different chapters representing quite a few people. Mr. Stanek commented it was an honor and privilege to serve especially the residents of Dunedin. This is something they take seriously and work very hard at and they are very proud of what they do. Mr. Quintas commented the citizens may not realize the extent to which Public Works affects them from morning to night, these folks touch their lives. He is very appreciative of how professional and committed, intelligent, educated and knowledgeable and experienced they are. 1.b. 2019 National EMS Week - May 19-25, 2019 Commissioner Gow read a proclamation designating the week of May 19-25, 2019, as EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES WEEK with the theme, EMS Strong: Beyond the 7
19-1 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Call, and encouraged the community to observe this week with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities. Deputy Fire Chief Erich Thiemann and Division Chief of EMS Mark Zipeto were in attendance to accept the proclamation and they thanked the Commission for the recognition. Division Chief Zipeto commented his division shines every day answering more than 6,000 EMS calls alone in a year which averages about 14 calls a day of unbelievable work they do. It is a lifetime of education and keeping up with the trends and ever changing medicine of today. They do a great job every day. He gave each of the Commissioners a coin commissioned by the department similar to those the military give. 1.c. City Manager Code Enforcement Update Mayor Bujalski referred to the recent Code Enforcement issue that was in the newspapers and television news and social media and advised City Manager Bramley had some facts about the case to share. City Manager Bramley advised she wanted to provide a statement of facts in regard to this Code case related to 1341 Lady Marion Lane in Dunedin. On May 10, 2019, the City issued a press release regarding a property located on Lady Marion Lane. She read the salient facts described within that press release. There was one article which was essentially the City’s side of the matter indicating that the City claimed, x, y, z; however, these are statements of fact and of record as they pertain to the Code case itself and how it evolved. She also wanted to address directly the assertion the City is putting a senior citizen on the street. Finally there are a few other items in regard to this case and some of the discussion regarding the case revolving around the case she feels Dunedin residents and business owners need to know and those comments will be directed to them solely. The Code case itself: Suncoast First Trust purchased the property located at 1341 Lady Marion Lane on June 7, 2007. In October 2007, four months later, Code Enforcement was required regarding overgrowth on the property. Apparently there was a resident complaint. This original overgrowth violation was followed by another in 2009, by three violations in 2010, one in 2011, three violations in 2012 and three in 2013. Twelve times since 2007 the City has had to intervene to get the property owner to maintain his property. On May 5, 2015, Suncoast First Trust was deemed a repeat offender for overgrowth by the Dunedin Code Enforcement Board, the order read, “This matter is deemed to be of a recurring nature and should it recur by law the Board can levy fines up to $500.00 a day, plus daily recording costs and interest.” Since 2007 the Dunedin Code Enforcement Board has attempted to work with Mr. Ficken on behalf of Suncoast First Trust to keep the grass mowed with a series of phone calls, courtesy notices and violation notices. It was not until 2015 that Code Enforcement staff recommended repeat offender status after numerous complaints from the neighborhood regarding this particular property. In July 2018 the City received a complaint the lawn at 1341 Lady Marion Lane was again overgrown. The Code Enforcement Inspector made personal contact with Mr. Ficken on 8
19-2 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
behalf of Suncoast First Trust on site shortly after June 5, 2018, and informed him that his grass needed to be cut because it could cost him up to $500.00 a day as a repeat offender. Amount of the Fine: Per Florida Statute 162.09 (2) (a) A fine imposed pursuant to this section shall not exceed $250.00 per day for a first violation and should not exceed up to $500.00 per day for repeat violation. In determining the fine, if any, the Code Enforcement Board shall consider the following factors: 1. The gravity of the violation. 2. Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation. 3. Any previous violations committed by the violator. At this property, 12 previous violations had occurred. $500.00 a day is a standard in most Florida cities for a repeat offender. It is predicated upon the need to ensure the violation is brought into compliance quickly given the continued negative impact on the neighborhood of a repeat offender. Mr. Ficken stated in July 2018 his lawn mower was broken and he would get the lawn mowed by some means after it was repaired. After giving Mr. Ficken 5 weeks to get the mower repaired and/or the lawn mowed by some other means the Code Enforcement Inspector mailed a repeat violation notice on August 22, 2018. This case was brought to the September 4, 2018, Dunedin Code Enforcement Board hearing which resulted in two separate Board orders which totaled $23,500.00 plus interest, plus recording costs. Again notice to Suncoast First Trust of the impact of not maintaining the property is provided in the 2015 Board Order. Notice was provided as required by law. A Demand Letter was sent to Suncoast First Trust on February 13, 2019. On March 5, 2019. Mr. Ficken, speaking on behalf of Suncoast First Trust, asked for additional time saying, “I need an additional 60 days until 5/1/19 before proceeding with a foreclosure or any other procedure which you may seek payment against the Trust.” On March 6, 2019, City Attorney Tom Trask asked Mr. Ficken why he was requesting additional time. Mr. Ficken did not reply to that email or an email after that. Foreclosure Action/Homestead Property: Two months later on Tuesday, May 7, 2019, the City of Dunedin Code Enforcement Board authorized the City Attorney’s Office to file foreclosure actions. The Dunedin Code Enforcement Board is comprised of volunteer citizens appointed by the City Commission. They are residents and business owners in good standing and they volunteer many, many hours to ensure our neighborhoods are properly maintained. Dunedin Code Enforcement Board members were individually served with a lawsuit yesterday, as was the City of Dunedin. This property has a long history of Code violations which resulted in the fines imposed. This issue is about compliance, this is about requiring a property owner maintain his property without prompting and without expenditure of City funds. 9
19-3 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
As to the second point that the City is putting a senior citizen out on the street, Florida Constitution Article 10, Section 4 states, Policy prohibits foreclosure on a homesteaded residence, as is the policy of the City of Dunedin. The reason for that is that homesteaded property is recognized as a person’s primary home. What qualifies as a homestead is the house in which the owner and his family live in. There are tax exemptions, as everyone knows, associated with homesteaded property. A home leased to other families does not qualify as a homesteaded property and can be foreclosed upon. The property located at 1341 Lady Marion Lane is not Mr. Ficken’s primary homesteaded residence. Mr. Ficken’s homesteaded property, his primary residence as recognized by the Florida Statutes, is located at 1608 Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, according to the Pinellas County Property Appraiser. The property on Osceola Avenue was purchased in February 1993, since that time 35 cases against this property have been opened by the Clearwater Code Enforcement Division ranging from overgrowth to abandoned vehicles to broken glass in the windows. This is Mr. Ficken’s homesteaded property which cannot be foreclosed upon. The property is currently vacant. In addition, records show 3 other properties owned by the Trust or some variation of the Trust. The properties are in Palm Harbor, Clearwater and another in Dunedin. According to Zillow, the market value of those properties is $709,000. City Manager Bramley made the following general comments on some of the issues she has seen in articles and reports. The City of Dunedin has, like other cities in Florida, collected above average revenue as liens have been foreclosed over the past few years. The City estimates 40% of these foreclosed liens have been against bank owned and abandoned properties. This is because during the recession a large number of properties were foreclosed upon by the banks, which is very unfortunate for those families and for the cities involved. These properties then sat vacant and many were not maintained which resulted in large fines, the fines accrued. The banks were overrun with this inventory and very gradually brought the homes into compliance, settled the code liens with the municipalities and put the properties back on the market, which is very good for the neighborhoods and something the City encouraged. This process took many years and many cities like Dunedin are still involved in this process; it is not unique to Dunedin; it occurred nationwide. Last fiscal year, Dunedin collected $1.1 Million in fines; this year a decrease is anticipated and budgeting next year for another decrease in the number of fines as the bank owned properties are placed back on the market. It should be noted in February the City Commission directed City staff to use proceeds from these code liens for affordable housing for residents. This case has garnered nationwide attention and emails were received from across the country. The most important input the City receives is from its residents and business owners. As is known, the City recently took a citizen survey and it was comprehensive and was statistically confident to 2.7%. Of the residents 73.2% found there is either the right amount of code enforcement or not enough in Dunedin; 26.8% found there is too much. Three quarters of Dunedin residents find there is not sufficient code enforcement. She thinks it is important when taking a step back from the situation and the vitriol it has engendered that we recognize ¾ of our residents are happy with the City’s Code 10 Compliance Division. 19-4 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Our Code Enforcement Officers have the most difficult job in the city. They work with residents and business owners day in and day out to bring properties into compliance. Our property values are among the strongest in the region and she encourages them to continue the fine job they are doing. Mayor Bujalski thanked City Manager Bramley for the statements of fact. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented: She was out of town most of this situation; however, was certainly following it on the media. Everyone she showed the media broadcast of the issue to, some people in California, everyone had the same reaction that it was terrible and how could Dunedin do that. Her first comment is her disappointment in the media, because if a story is going to be told, tell the story. We have rules in place to protect our neighborhoods and the Commission is to represent all the citizens. She thought it was important what was said about the citizen survey and how they feel about code enforcement as a general rule. Overwhelmingly people in Dunedin are good and courteous to their fellow neighbors and their citizens. Sometimes neighbors are not what we hope them to be and that is why we have rules and a process. The process is attempted to be done with courtesy first and reminding people what the rules are and then as things progress, as they certainly did in this case since 2007, there is a process again trying to give people a lot of latitude which this individual had, but eventually there is a citizen board that gets involved and the ability to fine. When you sit on the dais you see the other side as does anyone who has a neighbor who does not take care of their property, the frustration of how long it takes to gain compliance and how long the system tries to work with them to be in compliance. When things repeatedly do not work there is a process and this gentleman had every opportunity. She thinks it needs to be repeated again and again, this is investment property, this is not his home, so a neighbor next door to investment property and having this frustration it is even worse. Sitting on the dais as the Commission has looked at the facts of the case and made sure of the facts and of being fair, obviously some situations come up and some adjustments need to be made, but she thought the facts as the City Manager stated this individual had a lot of opportunities. This is an investment property, this is not an older gentleman being put out of his home, this is someone with multiple investment properties and multiple code infractions in other cities, not just ours. The Commission is here for all the citizens of Dunedin and the neighborhoods. She expressed appreciation for all the work that has been done. Commissioner Gow agreed with the comments by Vice-Mayor Freaney. When a house is not homesteaded and it is not their primary residence the primary reason people have additional homes especially in close proximity to their homestead home is for income generation. While the media did give a one-sided slant that this is a gentleman on a fixed income, this is a gentleman who has multiple homes. He did wish it had been more of a full story. He would encourage the residents of Dunedin who time and again express how wonderful this city is, when they see something negative on social media to please at least take a step back and investigate it. The City has a tremendous amount of people involved in this case, and in Code Enforcement, who work very hard to make sure Dunedin is as wonderful as we all believe it is. 11 Commissioner Gracy commented: 19-5 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
It has been an interesting week and she does see all the stories out there. She thought a lot of this conversation among her peers is certainly valid. It is nice to have some data behind what our residents do feel and the levels that they do support the services, in this case the Code Enforcement. Notwithstanding, she has had a few calls from Legislators who wanted to know what is going on in Dunedin. First and foremost she wanted to defend the residents of this city, because it was a resident led board, these are not elected officials. She stated “feel free to come at us” as elected officials that is their role. Her comment back is maybe Chapter 162 needs some work because our Code Enforcement Board, our residents are reading right from the Florida Statutes, so we need to find a middle ground there and she is looking forward to a better path forward for instances like this. She does not know what that is or any idea how that would work, but she has a good idea that a lot of people will let us know and advise on that. Certainly working with other cities through the Florida League of Cities is what she anticipates, doing some research to see how we compare in levels of fees and in levels of compassion. She did not want to opine on certain cases being that they are open and she demonstrates a lot of concern for the exposure the City has on the legal side of things. Commissioner Kynes stated she sat on the Code Enforcement Board for years, many years ago. She supports the Code Enforcement Board; they are citizens and give tremendous time. She thinks legally and she does feel it is an open case, so as a legality there is a balance between the use of your property and where it begins to impinge on the use and enjoyment of someone else’s property. That is the legality. Mayor Bujalski commented: Everyone has had a hard week. Our country, state and city are always a work in progress. She noted the back of a dollar bill has an unfinished pyramid and we are always unfinished, always working to become better, to do better. There could be things in front of us we need to fix and we do not always see them. She is not saying there are things in this situation, but she does think there are things that could be looked upon in the future, but as Commissioner Gracy said, the State makes the regulations and our Code Enforcement Board follows them. In addition, our Code Enforcement Board, as has been said, are residents of Dunedin; they are making the decision to hand down on code enforcement on their own neighbors, so that is not this board doing that. The Commission has very little to do with code enforcement and it is built that way by design because it needs to be fair and impartial and treat everyone the same, no matter who they are; if you are a celebrity, if your main house is in Clearwater, everyone is treated the same. She commends the Code Enforcement Board because that is a hard thing to do when you are handing down a judgment on what could be your own neighbor. She is concerned about the news. What makes Dunedin special is the people who live here, she thinks we are very unique and a group of people who sometimes can be like a dysfunctional family, but we love and care about each other and know peoples’ names and/or faces. We are a very strong community. It was difficult when the ABC News story came out because it was so one sided; they called at 4:45 for a comment when their newscast was at 5:00 or 5:30 and left a message for, she was told, a low level Code 12 Enforcement person who was in a meeting at the time and the City closes at 5:00 p.m., so 19-6 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
there was no opportunity. They had spent the whole day crafting their story and editing their video and waited until the last fifteen minutes of the day to even ask. The Washington Post, the city is famous, they emailed her 12:02 a.m. Sunday night and their story ran at 6:00 a.m.; she slept and did not even see it. This is what they are doing, they are picking up on the same story and not even expanding on the story, just picking up on the Associated Press and it is going viral. She supposed that is the way they are and they can do that; even the Tampa Bay Times had their story written by the time they spoke with her and just inserted a couple of comments and talked like they were going to do a follow up, but that has not occurred and she does not think it will. What is concerning to her is that as a strong community everyone bit into it and as a protection mode she understands, we care about our neighbors, that was good to see; she can’t remember when she has seen how many people wanted to go mow this gentleman’s yard and that actually made her feel pretty good that is the kind of community we have. The City of Dunedin would never in a short term period try to take someone’s house for not mowing their grass once; what benefit to the City would that be and the City’s laws would not allow it; the State laws would not allow it. Words matter, what they put on social media and some of the emails and to staff, she thinks the Commission has broad shoulders and get it all the time from big and little things and get used to it to a point, but not staff, they are doing their job for the love of public service and that was pretty sad. Her family got threatened at her home with bodily harm and had to have the police out twice, they are patrolling her neighborhood and she has been called a Zionist, Marxist, Jew thief and a few other words she probably can’t repeat and she is not the only one, she is sure everyone received these kinds of communications from all over the country. She just hopes the world becomes a little more of a caring place because we do care. Our Code Enforcement Board cares for both sides; there is the gentleman or lady who goes through the actual code enforcement issue and then there are the neighbors. Just two months ago that same news station did a story that we did not do enough code enforcement on a property on Pasadena, the same station and there were issues with their reporting on that also, it was one sided. That is their job to make headlines, she just thinks it is important to go back to remembering who we are as a community, a great community of special people that love our neighbors whether they have broken a code violation or not. The City does have the opportunity to mow peoples’ lawns and put it on their taxes, the City does that in certain cases, but she thinks after hearing the City Manager lay out the statement of fact, you also have to want to help yourself a little. The City does have those opportunities and they will be looked at more and certain things with fees. She also does not want to say too much as the City followed the current law as it is set forth that the City did not create and has no control over, but we can always do better and we will. She reiterated wanting to treat everyone fairly. She has had a lot of people ask why we have not put out a statement on Facebook; after the visceral social media that has happened for the last five or six days she thought the thinking was staying off social media was a better choice, they did put out a press release which no one has picked up on yet, so here we are using the City’s own means of communication and she hopes that helps everyone understand. 13 CITIZEN INPUT - None 19-7 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
2. CONSENT AGENDA 2.a. Approve the minutes for: A. April 2, 2019 Work Session B. April 4, 2019 Regular Meeting C. April 18, 2019 Regular Meeting 2.b. Approve the Board and Committee Appointments/Reappointments A. Architectural Review Committee - Appoint Roger Leibin to be appointed as the alternate to finish a three year term that expires January 2021. B. Arts and Culture Advisory Committee - Appoint Ray Bouchard to move from Alternate member to Regular member to finish a three year term that expires January 2022; appoint Carol Cartwright as a Regular member to finish a term that expires January 2021,and appoint Mary Childs as an Alternate member to finish a term that expires January 2022. C. Board of Adjustment and Appeal - Appoint Alternate member Pat Morea as a Regular member to finish a term that expires December 2020 and appoint applicant Kathleen Sands Martin as an Alternate member to finish a term that expires December 2019. D. Code Enforcement Board - Appoint Douglas Byrne as an Alternate member to finish a term that expires September 2020. E. Social Services Committee - Appoint applicant Chantala Simmons as a Regular member to finish a term that expires May 2021, appoint applicant Kimberly Tucker as an Alternate member to finish a term that expires May 2021 and appoint applicant Sandra Sunter as an Alternate member to finish a term that expires May 2022. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gracy and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 3. ACTION ITEMS 3.a. The proposed agenda for the June 4, 2019 Work Session Staff recommends to approve the agenda for June 4, 2019 Work Session Commissioner Gracy requested an excused absence for the June 4, 2019, Work Session; she will be in Israel at that time. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Kynes and seconded by Vice-Mayor Freaney to approve an excused absence for Commissioner Gracy for the June 4, 2019, Work Session. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Gow to approve the agenda for the June 4, 2019, Work Session. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 4. WORKSHOP ITEMS 4.a. City Hall - Phase I presentation to Commission regarding site locations Presenters: Economic & Housing Development/CRA Director Ironsmith; Amy Weber, AIA, 14 Harvard Jolly; Ward Friszolowski, AIA, Harvard Jolly and Deputy City Manager Hutchens 19-8 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Mayor Bujalski explained the Commission would only be giving consensus direction on this item and no decisions will be made. City Manager Bramley advised this discussion is looking for consensus direction from the Commission on the four options to be presented. Details still need to be worked out and will be the next step, then financing and so forth. Today City staff needs to know the general direction which might be one option or a combination of options. Economic & Housing Development/CRA Director Ironsmith advised there are four options to locate a city hall with 37,500 square feet. The City staff is looking for consensus direction as to where the city hall campus should be and moving forward with the scope of services. Mr. Friszolowski reviewed the interactive and relatively lengthy process for the new city hall including a Listening Session at the Library with good attendance, information and comments from the public. It also included working closely with the City Manager, Department Directors and City staff in many meetings to consider the right size of the building in consideration of the current staff needs and future projections, then efficiencies consolidating three groups currently in three buildings into one building. He thereafter presented the PowerPoint Presentation, City of Dunedin New City Hall included in the agenda packet. Project Scope The new 37,445 square foot City Hall will replace the existing City Hall, Municipal Services and Technical Services buildings. Parking garage will have 140 spaces for staff, 160 spaces for public use during the day; and approximately 300 spaces which changes depending on the site and configuration. Buildings will be located on the two blocks which is more land than is really needed to consider where the best place is for the City Hall, Parking Garage and possible opportunities for the City to sell some of the land to help with overall expenditures. Ms. Weber continued: An aerial view of the existing site and a graphic depicts the current location of the parking lot and buildings. Evaluation Criteria A set of criteria was developed in order to evaluate the four options. Cost – construction, furniture, fixtures and equipment, A/V, IT equipment, fees and soft costs, demolition of the existing buildings as well as solar energy and public art. Their partners looked at valuations of the remaining land on the site which is incorporated into the overall cost of each option. Financial Risk – Private development is a part of any of the options if the City wants to sell the land; in some cases the City has to put some money into building shelf space for that private development meaning some financial risk for the City. Iconic Architecture/Prominence or Visibility – Neighborhood Impact: Traffic Circulation and Compatibility – There is residential area directly to the south on Wood Street. Redevelopment Potential – The remaining land in each option is viable for redevelopment and will be desirable to developers. 15
19-9 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Mass/Density/Height - They want to make sure this design is compatible with the neighborhood and surrounding development. Option 1 Option 1 – Ground Floor (Graphic) City Hall is on the east block in an L-shape configuration with a 2-level office building. Level 1: “One-Stop Shop” will be all departments with a lot of interaction with the public; the second level will be more administrative departments; The single story wing is for the Commission Chambers and associated functions including public restrooms and small connector lobby area. The reason for this configuration was to make sure the Commission Chambers and those associated public spaces can be open outside of regular business hours, so that wing and the lobby can be open, but close off the entire office side. This also allows for two entrances to City Hall, one would be the “ceremonial” off of Milwaukee Avenue and the other more “functional” with the parking lot being on the west block most people would coming from that direction and would enter through the plaza. The parking garage on the west block shows 35 spaces on the ground floor with the rest of the building available for development that would be the shell space which in this case the City would have to construct as part of the parking garage project. A restaurant is shown on the corner of Highland and Virginia, probably the most desirable location on the site and office space is shown along Virginia. Space was also reserved for development of townhomes on Wood Street providing a residential buffer between the residential neighborhood off Wood Street and the development of the City Hall and parking garage. The townhomes would be an out parcel the City would sell off and work with a purchaser to develop; the City could control what they wanted that to look like. Option 1 – Second Floor Three (3) elevated decks of the parking garage with 100 spaces each for a total of 335 spaces for the entire garage. Some of those spaces would have to be dedicated to the businesses. For any of these options additional decks can be added to the parking garage; the goal was 300 spaces. Level 2: Administration offices Option 1 – Cost – This option would be approximately $27,510,680; Solar on top of the parking garage is an additional approximately $2,500,000. Option 1 - Pros The entire site is master planned. It has a “campus-like” feel for the City Hall which was heard in the public listening session. Residential buffer is on Wood Street. The parking garage with the commercial development at the ground level and the parking decks stepping back creates a more friendly façade at the pedestrian level and makes a more walkable street. 16
19-10 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Option 1 – Cons The City must build shell space for commercial development that is a potential financial risk to the City not knowing how soon that would sell. City Hall being on the east block is not as visible from Main Street. It is the most expensive option because of building the shell space. Option 2 The City Hall configuration is the same as Option 1. The parking structure is 2 elevated decks at 90 spaces per floor for a total of 270 spaces as there would also be parking on the ground floor of this option. This option does not have any retail or office shell space; it is strictly a parking structure, but it could be articulated in a way that it does not just look like a parking structure. It can be made to look architecturally nice and fitting in a neighborhood. This option allows for the City to sell off the entire western half of the west block. That would be 32,000 square feet available for sale. Their understanding from their consultant is it would most likely be a multi-story mixed use, multi-family or hospitality development with some commercial at the prime corner of Virginia and Highland. Option 2 – Cost - This option would be approximately $24 Million and an additional $2.3 Million for Solar. Option 2 - Pros In this option the most desirable portion of the two parcels is available for sale, that western half of the west block being so close to Main Street. The City has no financial responsibility for that parcel, but still retains control to choose the type of development that available parking could also be surface parking for the City until it sells. This option still has that “campus” like feel for City Hall on the east block. On the northwestern corner of the parking garage is vertical circulation for the parking structure, but it could also be a tower element such as clock tower that draws you into the site, is visible from Main Street and sort of hints that City Hall is in that direction. It still gives some prominence to City Hall. This is a lower priced option. Option 3 Both the parking structure and the City Hall on the west block. The parking garage is the same configuration as Option 2. City Hall is more of a bar shaped building on the western side of the west block with the 2- story office structure and a 1-story Chamber wing with a connector lobby that in this case has an entrance off of Highland Avenue close to Main Street and off of the plaza between the parking garage and City Hall. This allows for selling off the entire east block which is about 69,750 square feet available. That would most likely be a multi-story, mixed use, multi-family or hospitality with some commercial on the first floor. Option 3 – Cost – This option would be approximately $24 Million with a potential $2.5 Million 17 for Solar. 19-11 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Option 3 - Pros A large parcel would be available for sale. The City has no responsibility for the development of the parcel for sale, but would still retain control in the type of development. The available parcel can be surface parking until it sells. In this option City Hall is highly visible from Main Street This is a lower price option. Option 3 - Cons Development of the City Hall blocks is rather dense for this area. The narrow footprint of City Hall may not appear as iconic as the other options. There is no opportunity for commercial development close to Main Street. The question is whether or not City Hall is the highest and best use of the prime corner. Option 4 City Hall is on the west block very visible from Main Street. Space has been allowed for a restaurant as that corner is prime space for that use. The plaza would be shared by City Hall and the restaurant. The parking garage would be on the east parcel with 2 elevated decks. Option 4 – Cost – This option is approximately $27 Million and because the footprint of the parking garage is larger, the Solar power would be approximately $3.26 Million. Option 4 - Pros City Hall is highly visible from Main Street. There is still an opportunity for a restaurant providing for there still being activity after normal business hours for City Hall on that corner since the plaza could be seating for the restaurant as well as serving City Hall. Option 4 – Cons The entire east block is a parking garage that might not be desirable to the neighborhood. There is very limited land for sale, the only opportunity would be the restaurant. There are concerns about service access for the restaurant and how functional and desirable that will be to a restaurateur. This is a more expensive option. The parking garage with the idea of serving the businesses on Main Street, it is further from Main Street; therefore, not as desirable for that purpose. Schedule Schedule for each of the options is provided in a graph with the parking garage being completed November 2020 and City Hall completed September 2021. Comparison of Each of the Options (+ and – shown in the PowerPoint) Option 1 they think is well designed for the neighborhood and fits in well. The redevelopment potential is high with the shell space and parcel for the townhomes. The cost 18
19-12 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
is more and there is financial risk for the City. City Hall may not be as prominent and it is a taller parking garage. Option 2 they think is a lower cost option with no financial risk for the City. It is a prominent location with the tower element on the parking garage. This is a good option for the neighborhood impact holding the parking garage further from the residential neighbors. Redevelopment potential of the western half of the west block is very high. In terms of mass, density and height it fits well into the neighborhood. Option 3 is a lower cost option with no financial risk for the City. City Hall is very prominently located on the western half of the west block. Due to the mass, density and height of this option they think it is not a great impact on the neighborhood. The redevelopment of the eastern block is not as high as the west block. Option 4 is a higher cost option. There is limited financial risk to the City. It is a very prominent location for the City Hall; however, they think the neighborhood impact and the mass, density and height are not as good with this option. Redevelopment potential opportunity is on the restaurant. The last page of the PowerPoint provides each of the options on one slide for comparison. Commission Questions In response to the question from the Commissioner Gracy regarding infrastructure, Mr. Friszolowski advised: Regarding infrastructure a survey was obtained and Harvard Jolly works closely with the George F. Young firm. As they developed all the options they reviewed the surveys not only for utilities and available utilities, but also the concern for stormwater retention especially for Option 3 and the feeling was they could deal with stormwater retention on any one of the options; however, did share that Option 3 was probably the most challenging from that standpoint. In response to the question from Vice-Mayor Freaney regarding only Option 4 having angled parking, Mr. Friszolowski advised: It had more to do with there being more available land and selling off less land and there was more flexibility. It is not that angled parking could not be done on some of the other options; however, adjustments would have to be made. In Option 3 they tried to maximize the parking garage and with angled parking they would have had to tighten the parking garage and get fewer spaces in the garage. Option 4 provided the most flexibility because of taking up the most amount of land. Vice-Mayor Freaney verified with Mr. Ironsmith that angled parking is always considered a good thing and creates an activity center. There are variations that can be done. In response to the comments from Vice-Mayor Freaney regarding the higher cost factor in Option 4, Mr. Friszolowski advised: It is the biggest parking garage in terms of the number of spaces with 370. Solar changes with each one of the options, but that is only a factor of trying to maximize the top level of the garage. In Option 4 solar is the most expensive; however, it is correct you do not have to do that much solar. For this parking garage they tried to maximize the site; in terms of fairness and cost if we wanted to equate better, one to the other, there could certainly be a smaller parking garage and that would bring down the costs. 19
19-13 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Ms. Weber noted in this option because only the restaurant is available for sale, the City is not getting as much back potentially for selling land, so that factors into the cost as well. Vice-Mayor Freaney pointed out regarding Option 4: Basically the cost differential of these two becomes $410,000 and that is the difference in what would be sold off; that is the only difference in cost and you don’t have to move the people with Option 4, you do if you take Option 2, and under the cost section it is to be determined what that cost is going to be. She would argue that is pretty much of an equal cost. She just did not want it to be a negative cost when it is really the same cost. In Option 4 if there is not this huge footprint of a parking garage, which it does not have to be, and could go back to the same size as Option 2 and have more space, for even townhomes for example on Wood Street on that one side. She did not understand the negative neighborhood impact there, part of which she thought was the huge footprint of the east block being all parking garage that does not need to be that massive. For her the only negative there is the redevelopment potential, agreed it is the least amount of space to sell off which she thought at the listening session was not the citizens’ first priority. Commissioner Kynes expressed concern regarding the size of the parking structure and noted, for example, at the Artisan at least half of theirs is underground which does not get the bulk. She would like to see from a side view how big it will look in that master plan. She had an issue with whether or not this is trying to be all and end all of parking on one site; she does not think that is going to happen and that eventually there will be a third parking somewhere. In that case does this have to be a plan for anticipated needs for so many years. Another concern is for a really good buffering between the neighborhoods; the townhomes are interesting. She also questioned how big the parking garage needs to be in Option 4; she thought Option 2 was less. Mr. Friszolowski advised they could develop heights or develop them further; they were hesitant to try to develop all four options further. Commissioner Gow noted most of the discussion seemed to be about parking spaces, Mr. Friszolowski clarified: Option 1 has 35 spaces on the ground floor and then 3 elevated decks at 100 spaces each for a total of 335 spaces at 4 stories. 3 stories are elevated, one is not technically underground, but hidden by retail and office. In consideration of protecting some of the Public Works specialty vehicles on the first level they went with a taller 1st floor of the garage at 18 feet and any story above that is another 10 feet each and then there is a parapet at the top level to hide the cars and headlights. Option 1 would be a little over 42 feet. Option 2 is the first elevated deck at 18 feet, the second elevated deck is at 28 feet and then 4 feet would make it roughly 32 feet. Option 3 would also be 32 feet for the garage. Option 4 Ms. Weber clarified in Option 4 since that is a larger footprint for the garage they were trying to keep the height of this one lower. The first elevated deck is not the entire area as shown; it is cutaway so there is a double height space for the taller vehicles, so 20
19-14 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
that might relate to the question about the number of spaces; in this case each deck is only 10 feet instead of the first one being at 18, so this garage is 24 feet and the City Hall is 34 feet. Those heights do not include the height for the solar facilities; that would depend upon which option. In response to the question from Commissioner Gow, Mr. Friszolowski advised the cost difference for the 18-foot height on the first floor versus 11 feet did not have an exact cost; however, explained it is relatively nominal depending on how it is articulated because it is only paying for a few more feet of vertical height, no more lighting and other factors. Commissioner Gow clarified with Ms. Weber that the design for garage for Option 2 and Option 3 are the same design. He asked the setback, especially on Wood Street between Option 2 and Option 3 and Mr. Friszolowski advised originally they had an option 2a and 2b which they morphed into one because Option 2a was longer and getting closer to Wood Street and Option 2b was pinched in even more than this Option 2. Ms. Weber noted for Option 3 there are 100 spaces per floor where Option 2 has 90 spaces and Option 3 could also be the 90 spaces per floor and be a little smaller footprint. In responses to the question from Commissioner Gow regarding the possibility of switching the location of City Hall on any of the options in terms of the 2-story building having less impact on Wood Street, Mr. Friszolowski noted it could be done; however, that changes where the front door is located which they think would not be good to change the front door access with the visibility to Main Street especially for Option 3. Ms. Weber pointed out consideration as to whether or not the plaza will be a noisier and busier space and if it would be better to have that facing Wood Street or the 2-story office building. Commissioner Gow asked if there is any coverage from the parking garage for inclement weather and Mr. Friszolowski stated there is none currently, but it could be incorporated. Mayor Bujalski commented she agreed with some of the things that had been said and noted her overall concerns: Extra parking is needed and one reason for increasing the numbers was not knowing how much parking the City will actually get at the Gateway project and with the revitalization of the east end to be sure there is enough parking where currently there is 200 spaces being used that is more or less from west of Highland hoping that the east end revitalizes with the money being invested, almost everything on the east end has only street parking, so additional businesses in that area are going to require additional parking, so having the extra parking is important. That is not at the cost of everything else; however should be kept in mind. She likes City Hall where it is located; she thinks the neighborhood is used to it and it is no bigger than what it is today because Technical Services is a 2-story building. She is leaning toward Option 1 thinking that we can still get more creative with it other than City Hall, how the rest of the parcels are done and removing the City’s risk. She has heard from City staff there is risk in the City building its own retail; she does not think the City has to do that and that instead of selling the townhome portion, sell the entire piece and indicate what the City wants or some variation of this and let a developer build it and take the risk. She thinks that needs to be investigated more as to what can be done if it is not the City building it. That would not slow down the City Hall portion as it is important for the City 21 19-15 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
employees not to slow that process down. Ideally it would be great to have the whole thing wrapped up into a deal, but not in consideration of slowing it down for the employees. She does think some kind of combination of restaurant/retail is very valuable there. Usually with a developer they will go out and market the space to build and in general have it preleased which the City does not have those capabilities and would have to hire someone to do that and the City does not want to be in that business, she agrees. The City could still have ownership of the garage and have someone else build the whole thing and they can make their money on townhomes, retail and so forth; the cost of the land goes toward building the garage and maybe it won’t be as tall in consideration of the concerns heard. The idea of the California Wrap she thinks is still of value and she does not think it has been taken far enough to look at how to get it done where it alleviates the risk. She also thinks a master plan without an empty piece of property gives the neighborhood some certainty of what is going to be there which she thinks is important in that a vacant property she thinks might upset people and then all this has to be gone through again when a developer comes in with what they want to do. In reference to the Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee (CRAAC), they said in almost a complete split vote it could be taken either way. She likes the buffer and the idea of the angled parking is something she had not thought about previously and maybe around City Hall where there is some green space, not to take it all up is a place for that in terms of convenience for City Hall to be able to stop in quick as opposed to having to go into a garage that takes longer. She agreed with consideration of some type of cover for residents to get from the parking garage in inclement weather. Her concern about Option 2, besides the neighborhood knowing what is going to happen; whatever is built there, with the 270 spaces when there currently are 200 spaces, during prime time, everyone knows whatever goes there with the by design low requirements of parking to begin with, if there is a restaurant or two they will need more permanent parking. Whatever extra parking there is in Option 2, she thinks if there were some type of retail/restaurant it will take up some of that extra parking. Now the City has paid $8 Million for a parking garage that does not give any more parking than there is today. Even though it is a 65 space difference between Option 1 and Option 2 that makes a difference in talking about low parking requirements for retail/restaurant and their need for extra parking. She summarized those are her concerns about building the garage without knowing what is going to be on the vacant property. She likes the idea of a master plan and finding a more creative way to get the concept of Option 1 to give the neighborhood certainty to have enough parking for whatever is going to be built there, to have the buffer, to have the activity on the corner and she thinks some angled parking would be good. Citizen Input Lynn Olson of 723 Louden Avenue commented regarding angled parking, if it is on the street, her concern is the way it is now when you cross Louden and stop, you have to go into Wood to be able to see the cars that fly down Wood Street one way; so that angled parking blocks the view. Regarding the height there is already the 2-story Technical Building that is an eyesore, so anything will be nicer, but she understands that having it much taller would be a concern. Option 2 does extend the downtown area longer than now, which would be fine. 22 She questioned what is at the ground level of the garage, what will that look like and what 19-16 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
the setback is and what is in front. Also, what is the walkway looking thing in Option 2 that goes from the parking garage over across Louden that is not in the other pictures. City Manager Bramley explained that walkway mentioned is at surface crossing into City Hall from the parking garage. Mayor Bujalski explained the ground level architecture is not known yet, this is only the placement and it depends on which option is selected, but whether or not there is retail/restaurant on the ground floor, the garage will have some type of architectural façade to make it look better when it comes to that stage. Glen Turpin of Wood Street across from the current parking lot stated it would seem that where the Municipal Services Building is now everything could be there, City Hall and parking, all that and then where the parking lot is now, sell it off and put in a restaurant and let them develop that. There are 5 houses on the west end of the street where there are 2 houses on the east side and they have been looking at that ugly building forever, so whatever is put there, he thinks they would be ecstatic. Personally, he is not going to be thrilled no matter what is put across the street from him, because there was a church which he loved, but that is gone and now the open view has been wonderful, plus two years of construction does not excite him. Ralph Shenefeld of 503 Wood Street stated he has shared his view on this with each of the Commissioners which is on public record. He expressed appreciation for the comments regarding the mass and scale particularly for the garage in Option 1. He thinks the most iconic feature in any of the options will be the parking garage because it is massive which he thinks is a mistake. Obviously, he does not want a restaurant in his front yard; it is already noisy enough until 3:00 a.m. He clarified with Mayor Bujalski there are no plans for paid parking in the garage which he noted paid parking just forces people onto their streets which never works. He liked the Mayor’s comment regarding the piece in Option 2 for whatever due to the uncertainty and going through this again and it effects property values not knowing what is going there, so the sooner it is resolved the better opportunity he has to decide what he will do for his family and future. He lives in the house on the corner of Highland and Wood. Option 2 is not an option for him; a restaurant in his front yard is not an option for him. When this was first discussed at the Library the bullet point of neighborhood impact was number one, being good neighbors and making sure there was plenty of buffer; however, the only buffer he sees is in Option 1 and he thinks the townhomes in maybe a Craftsman style would be a great buffer and would sell; he would like to see them extended throughout Wood Street so people who have been looking at the ugly Technical Services Building would look at a porch with people instead and people want to live here, so the more and better quality housing stock the city has the better. He also liked the Mayor’s comment about addressing the City’s risk, simply eliminating that option simple because of the risk of building a shell and not being able to fill it; there should be other creative and innovative ways to manage that. It is exciting and scary with this massive project right in their front yard and many neighbors will be affected by something that will last for many decades. Tony Arnold of 715 Highland Avenue commented Dunedin is supposed to be famous as the most walkable town and he is baffled as to why there needs to be a parking garage and so much parking to save people from walking. He thinks the more that is put on the periphery the better, maybe at the Gateway area. While it is a matter of convenience, if the amount of parking needed can be reduced to what was suggested at the Library meeting, 200 or so; he 23
19-17 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
has not heard anyone talk about that all that parking becomes available in the evening anyway as the City’s business is concluded at 5:00 p.m. Also, it seems in all four options you could flip flop from north to south the 2-story part of the building and the 1-story Commission Chambers that fronts the residents of Wood Street with a 1-story building and also puts the park like campus area next to Wood Street where they would not have to look at a 2-story right outside their front door. Diana Carsey of 518 Virginia Street stated they like Option 2. She referred to Commissioner Kynes’ comments regarding elevations and was not sure that question was really answered. She is also looking for elevations, and parking below ground would modify the elevation and she would like that to be clarified. She thought Option 2 had a softer edge for this end of town; it has potential for creating a space that looks like the center of town and the lay out concept is good and the smaller footprint of the garage is interesting and looks like that option has the possibility for development on the north side of that square. The two-year construction schedule they know is going to take time and as for sound and noise, if they open a door they hear every party, every parade, all the music and sometimes amazingly personal conversations, but when they close the door in their house they hear nothing. They miss events by not hearing them because they have the new impact glass. Bob Henion of 860 Loch Linnhe Lane, Unit #115 referred to the comments by Commissioner Kynes about the elevations and profiles and stated it really has not been taken into account, when adding all those levels, the slope of the land. That really factors in and with a parking garage at 3 or 4 levels at the west end; it really is down 10-foot lower than if it was on the east block. Deborah Matthews of 646 Scotland Street expressed her concern was the increase in the number of parking spaces and it sounds like it is a done deal. She thinks we do need to build a City Hall for the community. Parking does need to be taken into consideration for people to visit, but she is on her golf cart on a regular basis and most of the time the parking lot where the Baptist Church was is not full; for specific events it is. She does not think there would ever be enough parking created for Mardi Gras, so they park in the streets three or four times a year. Most of the time that many parking spaces are not needed and that affects what we need to create overall in terms of price and what it is going to look like. She is very against Option 4; she does not want a parking garage kitty-corner to the block where she lives. Keep it down where you want people to go. She prefers Option 1 that keeps more of a community feel. There is already major infrastructure sort of surrounding the little downtown section on the east side and they do not need any more. She has seen the California Wrap and there is just so much you can do to make a parking lot look pretty; she appreciates the efforts. She is concerned about the vacant parcel on Option 2 because you don’t know what will be created there; it is not going to stay vacant and she would rather have control, as in Option 1, on what is going to be there. In Option 4 for the parking if it was decreased, and she hopes the Oak trees can be protected, it brings people further into their residential community. Nathan Murray of 505 Scotland Street commented this is forward thinking for the years ahead for Dunedin and also for the economic development of the city. He is in favor of Option 1 thinking about the retail component and the value of that east block. He spends time on the street observing and enjoying the city; at this point Main Street kind of ends at The Living Room and Pisces and then people walk back. That is all good now, but thinking 24 about the extension of what Dunedin is and people wanting to come and walk and spend 19-18 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
money. He likes the buffer of the townhomes along Wood Street and also the idea of extending that for all of the two blocks. Gwendolyn Campbell of 318 President Street commented though she does not live in this specific area she did have questions. With all the parking plans was there any plan for golf cart parking. Also if the parking was on the east side could there be a plan to make the first level somewhat underground so the height would not be so obstructive to the people living around it. Mayor Bujalski noted there is some golf cart parking in the other garage and supposed there would be some in the plan for this one as well, maybe with a charging station. In terms of the underground, Mr. Friszolowski explained they looked at options for underground parking; however, they did not seem to be working out. They looked at the west site more than the east site, but had alternatives that were not gaining a lot with one issue being access from only one side and keeping the ingress/ingress away from the retail of office space. Ms. Weber advised for all options the vehicular entrance to the parking garage is off of Louden. Mayor Bujalski commented that is a problem because of the one-way streets and suggested since Highland is a collector road that is where the traffic needs to be. City Manager Bramley noted once the Commission decided on the locations there is within the scope, which is the second phase, a traffic study for how that will circulate. BREAK 11:02 A.M. – 11:14 A.M. Commissioner Gow stated he liked Option 2, but wanted to see if the parking garage could be expanded west, not move it; what is the impact on the ability to develop from the standpoint of a developer. He noted the extremes of little retail on Option 1 and what appears to be a large amount on Option 2. Mr. Ironsmith commented there would still be sufficient depth for some storefront or restaurant if it was half way, so both could be done; he thought the thought process for leaving that amount of available land was for a developer creativity even though the City ultimately controls; from the Collier report it talked about restaurant and even lodging and some retail/office and create walkability and an urban edge. Mr. Friszolowski explained the resultant space was more to do with getting close to 300 cars in the parking garage and in this case Option 2 there were 270 so that resulted in that amount of land left over for sale. In that case for Option 2 as compared to Option 1; Option 1 had what they call a retail liner; Option 2 is quite a bit more land so, Collier saw that more as a mixed use opportunity. It was not so much how much land they were trying to sell off as much as it was the resultant land once they accomplished the program with the size of the building and the parking garage. An example in Option 2 parking garages have certain dimensions that cannot be altered too easily like a parking bay; it could go one more parking bay west and that would leave a little more than half that lot left over; it would just reduce the creativity and amount of mixed use and of course the amount for the sale of the land that would be left over. Mr. Ironsmith commented with less land available it drives up the cost for the developer to come in terms of drainage, infrastructure and so forth and perhaps they would pay less for the land taking those things into consideration. Commissioner Gow referred to the solar cost noting the study has not been done to 25 determine how much solar will actually be needed, so some of the estimated costs might not 19-19 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
be that much. Mr. Friszolowski commented they were just taking advantage of whatever size parking garage top deck there would be and maximize solar by putting it over the entire deck, but that would have to be done. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked realistically what would be the likely commercial going in there. Mr. Ironsmith commented certainly a restaurant on the corner; the reason for saying limited office there is not a lot of data on the office although there has been a lot of interest in the Courtyard with 19,000 square feet; it is more risky for a little professional office space, but there could be some demand. One of the benefits of leaving the vacant piece is to see what kind of demand occurs as a result of what the City is doing. He noted there are pros and cons for each of the plans. Lodging was also mentioned; however, he thinks the piece is not large enough for that activity and apartments need a certain number to be efficient. Vice-Mayor Freaney stated she has talked with some citizens and their thinking also is to not worry about how much land there is to sell, but how we want it to look. If after deciding what we want, if it is better to have about 50 spaces of angled parking which is going to minimize the need for how big the garage is, but is going to be more walkable. She thought this is an opportunity to create that same look a resident described as walkable, cool, campus like and artsy as opposed to “iconic.” She thought that this is difficult because the City requires developers to come in with pictures and the whole dynamic of how it is going to look. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked if angled parking would be worked into any option selected. Mr. Ironsmith commented he liked angled parking more on Highland that is a major collector street; parallel is fine; angled is more user friendly. He would look for some potential, but would not say it is definite. He thought the angled parking the City partnered in at the Artisan factored into the activity zone that was created there. He thought also there could be a time limit in a couple of spaces for those who are running in and out at municipal services so those spaces are not taken up all day. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked for more explanation of the entrances, particularly if they are on Milwaukee. Mr. Friszolowski advised: Option 1 – the front entry would be between the Commission Chamber wing and the 2-story wing with that connector piece between, so there would be two front doors. One would be the more formal front door on Milwaukee and the other would be from the courtyard area coming from the parking garage; that lobby area then would have two front doors. That also allows for thinking about the flexibility in how the building operates, access, security and so forth. Commissioner Gracy asked the price of a parking structure space and Mr. Friszolowski stated they estimate $22,000; however, clarified having done over 60 parking garages and some can be done more economically if it does not matter how it looks, just a functional parking garage is a lot less and it can go all the way up to one that does not look like a parking garage and that was higher than that; there is a lot of complexity and a big range and this is the mid to slightly higher range expecting not to look like the economy parking garage. Commissioner Gracy asked for some information regarding protections for the chambers although this is not at that stage yet. Mr. Friszolowski noted they have not gotten into those details; however, the dollar per square foot being allowed for this building is allowing for a very robust one that will function well and it could be done for less, but they have been listening and factoring the comments into the cost. 26
19-20 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Commissioner Kynes inquired what the trend is in parking garages and the range their company does most. Mr. Friszolowski commented it depends on what the client wants, an example is the Florida Gulf Coast University for their student housing and they did not care what they looked like, just a basic economy and some were 800 or up to 1200 spaces and another example is the State Street parking garage on a tight site in a downtown atmosphere that drove the cost up and they did not want it to look like a garage, which drove the cost up. He would say the trend if closer to a downtown is to disguise it and to not go too small because the smaller, the more you pay per space, there is economy of scale. Everything they are proposing here is smaller than the structure in Sarasota. Commissioner Kynes pointed out she thought the biggest collector road is Milwaukee. She did look at whether there was a way to do a smaller footprint garage and do some kind of wrap buffer. Commissioner Gow commented that depending on where he is it seems there is a difference in the size of parking spaces. Mr. Friszolowski commented some people try to fit in lots of compact cars and they would not be doing that and recalled these are all 9’ x 18’. Ms. Weber advised they followed Dunedin’s code. Mayor Bujalski commented she thought she was hearing some consensus to include: The idea of angled parking is good probably on the collector roads depending on the traffic study as well as the entrance to the parking garage depending on the traffic study. How many parking spaces are needed and how can the architecture mask that and the cost to do that because at this point the presentation is one big block. Going back and forth between Option 1 and Option 2 with the matter being whether to leave the property open or have a concept and market it in some way or find some way to alleviate the concern of risk. She thought everyone thought there is going to be some level of retail on that piece whether it is Option 1 or Option 2. Mayor Bujalski suggested maybe the Commission ask for them to go back and look at Option 2 because of the reduction of risk and look at Option 1; figure out the angled parking and how much space that takes away; figure out how many parking spaces are actually needed in the garage; the bulkiness of the garage and how to mitigate some of those risks. Is there some way to give some certainty to the neighborhood with Option 1 versus Option 2. It is a matter of answering some additional questions and combining it to some degree or another. Commissioner Kynes thought some of the Commission talked about buffering and hopefully it can be decided there needs to be a buffer between the neighborhoods. Mayor Bujalski agreed and noted not as much buffer is shown in Option 2 because of not seeing what the whole property looks like; whereas more buffer is shown in Option 1, but it is really just a visual not knowing what Option 2 will be and there is also the idea of mixed use, so either way it will be taller. Mayor Bujalski noted the issue of golf cart parking was heard. Commissioner Gow noted the suggestion to flip the City Hall to add more buffer to Wood Street. Mr. Friszolowski explained physically it is a possibility to do that; however, in order to do that then the courtyard area seen as potentially active at times is then going to be on that 27 side; while it seems like a good idea; he thinks it will not achieve the City’s goal. The other 19-21 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
thing is the Commission Chambers will be about 1 ½ stories depending on how it is massed out, but the activity center where the front door is and that courtyard area seen as potentially being active at times would then be facing toward the residents. Mayor Bujalski noted right now it just looks like a big box and referred to the photograph in the PowerPoint that is 2-stories which in looking at it is not as offensive as the existing building that has no character, not that she is saying that picture is what it should be, although she does like it, just that it gives a lot of dimension and depth and much different than the building that is there, so if we do our jobs right architecturally, but that is a piece we are not at yet. It is the same with the parking structure that will look as good as we can make it, but right now there is just not the visual and the cost of that has to be considered. Mayor Bujalski thought there could be another look at Option 2 and address some of the concerns with Option 1 and come back with some additional answers. Mayor Bujalski expressed another concern in that she does think it is important to have enough parking; it does not sound like the City will be able to get full time parking reserved at the Gateway, but that is not known yet and it is going too far away, not like on the corner of Milwaukee and Main Street. There does need to be enough parking; however, she does not want to end up on the opposite side. Today there are 200 spaces on the surface lot and if the City is going to pay this much for a lot and sell off some of the land or use some of the land for something else and build a structure it has to make financial sense to go into that cost per space versus the lot that just sits there that already has 200 spaces, the math has to work and support the future revitalization of the east end to some degree. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked if the other Commissioners were pretty much in favor of the campus look for the east block for the facility. City Manager Bramley noted City staff was looking for that consensus direction today and with that direction they can move forward on that aspect and get to the other things. Commissioner Kynes noted her struggle between 1 and 4. Vice-Mayor Freaney stated she struggled as well because she was sort of in the mode of minimal sell off of property, keep the maximum land, make it the Dunedin walkable look, angled parking, keeping the height and mass down that way; the City has complete control. Then she goes back to the other side which is bringing more of the downtown feel into that area and she was very interested in Ms. Carsey’s comments because they live right there and she in a sense wants that a little bit of the downtown feel; the garage is closer to the street that way and while she understands the point of flipping the city hall location; however, thinks if everyone was settled on the east block, the courtyard is key because then some cool signage could take you right to the courtyard of the city hall building that would sort of make it feel like it is part of the Downtown. Commissioner Gow agreed. She noted also the comment to be cautious because the courtyard next to the citizens might actually be worse. She struggles with the thing about not getting caught up and thinking are we really going to bring a downtown feel there because the economic study tells her retail is not going to be that great there and office is not going to be that great there and a hotel is not, so that leads back to getting a nice restaurant there, keep the rest of the land and let’s do our thing. It is difficult because it is a long term decision. Commissioner Gracy stated she understood Vice-Mayor Freaney’s question now. 28
19-22 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Vice-Mayor Freaney stated if the other Commissioners were feeling solid about the east block then that gets her off of other issues. Commissioner Gracy stated she is solid on the east block; she thought about Option 4 a little; she would like the restaurant, but the parking garage that is supposed to serve the activity center of Main Street of the downtown is to extenuate it east. That is where a lot of the conversation is starting, talking about a building and really talking about the function of parking on that real estate. Vice-Mayor Freaney noted originally that is what the property was bought to be, a parking garage wrapped and the municipal center was envisioned somehow. She has wanted to make it more Main Street central so you did not have to look for City Hall, but she thinks based on that courtyard and signage you could do something very cool that still makes it very clear where to go that is walkable and campus like feel for the consolidated building and a courtyard to sit in if you have to do business there. Commissioner Gracy noted Ms. Weber picked up on in Option 2 with just that little beacon we could build something that would attract the eye, the user, hopefully the walkable user; she thanked whoever focused on walkability because there is a lot of focus on parking cars; primarily the city is known for walkability; that caught her attention. Commissioner Kynes commented she would not want the restaurant shown in Option 4. In Option 1 the restaurants are on what she would call an arterial; she is strong on buffering. If asked between Option 1 and Option 2. Vice-Mayor Freaney stated if everyone settled on the east block for City Hall then the other piece could be micro managed. If everyone is feeling confident about the east block that settles some of her concerns and issues. Commissioner Kynes commented she can see more retail in Option 1 along that core because there is so much retail up there and adding up there the buffering and the courtyard is just messed up in that one; it is not very good. Mayor Bujalski stated what is being heard is wanting the municipal services on the east side. It is really what to do with the west side property which brings it back to selling without knowing or see if we can find some kind of risk free thing. Commissioner Gracy stated she thought we control our own destiny with it. She does not know what the market will do, but with what she knows she has more comfort with Option 1. Mayor Bujalski commented it does not have to be exactly that either, it is the concept of it and how to get it done; maybe it is a smaller garage area, maybe on level lower, there is a buffer and some angled parking which is going to narrow everything, we want a big walkway around it, that is going to narrow everything, but it is the concept and then that can come back to the Commission. City Manager Bramley noted the difference between Option 1 and Option 2 and staff would support both; the recommendation is Option 2. She thinks Option 1 is a better design which is something staff discussed. If it is consensus direction to go with Option 1 then they will work it and bring back the finance plan and how to accomplish that. Whether or not the garage gets a little smaller or what type of entertainment or retail that can be worked out. She thought there was good census direction from what she has seen from all of the Commission and would like to get to work on that. 29
19-23 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
Vice-Mayor Freaney expressed her concerns for Option 1 including the height and mass; what do we want to look like and whatever is left, if the City gets less money it is a 75 year decision. She noted one good thing is the ability to move ahead with City Hall and she thought there were 226 surface spots in that lot currently, so there is no rush to do anything there depending on the market and even let a developer include a parking garage in their proposal. Mayor Bujalski thought staff has heard the City wants to control its own destiny and that can still be done without the City being in the retail business by letting the developer scout out their leases and so forth and the Commission can still say yes or no. Vice-Mayor Freaney agreed and added she liked the concept of townhomes there and it would be good to have them done together. Mr. Ironsmith commented the townhome piece would be key to get the developer on board; if that was sold out independently it would not make the rest of the project very viable. Commissioner Gow commented he was happy with the east end and whatever else can be worked out. He noted his desire for pushing forward a community theater there, but that can be figured out. Mayor Bujalski noted the down side would be the traffic with the one-way streets. Commissioner Gow noted the easy access with the parking garage and downtown restaurants, but that is a discussion for another day. He noted he did like Option 1 though it is expensive. Mayor Bujalski commented she thought the community having some certainty is a big relief and it has been said to be good neighbors the City would do that. She noted her faith in the professionals to come up with alternatives to address everyone’s concerns. Phase 2 Deputy City Manager Hutchens advised: The staffing speaks to the next phase of the project with the first phase being what was completed today, the right sizing for the building for now and into the future twenty years and the placement on the facilities on the two parcels. The next step is Design, schematic details and construction documents for bidding. The schematic design, the plan now for the Commission consideration and consensus is to have schematic design come to the Commission to see the mass and scale, some concept renderings and follow that with another session with the public sharing those documents. Then come back to the Commission with refinement of that design to make sure what the Commission and the public have said and receive consensus direction at that second Commission meeting to go forward with detail design. Part of the presentations will include a fly-by in order to see, maybe even interior of, the building in order to understand what it should look like and the Commission wants it to look like and have surety it is within the surrounding neighborhood as well. Those are the steps and if the Commission is in agreement that will be put in the contract document, staff will negotiate a fee and come back to the Commission in a near term Commission meeting to authorize staff to execute a contract with Harvard Jolly to begin that step. Commissioner Gracy asked at what point the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) would 30 be looking at this and Mr. Hutchens thought before even the schematic design for their input, 19-24 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
knowing they have a sense and feel for the community as well; then let the architect work on schematic design which once completed the ARC would be involved in that review as well as the Commission and the public meeting. Probably also the Disabilities Committee would be involved early in the process for their input. Mr. Ironsmith advised staff has been working with the Chair who was present earlier and had meetings and their role will step up as this moves forward. Commissioner Kynes asked what other committees would be providing input or receiving presentations and mentioned the CRAAC, the Historic Preservation Committee, Committee on Environmental Quality, Arts and Culture Committee, a lot of committees would be involved. Mr. Hutchens stated everyone was welcome to provide input and the public session is for all residents and certainly the adjacent property owners who have a vested interest. Mr. Hutchens noted also the Board of Finance would certainly have to weigh in as this is no small order; it is a very expensive project that will be taxing the City to do this right. Staff understands the point of this being a legacy project for 50, 75, 100 years and that kind of commitment will have to be made. Mayor Bujalski commented prior to this process today the Commissioners did have sort of one on one meetings and verified that can be done again prior to the next public meeting on this project. She thought it was helpful in order to have time prior to the public meeting to think about questions and so forth. Mayor Bujalski determined there was consensus to direct staff to move forward with negotiating the next step. Mr. Ironsmith advised the scope of services will come back to the Commission for approval with a negotiated fee. 5. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 5.a. Commission Discussion Commissioner Kynes advised she and Commissioner Gow applied for the Environmental Committee with the Florida League of Cities and they were told they needed to work it out. She is aware Commissioner Gow is very interested and asked him to let the FLC know she is giving him her Environmental Committee seat. She noted Vice-Mayor Freaney would be on the Land Use Committee. She will look at her other options. 5.b. City Clerk's Update City Clerk Kirkpatrick advised her office needs staff. In response to the request from Mayor Bujalski, City Manager Bramley provided a City Clerk Search Update. She advised the results of the poll by the Commission and herself were just received and she thinks that has been scheduled to interview two candidates for the position. 5.c. City Manager's Written Report - Review and discuss the report covering April 2019 City Manager Bramley thanked the Commission for a very good discussion on City Hall. She is very excited and moving forward, City staff has a direction and they will do so to get this done within the time frame. She advised: The Stadium is under construction as well as the Player Development Complex. 31
19-25 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
A Budget Meeting is scheduled for Friday, May 17, 2019, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. There will be discussion on the new Business Plan, the new Initiatives the Commission would like to see this year and those staff is recommending be incorporated into the Business Plan and in the afternoon discussion will be on the Capital Improvement Plan and those projects planned for next year. She wanted to thank everyone for the time today to commit that statement of facts to the record. She thought it very important in a situation like this for the City to defend itself and she thinks they did. She hoped that it would make it to the news media. 5.d. City Attorney's Update City Attorney Trask thanked the Commission on behalf of the City Attorney’s Office and the Code Enforcement Board for their support on this matter as it goes forward. He advised: The lawsuit was received. Attorney Daigneault, Attorney Morea and Attorney Augello will be working on that particular case responding to the lawsuit. It is a very odd drafted document and it does not look like it was drafted by an attorney who practices law in the State of Florida. A lot of mistakes and issues will be raised and he will talk with the Commission on an individual basis as to their thoughts on how to respond. It has been extremely difficult the way it has been portrayed in the news and he is very frustrated with the fact the request for information that came to the City and to his office came at the ninth hour after the stories had already been developed. He thinks the Mayor mentioned the call from ABC Action News came 15 minutes before they were about to air their story. He did talk with the reporter on the phone and did give some information and quotes, none of which was used in the video clip and he was a little frustrated with that. The City has a good case and it will take a little time and he thinks it is going to make good law here in the State of Florida. If you are not doing it to defend your Code Enforcement Board, then your Code Enforcement staff, allow them to defend it on behalf of all the cities in the state because this attack he is sure will move down the coastline and Dunedin just happens to be the first. 5.e. Commission Comments Vice-Mayor Freaney commented at the work session when there was discussion about the citizen survey and as she looked back, rightly so the focus seemed to be on things that can be done better, the concerns, traffic issues, development issues. She is not sure how much it was noted that survey said a lot about City staff and how amazing they are. Overwhelmingly, in the 90% range citizens are very happy with the services they receive. She is aware the Commissioners receive commentary all the time about how City employees many times go above the call of duty and they are polite about it. The consultant said these were uniquely great survey results. Obviously, there is always room for improvement and citizens will be passionate about keeping our charm. It is important especially for the City employees this was a great survey and a lot of that is owed to those on the front line. Commissioner Gracy noted she was not present for the meeting to be part of the dialogue; however, certainly watched the meeting afterwards. She thought it was spectacular having never seen information that congratulatory or reflective of what a top notch city can do. Her takeaway which she did not want to be a negative was that as a governing body went a little negative when, let’s not lose sight of all those 90’s in the percentages because you just do 32 not achieve them in cities; maybe if there is some time watch it from that perspective that is 19-26 Work Session Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 14, 2019
different from being on the dais at the time. She agreed with Vice-Mayor Freaney and that the employees are the life blood of the city and they should know that and they are appreciated. Commissioner Kynes agreed that is what came out of the survey and people do appreciate our City services. She stated we are the best town in the State of Florida, probably the United States. She was very proud and offered her congratulations to those on the forefront every day. Commissioner Kynes announced the Dunedin High School Graduation is May 22, 2019, at 5:30 p.m. at Ruth Eckerd Hall. Mayor Bujalski thanked everyone for the valued work today on something that is not easy and moving toward the direction needed; it was good dialogue. ADJOURN MEETING The Work Session adjourned at 12:15 p.m. NOTE: The meeting was completely recorded and the recording is in the official file. This meeting was also broadcast by Dunedin TV.
Julie Ward Bujalski Mayor Attest:
Denise M. Kirkpatrick City Clerk
33
19-27 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA MINUTES OF THE CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 16, 2019 6:00 P.M. PRESENT: City Commission: Mayor Julie Ward Bujalski, Vice-Mayor Maureen “Moe” Freaney, Commissioners Heather Gracy, Deborah Kynes and Jeff Gow Also Present: City Manager Jennifer K. Bramley, Deputy City Manager Doug Hutchens, City Attorney Thomas J. Trask, City Clerk Denise M. Kirkpatrick, Planning and Development Director Gregory Rice, Economic & Housing Development/CRA Director Robert Ironsmith, Solid Waste Sustainability Program Coordinator Natalie Henley, Assistant Director of Public Works & Utilities Paul Stanek and approximately fifty-one people. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Bujalski called the May 16, 2019 City Commission Regular Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE City Attorney Tom Trask gave the invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. PRESENTATIONS 1.a. National Garden Week Proclamation –June 2 - 8, 2019 Commissioner Kynes read a proclamation designating June 2 - 8, 2019 as National Garden Week in Dunedin in an effort to acknowledge the importance of gardening and the numerous contributions of Gardeners and National Garden Clubs. Briony Tomalesky, President of the Dunedin Garden Club and Debbie Whalen, Treasurer, accepted the proclamation and thanked the Commission for the recognition. Ms. Whalen commented they are very proud they are a vibrant and growing club and celebrating their 90th Anniversary this year. They have stayed focused on things appealing to our population. Today’s DIY people want to learn to do it yourself. They just had a spectacular presentation on how to turn a small patio space into a plant paradise. They have presentations on growing herbs, native gardening, how to save water, how to use things that are not chemical pesticides in our gardens. The Dunedin Garden Club has something for everyone. Their members are all ages and all genders; participation can be active and hands on or passive and just viewing and listening to their exciting speakers and anything in between. They have just completed a massive renovation of the Library Butterfly Garden that is City owned and everyone is invited to come take a walk through what their members have accomplished with their hard work; it is one example of how the Dunedin Garden Club is sharing their passion for gardening with the community. Gardening is therapeutic and fun. She extended a warm welcome to everyone to please join; they meet on the first Saturday of the month at the Dunedin Public Library beginning again in September at 1:00 p.m. and everyone is welcome. 1.b. National Safe Boating Week – June 2 – 8, 2019 Commissioner Gow read a proclamation supporting the goals of the Safe Boating Campaign and declaring June 2 - 8, 2019, as National Safe Boating Week and the start of the year- round effort to promote safe boating. Kristi Mackey and Rob Bonnem of the USCG Auxiliary Flotilla 11-10 and the USCG Auxiliary accepted the proclamation and thanked the Commission for the recognition. 34
19-1 Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Ms. Mackey reiterated some of the information from the proclamation. CITIZEN INPUT Mike Meoni of 80 Citrus Avenue a homeowner there for 40 years made the following comments: He wished to address the Commission on situation he thought important, especially to the people who live in the older areas of Dunedin, regarding the demolition of these old homes and building of the McMansions. His personal situation is, right behind him is a double lot that is going to be developed. It is a hazardous property, he believes, as there have been a lot of problems with the owners there. The house currently on the property is abandoned and vacant and loaded with asbestos. He has addressed the City, he believes it was Mr. May and Mr. Rice, about it and was referred to Pinellas County Air Quality Control and he did speak with them about it. He was surprised the City doesn’t have more oversight with this type of situation and passed it on to the County and he was bouncing around trying to figure out the procedure. He did finally speak with an asbestos surveyor who was at the property who filled him in on the property procedure of the asbestos removal. He and his neighbors are very concerned about, because of their houses being in such close proximity. There is so much debris, junk, blocks and walls and they are all concerned about bulldozers going in and creating a real firestorm for the neighbors. It did not seem in his emails to Mr. May and some others in the City, they were very matter of fact about it, and did not really seem to address their problems and just referred to the Code and the rules and so forth. He thinks they have a right to clean air and sunshine and so forth and their concerns he felt were not being addressed properly. In the meantime, the asbestos company person assured him everything would be done according to federal guidelines and it will be taken care of properly. He was just disappointed the City did not take a more active role as this is going to be happening a lot around Dunedin, especially in the older neighborhoods which are very historical and they all love living there. This is a very disruptive process; this is not Douglas Avenue or downtown, but neighborhoods where people live and in very close proximity to these areas of demolition. The second issue he wished to address is what is allowed to be built on these properties; the size of the houses being put on these lots is too much. He has pictures and to put a 3- story, 40-foot structure right behind your house that blocks the sun and the air flow and sky is not really taking care of the residents who live there. He thinks there are other solutions that could be made and the City really needs to take a look at the building codes for this type of thing. He sees other new construction in areas where they fit the neighborhood and look good; he understands property rights and highest and best use; however, certainly it can be done in a proper way. Mayor Bujalski advised the City has just changed some of the codes so that something will not be that tall up against a single family home. Those complaints have been heard and the codes are just being changed for the future. She asked Mr. Meoni to provide his 35 19-2
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
contact information to City Manager Bramley and she could contact him and see how the process can be improved. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented she would like to see the pictures Mr. Meoni had. Mr. Meoni noted he also wanted to address the issue of the zoning in his neighborhood of R- 60 that allows for huge garage apartments that are an eyesore and there is no need and it just hovers over the house next door and it can only be used for family supposedly. Mayor Bujalski advised that is something City Manager Bramley can work with the Planning and Development Department on those issues and explained single family homes do not come before the City Commission for approval. Vice-Mayor Freaney inquired if the action was regarding the multi-family designation in the historic neighborhoods; she explained she was alerted by a citizen that there are already multiple lots bought by one owner, so it would not be a stretch to get a surprise there. Mr. Rice advised in working with the City’s consultant they have determined the area they are looking at, which is going to be all the multi-family in the south of the CRA and that will be coming to the Commission workshop with ways of changing that whether it be voluntary rezoning to historic districts; there will be a few choices to make sure the single family historic neighborhoods stay that way. City Manager Bramley added at that workshop the outreach program will be presented; it is a large scale project that will require a lot of public input. Kimley Home Consultant is a world recognized Planning and Engineering firm the City is using to help with this. Mayor Bujalski commented Mr. Meoni’s issue, even within a neighborhood compatibility, is important and those are not items approved by the Commission. Commissioner Kynes commented often areas are described as historic neighborhoods and in fact there are ways of the availability of compatibility to try to steer that as with historic neighborhood designations, landmark designations; that is a way to try to steer preserving a true historic neighborhood. 2. ACTION ITEMS 2.a. 359-361 Chase Court request for 3rd story approval City Attorney Trask advised this is the first item of this type coming before the Commission, which should be treated as a quasi judicial matter. It is the application of the Code to one single piece of property. He requested everyone wishing to provide testimony on this application to stand and he swore them in. Staff Presentation Planning and Development Director Rice reiterated this is the first application for 3rd story approval. He advised: In 2005, Dunedin conducted its first citywide Visioning Exercise and in August 2017 the City conducted the second Visioning Exercise. As much citizen engagement was done as possible with a series of SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis, map exercise and preference survey. From that feedback one of the most cited citizen concerns in every redevelopment corridor was building height.
36 19-3
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
On February 21, 2019, after the Visioning and multiple code workshops the Dunedin City Commission approved Ordinance 19-05, which lowered building heights in the three zoning districts listed below. 1. Planned Residential Development “PRD” – lowered maximum height from four stories to two stories with a third story only allowed with City Commission approval. 2. Downtown Core “DC” (“C” Streets) – lowered maximum height from four stories to three stories with a fourth story only allowed with City Commission approval. 3. Form-based Medium “FX-M” – lowered maximum height from three stories to two stories with a third story only allowed with City Commission approval. The FX-M change requiring 3rd story City Commission approval is shown in the graphic provided in the staffing as well as the actual Code Section highlighting where it goes from 2 stories by right and then 3 stories maximum with Commission approval. Mr. Rice then referred to the property before the Commission in this item. Development Review Committee (DRC) Submission (November 28, 2018) A project was submitted for DRC in November 2018. The submission was for a three or four-unit apartment or vacation rental building with modern architecture. The owner was not present, instead the project was presented by a building contractor and a real estate agent. DRC staff explained three issues with this submittal. DRC Comments 1. The density for residential development on that lot (5,176 SF) is a maximum of two units. 2. If the building was created as a Bed & Breakfast, it would have to be owner occupied. 3. The architecture would have to be one of the City’s five required architectural styles. Based on the issues presented, DRC staff did not expect this type of project to move forward. On March 13, 2019, a building permit was submitted for a three-story duplex, which generated the need for this City Commission approval. City Attorney Trask was also consulted on whether the DRC submittal created any vested rights for the owner. The answer was no and that it is the building permit that starts the process. 3rd Story Application Analysis Mr. Rice presented renderings of the duplex with photos of the surrounding properties. There is a three-story development (Douglas Place) to the north and east of this location. However, this development was the driving force behind the code changes for Form-based Medium “FX-M”. Front Setback The front setback for this three-story duplex is setback two feet from the property line. This placement accentuates the height to roadway width ratio creating a “canyon effect” on Douglas Avenue with no step back to the third story of the building. Orientation The north elevation will be the most visible side of the duplex for people walking, bicycles, and automobiles traveling south on Douglas Avenue. The view of the side of the duplex indicates a lack of the architectural features normally seen from front elevations. 37 19-4
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Mass, Scale and Orientation The proposed duplex is a large structure on a 5,176 SF lot (0.12 acres). The mass and scale are out of context with the surrounding structures in the area. Surrounding properties are as follows. South One-story commercial North Vacant property West Two-story house East One-story bungalows Recommendation Mr. Rice advised based on the analysis above, City staff recommends denial of Permit 19-100054 – request for third story approval. Questions for Staff – None Applicant Presentation Bharath Ben Natarajan of 102 Arbor Drive East, Palm Harbor, FL 34683, the applicant/owner advised: They have been having this journey with the City since March last year. The purpose of the purchase of the building, as well as the conversations with members of the City staff, have at all points been productive, explaining what needed to be done to get where they wanted. The conversation continued through November when they presented to the Design Review Committee. Subsequent to the passing of the ordinance what he would be looking for is what other criteria there is for approval of a 3rd story. It says clearly a 3rd story could be approved by the Commission based on some process. For the last six days they have been looking for that including on April 29 they submitted their documents and have been waiting for the past seventeen days to see if they could get some idea of what they are walking into in terms of the criteria they need to conform to. It has been a little like shooting in the dark for them and they tried their best. Three aspects he wished to highlight: The primary reason for a 3-story (building) here is to provide a place for his parents, who are aging, to stay with them in a family environment. This duplex is not an apartment or holiday rental as was represented; it is actually a family home for he and his brother and their aging parents who he would like to stay with them until the moment they cannot. He recommends the book Being Mortal and noted all gerontologists will tell you the three things senior residents are looking for are independence, privacy and the ability to lock a door. He wanted to build a suite for them on the ground floor that unattached to any other living space where they can be unassisted and live for as long as they want with the ability to have a small fridge and live there. The entire premise for this is a family residence with a suite on the ground floor for his parents. They submitted the plans to that effect in March that was available on March 12. There is talk about the importance of green space in Dunedin. What they have tried to do here is to be as far away from any other building and provide as much green space. They have actually accomplished 40% green space on this property. He pointed out the rendering depicted the entire sides of the house bordering other residences have been left with at least 15 - 20 feet of green space for gardening for his father and for himself. They tried to make sure this building does not interact with or impose any shadows on the 38 19-5
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
surrounding buildings. They are trying to take the feedback from the residents in the best spirit possible. He hopes that the City of Dunedin and the City Commission takes every project and development for its own merit, value and commitment to the community. His concern is maybe there is some sour background with other projects including Dunedin Place, which keeps being brought up. This is a family residence, this is not a development of multiple units and this is not imposing close quarters on anyone, but trying in his opinion to do the right thing from all aspects. He has been telling the City of Dunedin this is something he hoped they could do. If they could give him the criteria for what the City needs from him. The first time he heard about it, 24 hours ago, he was blindsided by the aspect that they are too close from a setback perspective. This was not something that was brought to them at any point. If the City wants them to make changes so a third story would fit they would be happy to comply. He wants to leave here with one simple fact; he is happy to comply or conform to any criteria the City has in order for the Commission to approve that third story; he has a reason for it. If you have living space, kitchen, living areas next to a senior’s room it just ends up being a room it does not end up allowing free access and an opportunity for someone to live there and the three things they ask for, the ability to eat when they want, lock the door and have some level of privacy and he wants to provide that on the lowest level, because they cannot climb the stairs to the bedroom unit. He is trying to do the best he can in terms of getting to his vision in the spirit of Dunedin and they have conformed all the architectural renderings to or exceeding Florida Coastal Vernacular architecture as defined by the City of Dunedin. He would like guidance on what to do as he thinks he has done everything anyone could have asked. Finally, he understands the gentleman who spoke before and there are a lot of people who have concerns about houses; this was an empty lot on a main road; Douglas Avenue and even there they have done as much as possible to make sure there are no shadows. He knows his neighbor behind and they have left an entire detached garage space so that there are no issues there.
Greg Sawyer of 3209 Grenada Way, Tampa, builder, wished to address some of the concerns of staff: Regarding the setbacks, this is a corner lot and the zoning ordinance says the building has to be between 2 feet and 10 feet from the property line. They could move it back another 8 feet if that would help. Regarding the height of the building that is 35 feet with 3-stories, if they build a 2-story structure it would be 27 feet, so that is a difference of 8 feet. If need be they could lower the wall heights of some of the walls to get it down to within the 3 to 4 feet of the 27 feet allowed on a 2-story structure. In terms of location they were talking about locating it on Chase Court. With the requirements for parking and the location of the garages, based on the zoning ordinance they thought it better to face Douglas and then the parking would be behind. 39 19-6
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
The 2-story building behind it is 23 feet high, which he built just six months ago. They do not really dwarf anyone with two roads on two sides and a commercial building to the south where the lot is covered 100% with asphalt and is an old building he is sure will be redeveloped one day. Mr. Natarajan stated when talking about the side view as represented by Mr. Rice, there is only one front to a building. He has to put the front to either Douglas or Chase and he thought the best was to face it toward Douglas. The way it was represented was that it would not look presentable because of a south view, which is not actually on Douglas, but on the side street. If the requirement is to face the side street, they are happy to do that, which is the way they had started, but were told by the guidelines that the main thoroughfare is where they would have to concern themselves. Mr. Sawyer commented they did not want parking coming off of Douglas. Mr. Natarajan stated he would like to have the criteria the Commission envisioned when the ordinance was passed for a 3-story approval. At this point they were coming up with their best effort and each time the puzzle is changed and they have to come back. They did this in November and in March and are back again in the same place. Mr. Sawyer explained the footprint of each unit is the 680 square feet on top of each other, so it is not a large volume of a structure. If they build 2 stories in order to get the same square footage they will cover most of the lot. Mr. Natarajan stated he did not think that is what the City wants, but to have green space is his understanding. Questions for Applicant Mayor Bujalski inquired regarding Unit A and Unit B and noted it is sort of split down the middle. She explained her impression was that it was one unit on the bottom floor and the other units on the top two. Mr. Natarajan explained they are two brothers building two units, one unit has a suite underneath; his brother has two children so it is basically one large family with two homes attached with a suite underneath his unit. Mr. Sawyer added that it is two 3-story townhomes. When Commissioner Kynes asked what is in the middle she was advised it was a garage and the Applicant explained he was told they had to have detached garage for the look. Mr. Sawyer explained also for the architectural design standards. The public hearing was opened for public input. Kathy Luthin of 634 Edgewater Drive #645 stated she has known Ben and Christa for over two years and they have been talking about his dwelling and have met his parents who she thinks will be so happy in this city. She is hoping the City can work this out somehow, even if he has to make changes. She thinks he will be a real asset as a very skilled technology worker and has a lot of creativity. Stacy Rush of 659 Jacaranda Street was sworn in by City Attorney Trask and commented she is an Occupational Therapist Assistant. She noted if this is allowed to happen the applicant would be her neighbor. She works every day with senior citizens and to hear a family say they want to move in together to take care of someone kudos to them. She lives in the neighborhood and at first was concerned; however, based on what has been said with allowing someone to 40 19-7
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
live in the lower suite reducing the risk of falls that can be debilitating she thinks the city needs more people like this willing to bring their families in. She sees nothing wrong with this and suggested finding a way to work with the applicant so their families can be together rather than being placed in a home at an exorbitant expenditure. Duane Wright of 558 Beltrees Street advised he is a Registered Architect, sits on the Architectural Review Committee and is a member of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. When he approaches any board meeting he has no opinion and has none now based on the testimony put forward. When he began on the Board he was under the wisdom of former City Attorney John Hubbard who had a thing he advised them on want and need. He thinks this parcel meets the needs of the applicant, but not their wants. He also agrees regarding their not having any guidelines as to the Commission criteria. When he sits on the Board he has a list of criteria he has to check off and if the applicant feels they did not have the criteria to check off then they should be given that fact. Regarding the front of the house he always thought it was the postal address that determines; he personally does not like the other thing on Douglas. In terms of highest and best use, he agrees with what they are doing and thinks it could be a very huge single family house that is compartmentalized inside as well. He does understand the concern of the canyon effect; downtown he does not mind, but he does not have an opinion one way or the other. He just thinks if the applicant needed more guidelines they should have been there. He thinks as an architect there are ways it could have been done, because it does look like the townhouses and spiral staircases are not Vernacular, but that is just his opinion. Christa Cidway of 2681 Roosevelt Boulevard, Clearwater was sworn in by City Attorney Trask and commented: She came to support Ben in his effort; she is in a relationship with him. She knows some of the history of this approval process. She was disheartened today when she saw on the agenda the recommendation to decline and that was because of this being a long journey with a lot of interaction with the building committee, getting feedback and making adjustments based on that. She thinks all that has been applied really well with the green space that over exceeds what was expected. There are a lot of things changed in order to accommodate and she was really surprised at the recommendation to decline. Separate from that she thinks it is the attachment to Dunedin, they both have spent a lot of time and love it here. The fact that he has planned out this house to spend this time in Dunedin and to bring his parents and brother to be here with all the qualities of this city they want to be a part of and have this home. This is not some big development trying to take over, it is a home for a family. Meeting those requirements and designing it certain ways, every single design decision made including about being able to lock a door for his parents and having a separate unit and being able to spend time with his niece and nephew. The fact they do not know the criteria to have it approved would have made all these decisions and changes to accommodate to the best of his ability to have it approved; it is disheartening to see that it might not be. She too would like to know what the criteria is to make any changes necessary. She wanted it to be really appreciated that this is meant to be a home for a family who has really tried to make the accommodations to meet and exceed everything that Dunedin has to 41 19-8
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
offer. It is a family including herself that wants to make Dunedin home and they really want to make these two things fit. Sherry Allen, Realtor and friend of the applicant stated: She has worked with him on many different projects and he is very passionate about real estate; however, more so about his family. She supports everything he said and she has her mother with her and if not she is with her sister and she thinks that is very important. As a realtor they are seeing more and more of families living together for economic reasons, medical and family and community reasons. Things have changed so much and to see this in their family is wonderful to see. She hoped the Commission supported that as well in their findings. She was at the Design Review Committee (DRC) meeting with Mr. Sawyer and has been part of the project, both in the design and development in many of the meetings with Ben. That is why he bought the property. She took him to see the little cottages she was very excited to see that were for sale and he saw the vacant lot. Everything that was mentioned at the DRC meeting was taken into account and not one person of all the representatives from the City said anything about building height. They told them they would have to go through Design Review and gave them guidance and sent a link to look at for guidance, which they did and chose the Coastal Vernacular, which Ben would change to whatever the Commission would say. No one mentioned the design other than that, never mentioned the 3-story or the 2017 or the 2019 survey. They walked away not understanding there were any concerns about a 3-story, so Ben spent a lot of money and time coming up with this plan presented. Her understanding is the recommendation is to decline it already, without having heard him that assessment is already made. Her only other point is that she did read the studies, the pages that applied, and there were verbatim comments from people in the city and it is her perception after reading this knowing the Commission spent months on this and digested it better than she did, but in the summary the consultant had said the things that stood out in terms of the concerns of the community were the fast growth, the density and the traffic and the infrastructure not coming along with that. To Mr. Rice’s point from the south it will look like the side of the building and not the front; if it was a 2-story building with this design it would be wider and take up more of the green space, but would look the same from that view. Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed. City Manager Comments City Attorney Trask swore in City Manager Bramley who advised: She has spoken to Ben on the phone a couple of times and she thought the journey here has been very personal. When she first talked to him on the phone he stated he wanted to be in Dunedin and he wants to bring his family here and we all do. Regarding the staff recommendation and how it was formed, staff thought this building coverage, the height of the building as it addresses the adjacent structures is one of the reasons for changing the Code. Staff thought they could not bring to the City Commission a building with this coverage and height in this area a recommendation to approve just after that Code was changed for this particular purpose and for this reason. 42 19-9
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
As far as the building itself, the mass and how it addresses the right-of-way, all elevations need to be architecturally pleasing. The front, side and rear elevation and every part of the building needs to be up to City standards in terms of the architecture. It is not really an issue of where the features went on the building as far as the front right-of-way on Douglas. One thing she wanted the Commission to understand is when they consider the structure, if it moves back in the front it has to move back in the back; they might be able to decrease the size of the building to accommodate their family, but probably not enough to address that particular issue. She completely sympathizes and understands wanting to live with your parents and bring them with you, but one of the things the City Commission does not have the luxury of is reviewing this building and the use of this building in the here and now. This is three units, a ground floor unit and two units side by side on a smaller lot and that is what they have to consider. There is townhouse Unit A and Unit B and that is what they have to consider moving forward in their deliberations. As far as the criteria goes, when the Code was changed it was changed specifically with a 2-story with a 3-story allotment as approved by the City Commission. What the staff brought was a third story and a recommendation. In the intervening period, there is no criteria; it is not subject to criteria; it is not subject to negotiation specifically. The question is will the City Commission approve the third story or not. They can make the building look as beautiful as they can, but the height is still going to be there as it addresses the right-of- way. That was the issue in the intervening period. If it is the desire of the Commission, staff can certainly go back and look at how that can be addressed, but it will still be the three stories. It is her understanding from speaking to Ben that he needed the three stories. Staff will still be coming back with a 3-story building having just changed the Code. It is unfortunate that it was designed to the Coastal Vernacular; she thinks the architecture itself is lovely, but it is the height and the mass of the building and that is what the staff recommendation was predicated upon. Applicant Response Mr. Natarajan commented: He knew everyone kept talking about the height and mass of the building and he thought there was a bit of a misrepresentation here. The lot size is 5,100 square feet; the footprint of the building is 2,100 square feet. He has a single family home in Palm Harbor and he does not believe he has 40% green space. A single family home on most lots does not have that kind of green space. He thinks there is a misrepresentation of the size and mass of the building. As it relates to architecture, a pleasing architecture on all sides, he would argue that if you looked at that building on all sides it meets or exceeds the Florida Coastal Vernacular requirement on architecture. Finally, his point is there is a misrepresentation in that this is a 2-home duplex in which his parents will live with him on the ground floor; this is not 3 units; this is not a separate address, there are 2 addresses. He knows it was said these are three units, these are not three units, these are two duplex units identical with one part of it, because he does not 43 19-10
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
have children they will be his dependents. That is his aspiration and yes the other will have three bedrooms of which one is not a suite. He did not want this to be misrepresented as three homes and he certainly does not want the mass to look like it is imposing whatsoever. He thinks they have done a remarkable job of trying to accommodate two homes. As a matter of practicality if a particular lot was zoned to have two townhomes as they have been informed FM-X is supposed to be, he would like to ask anyone to be able to put two townhomes on that lot and do a better job of managing green space and concrete and if they can he is all ears. This is what they have tried to do to address all the elements that he put in his justification letter and he thinks they have done the most elegant job you can possibly do. The only thing he would say leaving here, if you were to put yourself in his shoes having bought a property in a place he absolutely wanted to live in March gone through the whole financing aspect, getting capitalization for it, coming to DRC, being told the only three issues as Mr. Rice mentioned was density was too high so make sure it is a duplex or less and make sure it meets all the architectural guidelines and make sure it has entrances on the Chase side, because you can’t pull out on Douglas. They have done that, they came back, they have done all the things the City asked and then they happen to be in this awkward moment when the ordinance changed. He is not asking for an exception; they were told they can’t be grandfathered in and he is okay with that; he is only saying there is a new ordinance and there is a process, tell him the process and he will conform and do whatever it takes to get there. Final Comments City Manager Bramley stated she would say the third unit where the parents are to live has a separate entrance. Mr. Natarajan clarified it has a door from the front door that can be locked; it is an entrance to a suite within their home; there is one address, one main door, you come in the door with stairways to the living area and to the right and to the end there is a doorway that goes to a suite. This proves to him we have not taken the time to review the plans they spent so much time, effort and money on to submit to the City; he is a little disappointed by that. Mayor Bujalski verified with City Manager Bramley this application did not go to the Architectural Review Committee or the Local Planning Agency with the explanation it goes through the Building Permit. Commissioner Kynes noted because it is residential and City Manager Bramley acknowledged that was correct. Vice-Mayor Freaney recalled the applicant was saying the unit for his parents had to have privacy so it has to have its own space, so in a sense it did seem that it is a separate unit. Mr. Natarajan referred to the rendering and showed where it indicates where the palm tree was on the bottom right corner that entire bottom part including the French doors including the patio is a separate area they can spend their time in; it is a large bedroom with a little refrigerator, maybe a coffee maker and lovely large bathroom and a closet, everything that you would find and need in a nursing home plus more, family. This is not a separate unit, they don’t have a separate entrance, they have the opportunity to have a door on the inside, which they can lock and be separate from the rest of the family if they want to. 44 19-11
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Commission Comments Mayor Bujalski inquired if this project has always been presented in this way from the time the applicant began talking about doing the project with City staff. She asked what it was originally going to be. Mr. Rice advised: In reference to the notes from November 28, 2018: Plans were submitted to show a 4-unit/3-story apartment development. The owner would have the end unit. There was discussion about transient use, bed and breakfast, a hotel, B&B, transient rentals, vacation rentals. There was nothing close to what is being presented in the application here. A lot happened between November and March. Mayor Bujalski noted then in March with the new application it became a new plan. She commented that is the purpose of the DRC meetings to come in and find out what can and cannot be done. But from November back to whenever it was always going to be these other things. Ben asked to speak at this time; however, Mayor Bujalski explained this was the time for the Commission to talk and there would not be any back and forth conversation and noted he had his presentation and rebuttal. There is a process she asked to be respected. In response to the question from Mayor Bujalski, Mr. Rice advised November was the DRC meeting, the only one. Then he did not think this was coming back and in March after all the work was done on the height adjustments the building permit application came in and the applicant was told it would have to come before the City Commission for 3rd story approval. That is when the justification letter came in that talked about the two brothers and the parents. Commissioner Kynes stated she drove around the area and verified with Mr. Rice the location of the bungalows in the area. He pointed out the 2-story structure in the corner and the location of the new project and the remaining couple of Mediterranean bungalows from the original Chase Court, which are on separate lots right now. Mayor Bujalski summarized the Commission received a presentation with the request for a 3rd story; City staff is not denying they can build, but they are recommending denial of the 3rd story. She noted there is no motion at this point and asked the direction of the Commission. MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to support staff recommendation to deny Permit 19- 100054 for a request for a third story approval. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented she completely sympathized, respected and admired what the applicant was trying to do. She thinks that staff did exactly as she would want them to here. She thinks if the Commission says they do not agree they are giving mixed messages. She thinks this is an exact reasoning and it is the first case with what the citizens have been asking the Commission to do, to be mindful. She drove out to the site today and looked around and she agrees totally with staff that it is too much and it hits to the heart of what the citizens have been saying in the Visioning and what they just said again in the citizen survey. 45 19-12
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
She appreciates the personal plea and understands and she would be doing the same if she were in the shoes of the applicant. She thinks to accept that personal plea is to turn our backs on what the citizens have asked overwhelmingly and this is a case that hits to the heart of it and staff did what she would expect. She does support the staff recommendation after being out there and looking at all the facts. Commissioner Kynes commented while all the Commission feels the emotion of the applicant, the Commission cannot make decisions on emotion, they have to make decisions based on the facts as they have been presented. She feels it is too much density, too much height and she thinks that is something the City will continue to deal with in residential neighborhoods. She loves the idea; however, it is sort of three dwelling places there, she understands the explanation. She thinks in looking around at the rest of the neighborhood that it is clearly too much for the lot size and that location. Commissioner Gracy commented on her appreciation for wanting to age in place and she wished there were ways this might get reworked. Much time including committee time is spent talking about aging in place and all those benefits and she was a little crushed about not getting it right this time. She would be in support of the 3rd story for this, because she has heard surrounding neighbors support it. The applicant has told the story, which resonates with her significantly just because of the family aspect and this being a family centered community. It is the building that has to be mitigated and she thought a better job could be done at that, but she is hearing that will not be done, so apologies. Commissioner Gow commented as the other Commissioners he sympathized and understands. He just read an article this week about multi-generational housing and where we got away from that and there is a move back towards that. Overwhelmingly city residents have said over and over their concerns with height. He would like for this somehow to be reworked as the applicant and his parents are wanted in Dunedin with him. He would hope somehow with Planning and Development this could be worked out; however, he has to support the residents of Dunedin who have spoken and City staff recommendation, which is a difficult decision for him. Mayor Bujalski commented on her agreement with support of the staff recommendation for a number of reasons. One reason is having just changed the Code to try to address not just the height, but the setbacks and compatibility as well as distance from other properties to avoid having a massive building on a property. Given that it was not even the original idea for the property, though she would give everyone the option to change their mind, that does bear some weight and makes a difference. She would urge the owner to come back and try to do something different that would accommodate the needs. The City is trying to stop putting an “elephant on a pinhead” and that is what has been happening. The citizen survey had 270+ comments about overdevelopment, traffic and affordable housing and all of this ties into that. It is not that the owner is not wanted here, but all the citizens have to be protected and this is what they have told the Commission they want and the rules have changed and need to be followed. VOTE: Motion carried 4 - 1 with Commissioners Gow, Kynes, Freaney and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: Commissioner Gracy 2.b. Skinner Boulevard Complete Streets Concept Approval Staff Presentation 46 19-13
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Economic & Housing Development/CRA Director Ironsmith advised: This presentation includes some revisions made as the result of the input from the last workshop. Items mentioned at the last workshop include looking at one lane, additional golf cart crossings, lighted crosswalks, pedestrian crossings to be more mid-block, angle parking versus parallel parking, PSTA drop offs, maintenance costs and neighborhood study on lower income. Also there was a group in attendance to talk about Skinner Boulevard. This is the result of a grant from Forward Pinellas for $100,000 to do the Plan/Design Concepts. The next step is to continue with design and construction. Jerry Dabkowski, PE, George F. Young, Inc., provided a PowerPoint presentation, Complete Streets Skinner Blvd U.S. 19 to Bass Blvd included in the agenda packet. The map depicts the location of Skinner Boulevard, which is actually S.R. 580, which goes from U.S. Alternate 19 to the west to Bass Boulevard/Main Street to the east. It is about a ½ mile segment that is 4-lane divided and has been a major road through Dunedin for approximately the past 15 to 20 years. Over a year ago they came before the City Commission seeking approval to proceed with a grant for $100,000 essentially provided by Forward Pinellas. That was approved to proceed and this presentation is to share what has happened. Major agencies have been involved in this from day one. Essentially the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), it is their road - State Road 580 - and they have a major say so if this project moves forward and are very interested in what the City Commission outcome will be. If the outcome is to move forward or maybe step back and look at some other options. Pinellas County has been very helpful along with Forward Pinellas that is essentially the one that gave the $100,000 grant to the City. Also the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) that has excellent ridership along Skinner Blvd. All of these agencies have been met with for their input. With Complete Streets and projects like this caution has to be taken of what types of safety features are put on the road. To make a Complete Street very successful one of the key issues is the traffic volumes taking place along the corridor. Slide 5 – Traffic 24 Hour Volumes This was presented to everyone at every workshop and looking all the back to 2011 on a daily basis Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) there was about 10,700; 2017 volumes were approximately 12,000 AADT. This means the growth of traffic over those 6 or 7 years has been minimal. This is very important to a Complete Streets project, you do not want traffic spiking really high and then dropping off or spiking and just continues that way. This growth rate has been very minimal, which means looking 20 years down the road on Skinner Blvd there might be 17,000 cars, which still works extremely well for a Complete Streets project. A question might be why in 2018 the volume dropped. These are actual numbers from the FDOT annually. He could have anticipated growth rate of maybe .5% over a year; however, 2018 had extreme hurricanes come through Florida, three of which fairly major and if he lived in Ohio in 2018 and thinking about vacation in Florida he probably would have been deterred; that is the best thought as to why the volume dropped. 47 19-14
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
In looking at the traffic this past March in Florida, he thinks it is right back to the 12,000; this was a very heavy year for tourist input and March is the heaviest month. Slide 6 – Safety Concerns/Update Crashes are also taken into consideration whether pedestrian, cyclists or vehicles and there has been a lot of activity with the Highway Patrol that this ½ mile section has a lot of crash activity that should be looked at from safety perspective to see what can be done to try to solve that. Slide 7 – Project Timeline The project has moved along extremely well. All the public workshops have been right on time with excellent communication with the public, City staff and many residents attended those workshops. Right now they are looking for the opportunity to move forward or further discuss the project; whatever the Commission wishes. Mr. Dabkowski advised: Essentially three concepts were presented at all three public workshops. Concept #1 was essentially do nothing. That was presented and there was not a single person in all three workshops who said do nothing. There has been a steady forward motion of providing concepts. It has been narrowed down to two that were taken to the third workshop. S.R. 580/Skinner Blvd. today is a 4-lane divided road with 2 lanes westbound, 2 lanes eastbound and a center lane. They feel with the growth of traffic as minimal as it is and having gone to the FDOT and suggesting there is really no need for 4 lanes divided in this section that they were open to listening to the discussion of 1 lane westbound, 1 lane eastbound and a center lane put in place were needed. Slides 8 and 9 – Concept #2 Concept #2 on the very east end shows 1 lane in each direction with full turn lanes at Milwaukee. On the west end of the project is U.S. Alt. 19, which essentially is a key intersection; it is signalized, but only goes about another 100 feet to the west, so it is pretty much a T intersection. The biggest feature in this section is the Pinellas Trail that runs from one end of the county to the other and Dunedin is pretty much the heart of the Trail. This location at Skinner Blvd. and the Trail has approximately 1,000 crossings on any weekend day and with 4 lanes of traffic versus 1,000 walkers, cyclists, strollers and all kinds of activity it can be cause for some conflicts. Every agency talked to has zoomed in on the Trail and said it does need to be improved with some type of safety features. On the west end it is 1 lane east, 1 lane west and the center lane for turn lanes. At the intersection of U.S. Alt. 19 where the traffic signal is located the plan is to maintain that signal keeping the geometry there which is to go left or right approaching the intersection the same as today; that is not being changed under Concept #2. Mr. Ironsmith noted the Pinellas Trail is bringing in 1,000 people a day during a week day and jumping up on the weekend into the downtown; it is a surprisingly high number. This is why it is felt that Complete Streets is so important.
48 19-15
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Slides 10 and 11 Concept #3 Concept #3 has had a lot of feedback. It is very similar to Concept #2, 1 lane westbound, 1 lane eastbound introducing some parking, some crossings for north/south and a roundabout at the intersection of Martin Luther King/Highland. At the first workshop probably 50% of the people questioned a roundabout and whether or not it was what they were used to just to the south. He explained there are places for roundabouts and there are places where they should never be put. His firm has designed roundabouts around the state, knows how well they work and where they should be and they feel this location is an excellent place to provide a safer intersection that will move efficiently, reduce speeds and make it much more controlled. The difference with this type of roundabout is this is a single lane roundabout. That is as you are traveling eastbound/westbound and you come into the roundabout you have the right-of-way in that lane with no one else competing or merging or trying to be in your way. The other thing they like is this is a 4-sided roundabout where others might be 5 or 6, which do not work well at all. The good news is that S.R. 580/Skinner has the 11,000 to 12,000 cars a day; that is the heavy movement east/west where the north/south road is 3,000 to 4,000 cars a day; therefore, there is opportunity for everyone entering that roundabout to get into it safely. These volumes of traffic are not that high that it would have this cause an issue. They forecast traffic out approximately 20 years that this roundabout will continue to work well into probably the next 20 years. This is because of the growth of the traffic taking into consideration the growth of the new development that has been happening in Dunedin, but also with that growth are people who essentially have already lived there and added to the traffic and they are just adding a few more based on that. Concept #3 on the very west end is Alternate U.S. 19 traffic signal; they are not touching the geometry or the lanes, the traffic signal is well needed. The reason being at the public meetings they heard about people coming out of the Marina with their boats pulling trailers; they liked the idea of the single lane going east to provide enough room for their maneuvers. They heard some people say if they were making the southbound left off Alt. 19 and someone is making the northbound right, the two are going to merge in that one little lane; there is an opportunity to make the traffic signal work where it will make a protected left southbound so you have to sit while the northbound right turn can free flow and then it reverses; that is how easily this traffic signal can be adjusted so that no two cars are ever entering that one lane going east. What they really like about Concept #2 and Concept #3 is the Pinellas Trail, the cyclists or walkers going north/south now only have to cross one lane at a time where today they have to cross two lanes eastbound, two lanes westbound and the cyclist never knows if maybe the inside lane is going to stop or not and there have been serious crashes where exactly that happened. The motorists in both lanes may not see the cyclist on the outside and then they are having a conflict. What they like about having one lane going east and one lane going west is the driver’s eye will now be focused on the eye of the cyclist, so there are only those two people looking at one another versus another lane that could be approaching like it is today. This concept was brought to several committees as listed in the PowerPoint (Page 13) providing this idea to many and it has a very high acceptance. 49 19-16
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Mr. Dabkowski reiterated these are concepts and if there are some design tweaks that need to be done based upon the Commission approval, those would happen in the next year or two. These are just concepts they want to share. Slide 12 – Typical Plan View (Conceptual) S.R. 580 has an expansive right-of-way, therefore, there could be 10-foot sidewalks and paths and still 6-foot grass strips between the pedestrian and the edge of the road. There could be parking spaces if that is something that is important. The FDOT just changed is if there is parking put on any of their state roads and you want a bike lane to be next to the parking, the FDOT now requires a 7-foot wide lane so if a car opened their door and cyclist has a little extra space to get by. They also had help from PSTA in this design that the actual road you will travel on will remain 12-feet wide; the lanes will be 12-feet wide, because the PSTA buses are pretty much 11-foot wide. Many cities and counties are going to 11-foot wide lanes, but they would like to keep this at 12-feet, because the cyclist is right next door, there is parking if approved and then there is still a 10-foot grass space between, which will make this corridor look very beautiful as you drive along. Slide 13 – Meetings with Stakeholders This concept was brought to several committees as listed in the PowerPoint (Page 13) providing this idea to many and it has a very high acceptance. Coca-Cola shared that the majority of the trucks that come to the plant north of Skinner Blvd. come from central Florida. The Senior Vice-President of Coca-Cola came down from Atlanta to find out about the roundabout and they had a great discussion and described the roundabout and shared that it had great safety features and a lot that can help Coca-Cola still get in and out, but he shared with them that the truckers use GPS and MLK is the way it tells them to go, so this roundabout is designed to accommodate large trucks with a 70-foot island. A video was shown. ABC Action News did a story on Dunedin and what the Complete Streets project is all about. Mr. Ironsmith noted the good cross section of stakeholders including Mease Manor and that the CEO and a Board member were present; they had expressed some concerns, which were addressed and they understand what the City is looking to achieve and were good with it. They do want the City to look at the Bass intersection and how that could work in the future for their future expansion plans. Mr. Dabkowski continued: What he calls a “walkabout” is when on December 1 they had approximately 50 people come out to Skinner Boulevard and walk the project from Alternate 19 to Bass. It was a great two hours talking about individual driveways, sidewalk widths, the Pinellas Trail crossing. There was tremendous input. Regarding the stakeholders meetings, thanked Mease Hospital for providing their conference rooms, all three were at that exact location and time and was advertised the same and had very good turnouts. Mr. Ironsmith noted the goal for the Forward Pinellas grant was public participation. Slide 15 – Results of Workshop #1
50 19-17
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
The graphic shows they asked approximately 20 questions of everyone who attended the workshops and it turned out that golf cart crossing was on everyone’s minds. They felt that was addressed from day one and think that solution has been taken care of. Safety lighting along the corridor was a big issue and really the roundabout came up as a very successful score, number 3 at Douglas Avenue and then again golf carts and mid-block pedestrian crossings were pretty much the top contenders. Slide 16 - Public Recommendations Public recommendations are indicated on a scale of 1 - 5 with 5 being the highest and 0 not interested at all. Golf Cart 3.92 Lighting 3.88 Roundabouts 3.81 Mid-Block Crossings 3.62 Slide 17, 18 and19 - Workshop Results The tables indicate the responses to the roundabouts at each of the three workshops. By the time it got to Workshop #3 with 28 attendees signing in there was an 88% approval of those who signed in suggesting that as a concept the roundabouts still seemed to be a choice the public would like to have. Approximately 9 months into the process and they came before the Commission about a month and a half ago when they had some great questions of staff to include the following: Slide 20 – Fire Chief Request The Fire Chief has supported this project and then in talking with their staff asked if there was the possibility of getting them through the traffic signal at Alternate 19 a little easier. Staff determined they will be able to keep the right turn to go north and the left turn to go north, but by cutting into the median a little, what he calls a shadow lane, can be put in where EMS and Fire can provide where the cars in the right lane will move over and the cars in the left lane will move over and then there will be a 10 – 11 foot striped out area where EMS and Fire can gain access to Alternate 19 easily. There has been no final response from the Fire Chief; however, he thinks they will be happy with coming up with a solution. Mr. Dabkowski reiterated these are concepts and FDOT has the final word. Slides 21 - 22 – Crosswalks near Roundabout A Commissioner brought up the need for crosswalks near the roundabout. After talking with many experts and also FDOT they think it is a good idea as long as they are not too close to the roundabouts. As a concept they could probably put 4 or 5 crosswalks going north/south that will not be in the roundabout, but external maybe 50 feet to 100 feet away, but the FDOT thinks that is a comfortable design. If it gets to design this is something that would always be brought back to the Commission for final approval, but it can be done. At the roundabout at MLK there are still opportunities for crosswalks. Slide 23 – Angled Parking There was discussion from the Commission about angled parking. Concepts #2 and #3 and the illustration shows on the north side what it would take to put in angled parking. It would 51 19-18
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
cut into the sidewalks running east/west, which are attempting to be made 10-foot wide and it takes it right up to the right-of-way line for the reason of keeping the center line of Skinner Blvd. where it is located because the drainage has already been analyzed. Diagonal parking would take up a lot of space; it does provide more parking; however, it is a little more precarious to back out into a travel lane. It has advantages and disadvantages and could be worked out if the Commission determines to continue pursuing angle parking. Slide 24 – Golf Cart Crossing Future Alternative Again this is a concept and there was just approval to cross at the traffic signal at Bass; however, FDOT did say this is a 5-year permit and then they have to come back in 5 years to make sure Bass is still a good location. FDOT wanted the City to think about another location, which is shown on the slide as an option because north of the golf cart on the illustration is a City owned park and the golf cart could go through the park and travel east over to Bass and then take Bass to the north and not have to go through the intersection of Bass, roundabout or signal or whatever it may stay at that point. They did look at Milwaukee Avenue of how to make that work to get the golf cart right to Main Street taking it to downtown to the rest of the neighborhoods. From a concept perspective there is another alternative for a golf cart crossing. Slide 25 – Lighted Crosswalks FDOT is looking at the possibility of the raised crosswalk with maybe lighted in pavement flashers. There are some pilot studies and there have been places where this has worked very well. These are currently being considered for Douglas as part of the raised crosswalks for the two approved raised crossings. Slide 26 – Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) There were comments regarding possibly going from four PSTA locations to two. That is in the concept stages and when it gets to design the Commission can make that final decision working with PSTA. The concepts can provide two or four locations. Slides 27-28 – Asheville, NC Before/After Photos The photographs provide an example of what Skinner could look like in four to five years. Slide 29 – Truck Traffic at Roundabout FDOT is getting into the roundabout business. The president of one of the largest trucking companies had his biggest rig driven around a roundabout and it can be seen that the tail of the truck goes up on the little concrete apron and that roundabout is identical to the size that would be considered for Skinner Boulevard. Slide 30 - Maintenance Costs Mr. Ironsmith advised the maintenance costs would have to be determined in getting to the final design. This is similar to the City having some of the maintenance costs on Keene Road and Curlew. These will be recurring maintenance costs. In terms of the construction costs, this project is 5 years away. Money is being planned out of the Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) and Penny-for-Pinellas. The project is anticipated to be around $4.7 Million; the City has $3.7 Million and is looking to see how to reapply for a grant to Forward Pinellas next year. Slide 31 - Low Income Neighborhood 52 19-19
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Economic Development Specialist Craig advised: He spoke with Ben Freedman with Pinellas County regarding some environmental justice statistics. On the north side of Skinner one of the things pointed out was with the size of Skinner currently it has created some problems for those residents to include: More than 305 of the residents’ income goes to housing costs, which results in many not having cars; therefore, many take the bus according to the statistics provided. They do not walk or ride bikes, because it is not conducive to that between Bass and Alternate 19 the way it currently exists. The housing stock tends to be older and less expensive. People are on fixed incomes and do not have the income to get around quite as well as others might. A high percentage of residents are retirees; therefore the fixed incomes. Nearly 30% of the residents do not have a car; therefore, are totally dependent on the bus. This fits in with the road diet and making Skinner more friendly for many reasons, particularly for the residents on the north side. Mr. Ironsmith reiterated some of the goals: In general the goals for an enhanced Skinner Boulevard have included the following: 1. Safety 5. Widening sidewalk 2. Reduce Speed 6. Bicycle lanes 3. Golf cart crossing 7. Additional Parking 4. Improvement to Pinellas Trail crossing 8. Economic Development City staff thinks this Complete Streets project as designed by George F. Young and Mr. Dabkowski is addressing those goals. Commission Questions Commissioner Gracy inquired regarding the citizens’ concerns about evacuation. Mr. Dabkowski explained FDOT would have the Florida Highway Patrol take over S.R. 580/Skinner Blvd. and if this were to be built in five years at the intersection of Alternate 19 and Skinner would direct both lanes to be eastbound to U.S. 19, which is the major corridor to go north or toward Oldsmar. Vice-Mayor Freaney inquired regarding the roundabout at Douglas/Skinner and the proximity to the Pinellas Trail. Mr. Dabkowski advised in his meeting with Pinellas County Commissioner Seel she brought up some concerns. The first is for example going westbound in the single lane when you come up to the roundabout you would be going 15mph - 20mph through the roundabout and as you come out of it then you will be approaching the Pinellas Trail, the attempt is to have the speed limit posted at 25mph; there will be plenty of “side street” friction that keeps you at under 25mph. He thinks the visibility will be much better approaching the Trail. Another concern was backups from the signal through the Trail; however, the signal can always be adjusted to make the green light come on more often if that becomes an issue. Mr. Dabkowski noted Commissioner Seel also brought up the visibility when going westbound with the sun during certain times of the year making it difficult to see the Trail and she thought the lights at the Trail are difficult to see when the sun is beginning to set. He 53 19-20
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
spoke to some folks about some louvers behind the sign, which blocks the sun and makes those lights much more visible and that would be looked at as part of the design. Vice-Mayor Freaney inquired regarding some citizen concerns about a break at Howard Street. Mr. Dabkowski advised when they did the walkabout there was much discussion about driveways, access to apartments and businesses. It was shared that the roundabouts will change how this entire corridor works, but if you wanted to get back to Howard putting a break in the median would not work very well. Unless there is an actual left turn lane what will happen is the car will not have enough room to sit in the median area with the back end of the car sticking out and because it is only one lane westbound it could back up traffic. The proposed design says if you need to make a left turn into Howard or into one of those driveways, you go to the roundabout and make the 360 degree and go back to that driveway; it will probably take the same time as making a left turn fighting the opposing traffic going eastbound. They spoke with many of the businesses about this and they understood the concept of the roundabout. Commissioner Gow inquired regarding the traffic signal at Alternate 19 and managing the right and left turn and if it is part of the plan to set those signals to manage those turns. Mr. Dabkowski commented he thought it is a good thing to do; it is more safe for a vehicle to go into an intersection and when told with the green and red arrow to wait until the green arrow to make that turn versus moving out into the intersection and wait for traffic to go by and make the left turn, which sometimes does not work too well. At this exact location you are not sure if the through lane is the only one coming at you or the outside lane someone is trying to beat everyone to go northbound. It might be a better solution even today to change how that signal works with a protected southbound left and maybe even a protected northbound right. The southbound left is probably the most concern from a safety perspective. Commissioner Gow asked if the right turn lane will have the right arrow; he was thinking about boats and trailers and whether or not that lane is enough to accommodate two or three that might back up or will there be a back up on Alternate 19 northbound. Mr. Dabkowski noted it was an excellent question and would say at design there should be a closer look because another comment was brought up regarding having only the single lane going eastbound away from the traffic signal there are some folks in the westbound left that would like to make a u-turn to come back to Douglas and with a single lane there is not enough room; so it might go back to 2 lanes there or at least widen that out to maybe 16 feet that goes back to 12 feet to accommodate a u-turn. As for a concept right now 50% of the people said make it a single lane and 50% said make it two lanes and boat trailers were a big issue. Commissioner Kynes inquired what places have used the lighted technologies that work well. Mr. Dabkowski advised Marco Island where they are historic and they still work; also at the cruise terminals in downtown Tampa that is an automated system that works well; however, those two locations are not FDOT roads, but FDOT is clearly paying attention to those and he thinks it will be in the traffic engineering manual very soon. She noted the most important location at the Trail for a good safety facility. Mayor Bujalski referred to the proposed parking near the Trail (slide 11) and expressed concern for example SUV’s parked there and visibility for people on the Trail, especially 54 19-21
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
when sometimes people don’t push the button for the light. Mr. Dabkowski commented parking is a touchy issue from all sides and this is a concept and that can be closely looked at and the Commission will have the opportunity to review the 30% design if it gets that far. Mayor Bujalski recalled previous discussion regarding pull offs for PSTA, not just stops and Mr. Dabkowski advised the concept does include pull offs where the buses will pull out of the travel lanes. Mayor Bujalski asked where a car pulls over for emergency vehicles going west. Mr. Dabkowski explained they would get out of the way at the roundabouts into the extra space or one of the bus bays. Mr. Dabkowski stated it was valid concern and noted that is why even garbage trucks and the hope for all the mail boxes to be moved to a particular place where traffic would not be blocked; all that has to be worked out in the design, but they think it can be worked out. There might be consideration of a small emergency lane, FDOT does that. Mr. Ironsmith noted it is not a unique problem and there are places where cars just pull over where they can, but Mr. Dabkowski can look at it. Mayor Bujalski commented regarding the alternate golf cart crossing, she was looking for something more to the west, because with the crossing at Bass that is what is needed, many people come that way. Mr. Dabkowski advised he spoke with Planning and Development Director Rice a couple of times on her thoughts and they will take a look at something further to the west. Mayor Bujalski opened the meeting for public input. Gregory Brady of 580 Skinner Boulevard noted he was speaking as a property owner, business owner and resident on Skinner Boulevard. He commented: He is also part of a group who initially came before the Commission to talk about some concerns with Skinner several years back. They met last night and those present were Michelle and Mark Rocco from Beyond the Wall, Gabriella Mullins from the Holiday Inn, Jack Batel of the Dunedin Downtown Merchants Association, Joe Kokolakis a developer, Grant Painter of Woodwright and a property owner on Howard and Happy and Mark Jordan from Bayou Bites. He initially along with some residents and property owners brought up the issues facing them on Skinner with then Traffic Engineer Joan Rice and Mr. Ironsmith probably seven years ago. He lives at his property on Skinner and has three additional rentals there with a parking lot facing on the corner of Milwaukee and Skinner. He has owned the property for about fourteen years over which he has noticed the changes happening with what is being developed and what could be developed as far as, for example, the Gateway project and the needs of the roadway are changing as well or need to. The uses are changing, but the problems along Skinner remain, one being speed including one he clocked with his cell phone at 101mph by a motorcycle. It is not only speed, but the lack of ability to cross because anytime there are more than two lanes and a turn lane; the center lane is currently referred to as a suicide lane where people go as fast as possible to get around all the traffic. Even the vehicular traffic right now finds it very challenging. Owning the property on Skinner just around the corner from Bass he has to pump his brakes all the
55 19-22
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
way from Bass for three streets because of the fear of being rear ended, which he has been twice at the Trail in a vehicle because of the high rates of speed. What this road has become is a commuter cut-through; people going and coming from work and using it in order not to have to go through Main Street at a slow speed. It has also become a truck route with a lot of that coming out of MLK. His hope is the ways and map system will reroute that traffic. They met for the final discussion last night to tell the Commission this. They support Concept #3, they like the roundabouts and think it will add to the safety. They would like to have the consideration of that median cut asked about on Howard. They like the crosswalks that have been added because they feel the attention to traveling from north to south and safely crossing is very paramount. In terms of the golf carts they did want some additional clarification about the crossing at Milwaukee because they do not see how that would be accessed, but a second question came up that if speed limit was 25mph wouldn’t golf carts be allowed on the whole street and be able to cross it legally anywhere. They also want the pull offs. Mark Rocco of 528 Skinner Boulevard expressed his concerns regarding noise including six weeks after opening Beyond the Wall the road was repaved and then he had to work with the City to move the garbage collection from 6:30 a.m. to about 8:30 a.m., he explained one aspect of a bed and breakfast is that people like to sleep. Regarding the proposed bus stops and the pull offs, three of the four would effect people sleeping at his business and they do not need to be there; therefore, his request is that those are cut down to 2 pull offs and put some nice covered artistic stops; but if the four are going to be there give him a break and move one of the three away. Grant Painter of 984 Howard Avenue noted he works at 985 Douglas along with 431 Skinner, 985 & 987 Howard Avenue referenced slide #11 of the PowerPoint. He commented: They observed and participated in the evolution of this area during the twenty-four years in this spot and they are thankful for the growth of downtown and all that the City is continuing to do to not only accommodate, but encourage this growth. He has attended several of the meetings held and the walk along and no one can say the citizens were not involved. His household fully supports the two roundabout design of Concept #3. They learned that most of those attending the meetings overwhelmingly supported the roundabouts as well. He understands this total redesign of Skinner is being requested in order to accomplish a very long to-do list. They also hope that Skinner can be entirely golf cart friendly if at all possible because of the speed limit; however, if FDOT does not let that happen there will be a need for several crossings; if there is no crossing at Douglas Avenue, the golf carts will continue to cross there a hundred times a day as they do now. Those on Howard Avenue have noticed that both concepts show it as being blocked off with a median and that is not acceptable to them; Howard Avenue is the only road actually blocked off by the median and he understands the need to block off the driveways up and down Skinner and some sacrifice has to be made, but to completely block off Howard Avenue, they know that Gramercy Court is going to be complete in the next 50 or 60 years
56 19-23
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
and when it is there will be more traffic; Howard Avenue is not just a driveway, it is a road that he thinks this proposal is ignoring. Happy Jordan, owner of Happy’s Bayou Bites at 431 Skinner Boulevard commented regarding the ingress/egress on Howard Avenue. With Gramercy coming in, the City is already putting money aside for the widening of Howard along with sidewalks to pull more people in and out; it has not even started yet and she is seeing all that traffic with two viable businesses and probably a third going in and it will really effect businesses and traffic. Marc Jordan stated they support Concept #3 and in their business, they renamed Skinner Boulevard to Skinner Speedway; they see this as a safety concern and want to see this project go forward. Hearing no further comments, the public input was closed. Commission Comments Mayor Bujalski noted staff would look at Howard Avenue and commented she understood there is not really the space to have a turning lane. She noted also the comments regarding getting golf carts on that part of the road. Commissioner Kynes asked if the parking was absolutely needed that is right up against a bicycle lane and explained that would be a concern for a cyclist. Mr. Ironsmith noted that it is a wide bicycle lane and that there is a premium for parking. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gracy and seconded by Commissioner Gow to approve Skinner Boulevard Concept #3 and move to Design Phase on Skinner Boulevard enhancements in FY 2019/2020. Commissioner Gracy commended City staff and Mr. Dabkowski because she thought this was one of the safest plans she has ever seen for the city. It certainly meets all the resident requirements from all the activities. She was able to talk with Mr. Dabkowski and Public Works and Utilities Director/City Engineer Quintas when they were in Tallahassee about this plan when getting the golf cart crossing and the feedback was very positive. When roundabouts are designed correctly they can do a very effective and safe job. Commissioner Gow commended Mr. Dabkowski and Mr. Ironsmith on a job well done. He stated he liked this concept from day one. He agreed everyone attending the meetings were very engaged and involved and all want to see this move forward. It does speak of safety, he thinks Dunedin does need that focus on slowing down and making room for all kinds of transportation. He recalled he was the only one pushing for angled parking with the concern of not enough parking and wanting to see more volume; however, he spoke with thirty to fifty bicyclists yesterday who said they wanted to see parallel parking that they thought was much safer. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented on this concept addressing the concerns brought out in the citizen survey that had many comments about this road regarding traffic, safety, conflict between golf carts, pedestrians, bicycles and cars. She agreed with the safety aspect and noted this is a fabulously vetted community input process. She attended a couple of the sessions and people asked hard questions especially about the roundabouts. She also complimented Mr. Dabkowski and Mr. Ironsmith. Commissioner Kynes reiterated her comments for the lighted raised crosswalks. She also thought the recommendation for Howard Avenue was strong. She commented when people 57 19-24
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
start speeding up to go north it is a race track and there have been 80 crashes on Skinner, two with pedestrians, 8 bicyclists. She is very concerned about the Pinellas Trail and something really innovative has to be done. She is in support of the motion with those comments. She thanked Mr. Dabkowski for all the work he put in. Mayor Bujalski also referred to the citizen survey and the comments about the traffic. An interesting fact shared is that in the past couple of years the city has only added about 1,700 residents 2010 to 2019; that is a long period of time; however, the increased tourism in this county is staggering in the hundreds of thousands increase. Dunedin is a destination and certainly a place people travel through to get to work, so traffic is a big concern for those who live here and with the added tourism, S.R. 580 needs to be safe. She was hearing in 2006 when she ran for office about S.R. 580 in general. This is the first step and it is important to make that statement with FDOT preparing to do another study on the other portion of S.R. 580 and that will be a couple of years process with plenty of public input on how to make that road more safe, attractive, easier access to businesses and this is sort of the beginning. She thanked staff and everyone who came to talk about the project. VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Freaney, Kynes, Gow, Gracy and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. BREAK 8:30 P.M. – 8:43 P.M. 2.c. Second Reading of Ordinance 19-09 for the 3155 Garrison Road Rezoning City Attorney Trask read Ordinance 19-09 by title only. Staff Presentation Planning and Development Director Rice advised: At the first reading there were items the City Commission requested. The applicant has provided a base drawing of both the existing lot and the two lots in question; he gave the two lots on the drawing the green shading, those are the two proposed R-90 lots. The concern expressed was the access or backing out onto Garrison Road. He asked the applicant to provide what the driveway pattern would look like, which can be seen that both with have circle drives to allow for no need to back out. The other concern was access to the applicant’s existing lot. There is going to be a reserved access, ingress/egress to this lot from Garrison Road that will not require backing out onto Garrison Road. The applicant might discuss the current access to Sharpe Lane; however, it is not an official easement. The top shaded area shown on the drawing will be reserved to access this lot. City Manager Bramley asked him to confirm these two lots meet the dimensional requirements for R-90, which they do as the lot size minimum is 9,000 square feet and these are both just over 10,000 square feet; the lot width is 75 feet and the dimensions along Garrison Road are 155 feet, so both will be slightly over 75 feet. The lot depth is 110 feet and that lot is 130 feet. The setbacks are 25 feet in the front, 10 feet on the sides and 20 feet in the rear. The height maximum is 27 feet and 2 stories that will come into play; all the setbacks and height will come into play if this application is approved when the building permit comes in for the two homes. 58 19-25
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Questions for Staff Commissioner Kynes asked if the drawing is the footprint of the home and Mr. Rice explained it is showing the footprint as to how the circle drives would work. City Manager Bramley explained the item is rezoning; therefore, the drawing is an example of where the houses could be and the driveways could be just to show everything fits on the lot, but not necessarily where it will be. That will be determined at building permit. Vice-Mayor Freaney clarified that all the setbacks will be met and the turnaround will be that way. Mayor Bujalski asked for a better description of the reserved area. Mr. Rice explained currently the applicant is using the access to Sharpe Lane, but if that is ever lost they are keeping access in that shaded area that would be in the form of an easement to make sure there is access from Garrison Road to the other parcel. Mayor Bujalski asked what would cause the loss of the access on Sharpe Lane. Mr. Rice stated the owner would have to say they could no longer use it; it is an unbuildable parcel being very narrow and small and Sharpe Lane is just above that. Applicant Presentation Rod Collman of 1825 Sharpe Lane, the applicant, explained: The idea is to get a couple of smaller reasonably sized homes available. The R-200 would allow a much larger home; however, the goal here is simple. Regarding the easement, all of his utilities are in that easement area, so that will be a dedicated easement for both utilities and ingress/egress. All setback requirements, the driveway concerns, have all been met and everything he thinks is within the code requirements. Questions for the Applicant - None Mayor Bujalski opened the public hearing for public input. Joe Garrison of 3233 Garrison Road commented he had many questions now as this is different from the original on May 2. He asked is this diagram now markedly different from what was in the package on May 2, because that lapped into Sharpe Lane and went into the McQeaney residence property. He made the following comments: He thinks what is being proposed here is to take what is traditionally a large lot neighborhood, divide it down and give a red herring as he said in his email. Affordability is in the eye of the beholder, how affordable is affordable. Affordable of a half million dollar house against a $600,000 is affordable. It does not fit in the neighborhood, these houses do not fit in the neighborhood and the Commission would not want something coming into their neighborhood taking a lot and dividing it down and putting two houses like that in and neither do they. He lives up the street with a nice size house and there are other houses up there that are not much larger in the square footage, but they have a great deal of road frontage and that makes them look a lot bigger. This is going to look narrow and boxy and is not going to enhance the area. In the May meeting there was discussion about an R-60 lot; however, he is at a loss as to where that lot is located. None of these lots are R-60. He listened to the video over and over 59 19-26
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
to pull out some of this information. Somewhere Mr. Rice mentioned there was an R-60 lot he was referencing that this would be compatible and he does not see where that is unless there is some weird zoning. He does not see this as an issue of more affordable, which seems to be all the discussion of the May 2 meeting; these lots will be out of the reach of most people anyway. These houses have to be $200,000 to $300,000 or $400,000; they will not be that affordable to people. This is a red herring to stuff this into their neighborhood, which is much larger 1 acre lots. He urged the Commission to reject this. It is not compatible with the neighbors and what is there and they should look beyond the 7 points of what they can do to see how it is going to damage the neighborhood. Carrie Osiel of 1860 Sharpe Lane commented: They were never notified about this hearing that was going to be happening and found out about it from a sign in the front yard. She asked if this is something she is supposed to be getting written notification, because she did not get that. The owner does not have access to Sharpe Lane, he is using Sharpe Lane that is a private drive and these two houses, she still does not see how there will be room for two circle drives. Regarding the house size, she is not a rich person and does not live in a mansion; she lives in a modest house. She moved to this area specifically to have her acre in Dunedin that is beautiful, she likes being close to downtown and likes being next to the school and she knows there will be traffic. She knew that the Blue Jays at some point might change; that is not an issue, she moved knowing they were there. She did not move here wanting two more houses to completely block and change their property value, the way they live and the way the area looks. She hopes all this will be taken into account and it will be kept at R-200 because she thinks you can still have a nice affordable home, but people want property and there is not enough left in Dunedin and other areas. James Osiel of 1865 Sharpe Lane commented they did not get an answer to their question as to whether or not they are legally required to receive written notice of these proceedings. Paul Garrison of 3233 Garrison Road brought to attention the size of these lots is probably one of the most important aspects of why anyone wants to live in this area. Recently they had a transition of 3 acres and it was a statement of we want to keep this part of Dunedin, we love Dunedin and we want to keep it country and undeveloped. He knows it is not city, but it is going on behind them as well. There are people coming in and saying they want to preserve this area. So the questions need to be asked, to look at the way this lot is being broken up and does it really adhere to what is going on in this part of the city. He does not think it does. Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Response to Public Input Mr. Rice advised regarding notice, he had a printout from the Property Appraiser’s Office of all property owners within a 500-foot radius. If they are not on the list then the Property Appraiser did not pick them up at 500 feet. Mayor Bujalski explained Mr. Rice would share that document. 60 19-27
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Commission Comments Vice-Mayor Freaney asked what is directly across the street from the lots. Mr. Rice advised it is a Planned Residential Condominium Development. Mayor Bujalski noted those are 2- story. Mayor Bujalski commented this neighborhood is like Spanish Trails and every lot is extremely large. Mr. Rice advised the full width is 155 feet, so each would be about 72.5 feet wide and 130 feet deep. Commissioner Gow commented he was struggling. He understands the concept and one of the benefits of zoning is you have an idea of what is going to happen around you. While this is in the zone he does understand that you move into the neighborhood you have an idea of the property size of everyone around you. Commissioner Kynes commented she was also struggling. What she really wanted to ask she can’t because the project is not at that point yet. Earlier the Commission commented regarding a neighborhood that has small lots and smaller homes and looking at how that would fit within the larger framework; now this is looking at the reverse. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented it does not strike her as an awful thing to do being across from 2-story condominiums; it is on the main street and not in the heart of some of the bigger homes, it kind of is. Mayor Bujalski noted it is the opening to the neighborhood. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented regarding her neighborhood where there are smaller lots, but there are two lots from the dead end with a giant house and the land was sold right at the dead end and the neighbors are concerned there will be a huge house on that property and it is almost that two small houses would be better. She does not want to micro manage this. She did understand the point by Mr. Garrison about affordable housing and that it still would be a very expensive house. Commissioner Gracy commented she had some of the same thoughts. She appreciated the feedback. She went back and watched the May meeting also and it is a little difficult to piece it together. In the end and with the discussion here she is getting the same point that it is still housing. A house is a house and albeit those are estate homes, but she thinks a sign of the times and she knows she said that last time, but she really sees that again this time that wanting to do two makes double the people who can live in Dunedin. It is a good looking neighborhood, so she is sure if the owner is going to get his cost out of it, it will be built as such. She sees the differences, but it is housing. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented until she drove through she did not know all those amazing houses were there. She asked is it better to have a couple of smaller houses as you go in and nobody knows those big houses are there, she was just thinking to herself. Commissioner Kynes commented is it one big lot and one big house, she thought about that also. Mayor Bujalski commented she does feel sort of like this is her neighborhood even though it is not directly; she drives past it probably every day and walked past it every day when her son went to Garrison, so she is very familiar with the road. She made the following points: The condos across the street are kind of an outlier, if you will, because they are not actually on this road, their main entrance is on C.R. 1. 61 19-28
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
The lot on the other side of Sharpe Lane was empty for years and a house was built, a great house that was just built in maybe the last ten years and that is not a mansion, it is a beautiful home and is larger and what is on an R-200, not a big mansion, but is the kind of home that fits in that neighborhood. She is going to ask herself if this were in the middle of Spanish Trails would we do this and the answer would be absolutely not. She is seeing both sides as well; however, it was sort of like talking about putting a restaurant on Scotland and if we can do it here, would we do it there; we have to be fair thinking about it. We would not do this in the middle of Spanish Trails where they have all those big lots and would be hearing about it there too. This is the same way, but just not a one way in one way out, not the same kind of developed neighborhood that Spanish Trails is, but it is still a neighborhood that extends all the way down the bumpy road she calls it. Also behind these homes and behind her neighborhood on La Grande there is all this open property and for the last two decades a son of one of the original developers tried to develop it and to demolish a house in her neighborhood to have access and build a bunch of little homes. She is aware Mr. Rice had to deal with this at one point, they tried to get another access to it and wanted to annex and he stood strong and explained they had to be larger lots and she thinks they are trying to do the same thing on the other side of the bumpy road on the C.R. 1 side that has been a big issue for a couple of years about condominiums or townhomes, she was not sure as it was the neighbors telling her; she had not heard it here. This is a neighborhood, even though it might not look like a traditional one, and that is what is bothering her. It is kind of the situation where if this were in Spanish Trails it would not be done. She appreciated the drawings regarding the driveways, but now there will be 5 driveway cuts instead of the two that are there, which concerns her even more because of the number of people who walk to school from that direction. Commissioner Kynes, though she was not sure if she was allowed, asked Mr. Collman how much acreage is around his bungalow and he answered ½ acre. Vice-Mayor Freaney noted this was split before to be the two ½ acres. Commissioner Kynes commented she was conflicted. City Attorney Trask offered direction to the Commission: When reviewing a rezoning application the Commission reviews the criteria presented in the City Code and determines whether or not it meets those criteria. If it does meet those criteria you must approve the application. If it does not meet those criteria you must deny the application. Those criteria have to be applied that are in the staffing. Mr. Rice advised: Criteria 6 states whether the proposed rezoning will have significant adverse impacts on other property in the vicinity of the subject property. He thought some of the Commissioners are saying that it does and maybe some are saying it does not. 62 19-29
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
From the staff perspective they did not see an adverse impact. That criteria is up to the Commission to decide. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked if it was his feeling that some of the clearly smaller houses on that street and Mr. Rice explained he was looking at how many different types of zoning are in that area; the second thing is in looking at Aberdeen Oaks, Glen Moor and the new development on Lexington Avenue, there are lots not even close to this size that are holding $500,000 to $700,000 homes. Mayor Bujalski interjected all of those are alike in the neighborhood and that is what this neighborhood is saying they want to keep their neighborhood alike. Mr. Rice responded that he understood and if that is where the Commission takes it he completely understood. Vice-Mayor Freaney noted right next to this is R-300 and the R-200 and asked where the lower zoning is located and Mr. Rice pointed out right to the north as indicated in the staff report there is a bunch of R-60 on the west side, north of the condos it goes to R-60. Mayor Bujalski questioned that is on C.R. 1 and not on Garrison. Mr. Rice provided the staffing and Mayor Bujalski reiterated the R-60 is coming out on C.R. 1 and not onto Garrison and that on the corner is a business and above that is the R-60 on C.R. 1. Mayor Bujalski pointed out the lots on Garrison, all are huge and they go far back and then it is her neighborhood where the R-60 comes in; that is all one piece of property. There might be small houses, bungalows, but they are on huge lots that go far back. City Manager Bramley wished to address the notice issue and verified with the owners of the property directly to the east of Mr. Collman’s property. She advised the City needed to notify according to the Pinellas County Property Appraiser’s Website and that lot is coming up, “Unable to locate parcel” and sometimes that means they have an exemption which means it is not a public record and she does not know why, but that is how their parcel is showing up. Someone responded from the audience that was inaudible. Mayor Bujalski stopped the back and forth conversation from the audience and advised the notice issue could not be sorted out tonight; however, City staff would work with them on that. City Attorney Trask advised the bottom line is they were in attendance; therefore, they have notice. Whether they got it on a piece of paper in the mail or whether they got it in a phone call or an email their due process rights are protected because they are here being able to address the City Commission. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked if there is anything else left that is R-200 along Garrison. Mr. Rice explained mostly it is unincorporated and the only Dunedin parcels he pointed out in the shaded areas; everything left in white is unincorporated Pinellas County; he did not know the County zoning. Mr. Rice explained the difference between this and Spanish Trails is that this is all unplatted; Spanish Trails is platted; therefore, the City could not split a lot if they wanted to. He noted there are four lots that are Dunedin that are R-200. City Attorney Trask advised there should be a positive motion and the Commission can vote it up or down.
63 19-30
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Vice-Mayor Freaney asked what happens if there is no motion. City Attorney Trask advised there has to be a motion; there is an application before the Commission and they have to act upon it. Mayor Bujalski asked someone to make a motion for the purpose of discussion, since there was already the discussion first. Commissioner Gow stated he would make the motion. Mayor Bujalski asked someone to make a second to get it on the table. Commissioner Gracy seconded. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gow and seconded by Commissioner Gracy to adopt Ordinance 19-09. Mayor Bujalski asked if there were any other questions or information the Commissioners wanted to know. Commissioner Kynes commented she thought when we go to a neighborhood we go to a particular feel whether it is historic or because we want more acreage and it is more of a pastoral feel. She does think people go toward where they want to live and then different neighborhoods begin to have a specific character or integrity. She thinks they are trying to preserve an integrity of acreage and it was exactly a flip flop of what she voted on and said no she could not go for taking a tiny lot and putting everything on it. Then she would be going against what she just voted for earlier today and that does not make sense to her. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented she was thinking if she was struggling this hard, to stay with the way it is, because in the absence of an overwhelming need to change perhaps we should let it be what it has been. She says that because she is not sure the right answer and because of that she thinks maybe the best answer is to leave it alone. Commissioner Gracy verified with Mr. Rice the staff recommendation to approve was based on the staff opinion that the application met all the criteria. She stated she is still in the same place and would be supportive of a positive motion. Commissioner Gow stated he voted yes on the first vote because he liked the idea of smaller houses in Dunedin and he is concerned about McMansions and so forth, which was also part of his struggle on the earlier vote tonight. It was a bigger house in trying to reflect what the residents have been saying, smaller. He went back to his earlier comments about why things are zoned because of knowing what the area is going to be and it is the same for these neighborhoods and the people who bought in them. It is a struggle for him wanting a smaller footprint for homes in Dunedin, but also wanting to support the integrity of the established neighborhoods for the way they are. Even now he did not know how he would vote. Mayor Bujalski referred to the staff report; Criteria 6. Whether the proposed rezoning will have significant adverse impacts on other property in the vicinity of the subject property. She thinks there is the possibility of that, maybe she wouldn’t if she didn’t live in that area; it will not affect her and her property so there is no conflict; she lives in the area, not in this particular, on Sharpe Lane. She just knows the area very well, she walks her dog there, she walked her son there and drives on that road every day. She does think that it has the possibility of having significant adverse impacts on the neighborhood. She is concerned about the curb cuts with students walking to school. She will not be supporting the application. 64 19-31
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Commissioner Gow verified this is currently an empty lot except for an old garage, nothing livable. Mayor Bujalski clarified there had been a house on the property, but it was moved to the back. When Commissioner Gow commented they moved it in order to divide the lot, Mr. Collman responded they moved it to be under the trees. Commissioner Gow referred the criteria Mayor Bujalski just read about significantly impacting; that goes to his concerns about the development downtown; it is not just one building if we don’t like it we will survive, but it is the understanding that building sets a precedent and now there is a whole block that looks 3 or 4 stories high and that is his real concern. He stated it is pretty much established, this is just talking about just one building. Mayor Bujalski responded to Commissioner Gow’s statement noting there are a number of lots on the east side of Garrison that over the last twenty years someone has tried to purchase to get back to the bigger property behind and make it something different. In all of those efforts that neighborhood has fought those things from happening for this very kind of reason. Yes, it is very established, but it is also very volatile and she does think there is some precedent setting here in her view. Commissioner Gow clarified we might not like this one, but could put up with it, but if there could be future consequences because of this that would be his concern. Vice-Mayor Freaney asked when the property was split to ½ acres and why. Mr. Rice explained that is what R-200 is, ½ acre and ½ acre. Mayor Bujalski called for the roll call vote. VOTE: Motion failed 3-2 with Commissioners Gracy and Gow voting aye. Voting nay: Commissioners Freaney, Kynes and Mayor Bujalski. 2.d. Second Reading of Ordinance 19-11 for CRA Street Types Amendment City Attorney Trask read Ordinance 19-11 by title only. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gow and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to adopt Ordinance 19-11. Staff Presentation Planning and Development Director Rice advised: When this item was left at first reading the City Commission requested three additional informational items for the second reading of the ordinance: 1. Make the final changes to the CRA Street Types Map The Honu and the Stone House has been changed from “B” to “A” The other request was for the one City-owned lot behind the Living Room on Wood and Highland has been changed to “A” 2. Provide the Table of Permitted Uses adopted in Ordinance 19-05 to split the Downtown Core “DC” zoning district into two columns, one for “A” and “C” streets and a separate column for “B” streets. The new Permitted Use Table is shown as an Attachment “C” to this agenda item. 65 19-32
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
One thing that was not part of Ordinance 19-05 was Municipal Service Buildings are permitted in “A” and “C” but not permitted in “B”. Mr. Rice did not want to do a complete new ordinance because the City Hall two parcels are “A” streets; therefore, it will not make a difference. If it comes to some other municipal type building in a “B” area that adjustment would have to be made at that time. 3. Schedule a future workshop to show how building heights are measured to include structures inside and outside the floodplain. This workshop is scheduled for June 4, 2019. Regarding the 36 feet versus 40 feet, there were a couple of architects who wanted the 40 feet; however, that question was taken to the Architectural Review Committee and they thought the 14-foot first floor with 9-foot second and third floors would still provide the 2 feet of structure between and come out to 36 feet. The ARC was okay with the 36 feet; however, that can be revisited at the June 4, 2019 Workshop. The ordinance currently reads 36 feet. The Public Hearing was opened. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. Commission Comments Vice-Mayor Freaney asked if it was determined the permitted use is actually a formal ordinance as well. Mr. Rice advised that was part of Ordinance 19-05 and he was just showing that. VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Gracy, Freaney, Kynes, Gow and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. City Manager Bramley commented these items are not like a 5K, it is a marathon and this is the end of the marathon and she commended Mr. Rice for the work he has done. Mayor Bujalski and the Commissioners concurred. BREAK 9:35 – 9:45 p.m. 2.e. First Reading of Ordinance 19-15, Amending Chapter 58, Pensions and Retirement City Attorney Trask read Ordinance 19-15 by title only. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gracy and seconded by Commissioner Gow to approve Ordinance 19-15 on first reading. Staff Presentation Human Resources and Risk Management Director Smalling advised: In response to revisions in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and its associated Regulations, guidance from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and recent litigation, Fire Pension Board Attorney Scott R. Christiansen of the Law Offices of Christiansen & Dehner, P.A. has proposed a number of amendments to the firefighter retirement system pension plan. The Exhibit in the agenda packet has the details of the amendments as were detailed in a letter from Mr. Christiansen. There is also a letter from the Pension Board's actuarial firm indicating that there will not be an impact to the pension's current valuation. The changes have to do with disability and how retirement is handled. The ordinance with the tracked changes it can be seen some of the language has just been moved through 66 19-33
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
separate subsections and taken out the sections that talk about terminated persons and put that in a separate section. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance on first reading. 1. Section 58-58, Disability, is being amended to more clearly identify those individuals who may be eligible to apply for a disability pension in the event that they have resigned or their employment is terminated. This clarification does not change the way in which this provision has been applied or interpreted in the past. This change is being made because the current language has been challenged in litigation as being unclear and has resulted in unintended application of the language. The recommended change clarifies the language with no change in the intended application. Subsection (g), Workers' Compensation, is also being amended to clearly identify the new minimum benefit accrual rate of 2.75%, as provided for in Chapter 175, Florida Statutes. 2. Section 58-65, Maximum Pension, is being amended by changing subsection (h) to exactly comply with IRC provisions. 3. Section 58-67, Miscellaneous Provisions, is being amended to add subsection (i), Missing Benefit Recipients. This provision is in accordance with a recent IRS Programs Compliance Memorandum that requires plans to have an approved method for locating terminated individuals who are due benefits from the plan. 4. Section 58-77, Deferred Retirement Option Plan, is being amended to remove subsection (f)(8), Prevention of Escheat and re-number the remaining subsections. The information contained in this subsection is being expanded in accordance with IRS guidance and moved to the Miscellaneous Provisions Section of the Plan where it will apply to all benefit recipients rather than just DROP recipients. 5. Section 58-79, Reemployment After Retirement, is being amended to make several changes as required by the Internal Revenue Code to satisfy the qualification requirements applicable to the reemployment of a disability retiree. Additional changes have been made to clarify reemployment after receipt of early retirement benefits. Questions for Staff Commissioner Kynes commented she found it interesting and asked if it was correct with DROP that you can DROP and then you can come back and preserve your DROP. Dr. Smalling explained the way DROP works is you are considered retired, but you continue to work as an employee for a certain period of time, up to 5 years. Once you end DROP you are done, but you can come back in another capacity, yes, but not in the same job. Mayor Bujalski noted you have to be very careful about how you come back. Mayor Bujalski opened the meeting for public hearing for public input. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Freaney, Kynes, Gow, Gracy and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. There will be a second reading on June 6, 2019. 67 19-34
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
2.f. State Revolving Fund Construction Loan Agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Staff Presentation Assistant Director Public Works & Utilities Stanek advised: In regard to the State Revolving Loan Construction Loan Agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection there is an amended recommendation: The Commission: Reaffirm its authorization granted in Resolution 19-12 allowing execution, upon receipt, of the final FDEP SRF Construction Loan Agreement by the City Manager, upon review by the City Attorney; Final FDEP SRF Loan Agreement funding shall be in accordance with attachment “DWSRF Priority List FY19 – Adopted 05/08/2019 Meeting,” with an authorized loan amount of $28,270,737 Last week the State had a priority listing hearing and authorized the Phase 2 portion of the City’s SRF loan in the amount of $28,270,737, which is reduced from the previous amount as broken down in the staffing memo. Additions include the City will be required to pay capitalized interest, which is accumulated on funds from the time of withdrawal; and a loan servicing fee, which is 2% of the dispersed amount. This afternoon the City received the draft agreement from FDEP. Section Engineer Public Works & Utilities Ferlita advised: The City received an estimated bond rate of 4.25% as market value and then received the estimated loan percentage rate of 1.03% for this loan. Amortized over the life of the loan it adds up to a savings of approximately $10.8 Million in interest alone; it also reduces the annual loan payment by over $500,000 a year for the repayment program. Kevin, the Site Superintendent with Overland Contracting, and Mark Brewer with Angie Brewer & Associates, President of the City’s SRF funding coordinator were present to answer any questions. Commission Comments Vice-Mayor Freaney along with the Mayor and Commissioners thanked staff and the consultants for the excellent job. Mr. Stanek noted this is versus the standard bond where the City gets all the money up front and starts paying full interest up front for the entire amount. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gracy and seconded by Commissioner Gow to: 1) Reaffirm its authorization granted in Resolution 19-12 allowing execution, upon receipt, of the final FDEP SRF Construction Loan Agreement by the City Manager, upon review by the City Attorney; 2) Final FDEP SRF Loan Agreement funding shall be in accordance with attachment “DWSRF Priority List FY19 – Adopted 68 19-35
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
05/08/2019 Meeting,” with an authorized loan amount of $28,270,737 VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Kynes, Freaney, Gow, Gracy and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. 2.g. Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract for the Progressive Design-Build Services for the construction portion of the Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Refurbishment Staff Presentation Mr. Ferlita advised: Staff recommendation is to award the contract to Overland Contracting, Inc. for the construction portion of the project in the amount of $28,024,437. He reviewed the background as provided in the staffing memo. Construction activities are expected to take approximately 20 months with substantial completion by December 10, 2020. OCI has successfully completed Phase 1 of the Design/Build contract and has successfully completed other projects of similar scale and level of complexity; therefore, staff expects a timely and satisfactory completion of this project as well. Tentative date for the groundbreaking is June 27, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. Mayor Bujalski noted Pinellas County Commissioner Eggers, former Dunedin Mayor, should be contacted as he was the person who pushed the City to go on master planning for this project, it began under his watch. MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to award the GMP contract to Overland Contracting Inc. (OCI) for the construction portion of the WTP Refurbishment Project in the amount of $28,024,437. VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Gracy, Gow, Kynes, Freaney and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. 2.h. Resolution 19-23, Supporting Florida Gulf Coast Hope Spot – Mission Blue Hope Spot City Attorney Trask read Resolution 19-23 by title only. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gow and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to adopt Resolution 19-23. Staff Presentation Sustainability Coordinator Henley introduced with her Ray Bouchard and advised: Before the Commission was an outline of the nomination of the Florida Gulf Coast Hope Spot through Mission Blue, the Dr. Sylvia Earle Alliance. Mr. Bouchard, Vicki Love and Tracy Tippin have spearheaded this project locally and have worked diligently on getting support. Mr. Bouchard referred to a PowerPoint presentation attached to and made a part of these minutes explaining the project and the benefits. Hope Spots were introduced in 2009 by Dr. Earle as special places critical to the health of the ocean. They may have unique ecological features, a diversity of or a rare or 69 19-36
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
threatened species, spawning or nursery areas, historical, cultural or spiritual values. Also, they are of economic importance to the community. Hope Spots are nominated by individuals, groups or communities and approved by the Mission Blue Council. A Hope Spot is not a legal designation; they do not create legislation. It is not a regulatory entity and not able to have rules or restrictions. Specifically this Hope Spot will be all the things outlined and their mission is to become a conduit for all the different entities involved. There are many scientific research facilities in this area involved and letters of support from them. They can take the information available to everyone through these scientific organizations and through governmental organizations and be more or less like an octopus with many tentacles. They will hold all the information for everyone and everyone who needs the information can have it. Hope Spots bring awareness to the adverse impacts of unsustainable use, promote sustainable use of our precious waters. It is a means to educate and share information and support research. They want to be an education facility certainly beginning with programs for children, but there is the need to continue to educate adults. This is one reason Hope Spots do not police areas as that is the job of the Fish & Wildlife Commission (FWC). They bring attention through media, educating the public, giving workshops to help people understand what they need to do when they are out doing their jobs, fishing and so forth. Benefits of being a Hope Spot include that Mission Blue will provide world class advice. Their Commission is made up of some of the top Marine Scientists in the world. They have access to an extensive international network of marine experts, visibility, traditional and social media, press releases and expeditions. They will bring people to this area from around the world who find our unique situations necessary to study and with all the research will share ideas and information with the science groups already working here. They will offer access to their online tools and will provide an online presence and share stories. Mission Blue resources facilitate funding support. There is a large endowment already in place. They are not asking for money from anyone and will actually be able to provide funding for certain research areas that do not presently have funding. Also, they provide collaboration between potential partners, assisting and increasing local and national governmental recognition. Ms. Henley advised: This is a global discussion because it is about communities and coming together, sharing education information to understand best practice. Hope Spots locations were shown all around the world that are being nominated or are already a Hope Spot. The conversation is being brought to Dunedin and the Gulf Coast, starting here as it aligns with the City’s Epic Goals, specifically into Goals 3 and 4. It also plays a part in the other three Epic Goals. She thinks this supports who we are as a community and aligns with the Epic Goals and the Comprehensive Plan. 70 19-37
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
On the screen she showed the proposed area for the Hope Spot which spans the majority of the Gulf Coast from Apalachicola Bay to just south of Marco Island. It is a wonderful expanse to be able to designate that area of research and study in order to learn more about our natural resource. Mr. Bouchard advised: The map indicates Dunedin as the epicenter of this area which makes it critical for this area to be the support; he would call it a host city. This puts Dunedin in the middle of the map and all these different items will take place hopefully right from the city. Their support includes over 150 individuals. Previously, when this was written, Tampa Bay Estuary Program, now there is also the Pinellas County Commission that just sent a letter this morning. There are 8 businesses locally, 6 conservation groups, 3 scientific educational institutions, 1 USF Scientist, 1 University of Tampa Scientist and along with a student group associated with Jane Goodall’s group, Roots and Chutes. Two more talks are in progress with other city level governments and several talks in the early stages with other groups up and down the state. Ms. Henley commented this is still being discussed in the area and what they have found through their diligent work is there is a lot of local support. It is really about community and protecting our natural resources. Mayor Bujalski opened the public hearing for public input. Debbie Sheldon of 598 Baywood Drive S., Chair for the Committee on Environmental Quality, advised the committee supported coming before the Commission on this topic. It moved very fast; therefore, they did not have the opportunity to actually vote on it, because they had the initial discussion and determined it was a fabulous idea and to take it to the Commission. They have been kept up to date by the communication that Ms. Henley has provided and she has done a wonderful job of keeping them up to date. Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Commission Comments Commissioner Gow commented he was very excited about this project. He thought especially in looking at the Epic Goals, especially #4 about being a statewide leader, that this is what that goal speaks to. It is putting the city out in front in what it is striving to be for sustainability and what is good for our oceans. He noted it can be seen by the breadth of the area the vastness of what can be protected and what can be done within the local area for critically endangered species found in our local waters and two that are just endangered. Commissioner Kynes agreed she thought it was wonderful and she did forward it the Florida League of Cities, Rebecca O’Hara. Commissioner Gracy echoed the comments of Commissioners Gow and Kynes. Vice-Mayor Freaney commented the city’s greatest asset is to protect our water access and the environmental component. It is another way Dunedin can lead and she is excited that the County also did their part at that level. Mayor Bujalski echoed all the comments of the Commissioners.
71 19-38
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Commissioner Gow commented this all came about when Dr. Earle was here for the International Film Festival and she gave two talks after that and mentioned Hope Spot and it was amazing the number of people who got excited in that group who wanted to do it, but all it took was looking at the application process and it was not something to be taken lightly; it is a very serious thing to be done. He expressed thanks to Tracy Tippin, Vicki Love and Ray Bouchard for taking this on and working diligently on it and brining it forward and Ms. Henley has been instrumental. Mr. Bouchard noted during the initial discussion St. Joseph Sound was the original area and he found so much immediate support that he contacted Dr. Earle and told her he would like to go for the whole Gulf of Mexico and she said definitely think big, but through the scientific experts at Mote Marine and other agencies sharing information it was determined this would be a more practical use for the entire state and put Dunedin in a much bigger level to be a state leader. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously with Commissioners Freaney, Gracy, Kynes, Gow and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. 2.i. Resolution 19-24, to approve Spring Training Change Order No.8 City Attorney Trask read Resolution 19-24 by title only. MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Gow to adopt Resolution 19-24. Staff Presentation Deputy City Manager Hutchens advised: Resolution 19-24 is to appropriate funds for the Stadium in the amount of $8,943,042. It is for doors, frames and hardware, entrances and storefronts, overhead closing doors, athletic equipment and netting, fire suppression and air conditioning and plumbing, electrical and low voltage systems and audio visual equipment. This is the 8th Change Order and it has been signed by the contractor, the architect, the Toronto Blue Jays and seeking the Commission approval of execution. There will be one or two on June 6 and June 20 with the expectation of a final GMP for Commission consideration on July 11. Questions for Staff Commissioner Kynes asked the status of the spending. Mr. Hutchens advised: It is approaching the “magic number” at almost $75 Million. He, along with Attorney Eschenfelder with the City Attorney’s Office, Finance Director and Parks and Recreation Director had a conference call today with the Blue Jays in Toronto and they had a discussion how on June 6 probably the $81 Million will be exceeded with the next appropriations request and the mechanism by which to have assurances that the Blue Jays will be able to appropriately fund that at the right time. Granted, these are appropriations, but the dollars actually being spent are lagging by a few months; therefore, there is room before getting to spending up to the $81 Million, but the City wants assurances when the Commission appropriates beyond the $81 Million that those dollars are committed by the Blue Jays to fill that void. They had a good discussion 72 19-39
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
about that. Attorney Eschenfelder and Penny Colby the Attorney the Blue Jays have hired out of Los Angeles, are working on a simple one-page document to be executed. Mayor Bujalski opened agenda item for public input. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Kynes, Gracy, Gow, Freaney and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. 2.j. STARRED ITEM: Resolution 19-25, encouraging the Governor to Veto House Bill 1159, which would prohibit local governments from requiring a permit, application, notice, fee, approval, or mitigation for tree removal, trimming, or pruning of a “dangerous tree” on residential property MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to place this item on the agenda. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. City Attorney Trask read Resolution 19-25 by title only. MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to adopt Resolution 19-25. Staff Presentation City Arborist Wilson advised: On April 26, 2019, the Florida Legislature passed a House Bill 1159. This bill prohibits from requiring a permit to prune, trim or remove trees from residential property that “presents a danger to persons or property” provided the homeowner provides documentation from a certified arborist or landscape architect. In addition the bill prohibits local government from requiring any tree replants. The bill also eliminates the requirement for electrical utilities to obtain approval from local governments to maintain and prune their vegetation. He wanted to bring this to the Commission as he thinks it could have negative impacts for the City. The City tree ordinance was developed about forty years ago and it was demanded by the public at that time and has been perfected and honed down and gotten better over time. One of his concerns is having either inexperienced arborists writing letters that a tree could be dangerous or hazardous, or unethical people leading to possibly taking money for compensation to write a letter to cut a tree down that is not in fact hazardous or dangerous. The City provides that service in an unbiased form through him. He is Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) certified through the International Society of Arbor Culture, so he already gives that evaluation as a citizen of Dunedin. The City wants the ability to permit it and review and be involved in that and this bill could circumvent that. The City already agrees to let residents cut down a hazardous tree, if you apply for a permit and have a dangerous or hazardous tree it is approved and sometimes the City requires it and there are certain dates and timeframes to comply. The City is not saying not to cut down a dangerous or hazardous tree, they just want the chance to evaluate it. 73 19-40
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
The other component is this bill would not allow the City to ask for replants on properties that are deficient of trees and that could be extremely devastating for the environment, both wildlife habitat and just on heating and cooling impacts and stormwater runoff. The City does not require trees to be planted for every removal, but just for properties deficient in tree quantities or for new construction. Dunedin has an agreement with Duke Energy through the City’s Public Works Department that already works fairly well as far as allowing them to prune and they do provide the City notice as a courtesy. They prune according to federal standards and already provide notification that the City publishes on the website. The Parks and Recreation Department strongly supports the approval of this resolution and the Commission is asked to do the same by encouraging Governor DeSantis to veto House Bill 1159. Commission Questions Commissioner Kynes asked if anything has been heard about a veto and how long a period is there to know. Mr. Wilson advised it would be June 1st and if passed it would be in effect July 1st. Commissioner Kynes suggested everyone needs to get on the phone. Mr. Wilson stated he has heard an outpouring from the citizens and they have done that and sent emails, more than he had expected. Commission Comments Vice-Mayor Freaney commented she never thought this would be voted in by the Legislature. She wants to send the resolution and she thinks also the fact should be played that our Governor loves Dunedin and knows it is a special place. He received kudos today in the Tampa Bay Times for already respecting home rule with the plastic straw issue. She thinks this is an even greater attack in terms of some of the things that make the city special. She looked at issues over the years, the Land Dedication Ordinance, no billboards, being a Tree City; Dunedin has always done these things to help make it special. She wants to make sure the residents get it because these are the things that they will hate; however, they need to understand will have direct impact. She thought also there should be a good letter that talks about this being one of the things that is special to our community and it is important for the City to continue to be the local government using its best judgment on these types of decisions. Mr. Wilson was reminded that that this could have consequences to Dunedin’s Tree City U.S.A. designation. Not that the city would not still get it, but it definitely helps in that it requires a solid tree ordinance and some portions of that would be changed and removed and other things would be changed as well. Vice-Mayor Freaney explained she was suggesting a very humanized letter that expresses this is part of what makes Dunedin special from the Mayor and Commission. City Manager Bramley suggested drafting a letter and attaching it to the resolution. The Mayor and Commissioners were in agreement to attach a letter to the resolution as discussed. 74 19-41
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
Mayor Bujalski commented she appreciated when City employees bring these issues forward because everyone is not always paying attention to every single thing that is happening in every department. It is important to keep up that kind of thing. Parks & Recreation Administration Superintendent Sheets commended Mr. Wilson for the fantastic job of monitoring these types of bills over the last few years. Up until this point none of the proposed bills gained traction or left committee and were not really seen as a threat. There have been a number of environmental groups pushing back at the State level, so it really did catch the City off guard when this was passed at the last moment. Mr. Wilson stayed on top of it and brought it to her attention immediately and then wanted to bring it to the Commission as quickly as possible. VOTE: Motion carried with Commissioners Gracy, Gow, Kynes, Freaney and Mayor Bujalski voting aye. Voting nay: None. 2.k. The revised proposed agenda for the June 6, 2019 Commission Meeting Mayor Bujalski requested to move the Golf Cart Ordinance to the first action item on the agenda since there will be a lot of people for that discussion. City Manager Bramley advised staff is requesting to move this item to June 20, 2019, agenda. Mayor Bujalski commented she would still request it be the first action item. City Manager Bramley advised it could be the first action item. Hearing no other changes, Mayor Bujalski asked for a motion. MOTION: Motion was made by Vice-Mayor Freaney and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to approve the revised proposed agenda for the June 6, 2019 Commission Meeting. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. 3. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Vice-Mayor Freaney advised she would be absent for the June 6, 2019, meeting and requested consideration for an excused absence. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gracy and seconded by Commissioner Gow to approve an excused absence for Vice-Mayor Freaney for the June 6, 2019 City Commission Meeting. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Gracy advised she would be absent for the June 6, 2019 meeting and requested consideration for an excused absence. MOTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Gow and seconded by Commissioner Kynes to approve an excused absence for Commissioner Gracy for the June 6, 2019 City Commission Meeting. VOTE: Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURN MEETING The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. 75 19-42
Regular Meeting Minutes Dunedin City Commission May 16, 2019
NOTE: The meeting was completely recorded and the recording is in the official file. This meeting was also broadcast by Dunedin TV.
Julie Ward Bujalski Mayor Attest:
Denise M. Kirkpatrick City Clerk
76 19-43
Agenda Item: 2.b
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-05-24
From: Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
Subject: Board and Committee Appointments/Reappointments
A. Stormwater Advisory Committee Reappoint Regular members: Larri Gerson to her 1st full term that expires June 1, 2022, Belle Gruber to her 2nd full term that expires June 1, 2022 & Susanne Gow to her 4th and final term that expires June 1, 2022.
Presenter(s): Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
Recommend: Staff recommends to approve all reappointments.
Epic Goal(s): #5 Embrace community and employee relationship strategies that strengthen inclusiveness, respect, transparency and collaborative engagement.
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. Stormwater Advisory Committee Roster.pdf,
77 Background: N/A
78 City of Dunedin, Florida STORMWATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE
BOARD ROSTER
JILL GUNN Position Causeway Rep. lll!li!lmJ Jun 18, 2019- Jun 01 , 2022 Email: [email protected] 619-578-9 190 Address: 11 3 Shore Dr Dunedin, FL 34698
KAREN MULLINS Position Secretary t.li!!IM May 24, 2011 - Jun 01 , 2021 Email : dunedi [email protected] 727-434-2433 Add ress: 678 OAKWOOD DR DUNEDIN, FL 34698
MATTHEW WERHNER Position At-Large lfi@IIIM Mar 03, 2016- Jun 01, 2021 Email : [email protected] 727-786-47 11 Address : 2276 GULF VIEW BLVD DUN EDIN, FL 34698
CHRISTOPHER P MCLAUGHLIN Position At-Large lfi!iii@IM Sep 18, 2018- Jun 01 , 2021 Email: [email protected] 56 1-234-0760 727-725-3269 Address: 1677 BROOK DR DUNEDIN, FL 34698
ELIZABETH GRANT IEIID Jun 18, 2015 • Jun 01 , 2021 Email: elizag@tampabay. rr. com 727-738-0898 Address: 152 BUENA VISTA DR N DUNED IN, FL 34698
DONALD KNAPP Position Vice Chair/At-Large t.ll!!•D Mar o4, 201 o. Jun 01 , 2020 Email: [email protected] 727-734-3730 Address: 214 1 SARAZEN DR DU NED IN, FL 34698
ELEANOR MCCOOK Position At-Large lfilli!ilil iAifij Nov 06, 2018 • Jun 01, 2020 Email: [email protected] 678-427-0 529 Address: 511 Douglas PI Dunedin , FL 34698
79
Stormwater Advisory Committee Page 1 of 2 BILL SWEETNAM Position AI-Large 1311h§.!iijh.i May 19, 2016- Jun 01, 2020 Email: [email protected] 727-733-6888 727-688-4670 Address: 22 BIRDIE LANE PALM HARBOR, FL 34683
JAMES W SEFCIK Position Chair/At- Larg e t..ttfiit!ttiij Jun 17, 2010- Jun 01 , 2020 Email: [email protected] :Home: 727-709-0069 Address : 1 t51 MACFARLAND ST DUNEDIN, FL 34698
BELLE GRUBER Position At-Large Ba Aug 25,2016- Jun 01,2019 Email: [email protected] 727-519-3912 Address: 1916 BAYSHORE BLVD DUNEDIN, FL 34698
SUSANNE GOW Position Friends of the Hammock ElZ!Ii!D Mar 04, 2010- Jun 01 , 2019 Email: [email protected] 727-733-5409 Address: 17 17 SAN MATE O DR DUNEDIN, FL 34698
LARRIGERSON Position At-Large l@!fljii§U.i Nov 01 , 2016- Jun 01 , 2019 Email: [email protected] 727-492-0984 727-492-0984 Address: 1310 OVERCASH DR DUNEDIN, FL 34698
WHITNEY MARSH Position Staff Liason Gl!l1!lmJ Email : [email protected]
80
Stormwater Advisory Committee Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item: 2.c
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-16
From: Theresa Smalling
Subject: Renewal of the Lease Agreement with Pinellas County for the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office North Fleet Building
Presenter(s): Theresa Smalling, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management
Recommend: Staff recommends the Commission approve the Lease Agreement for an initial five-year period..
Epic Goal(s): #5. Embrace community and employee relationship strategies that strengthen inclusiveness, respect, transparency and collaborative engagement.
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: Annual Lease Payment from Pinellas County to the City in the amount of $47, 264, paid monthly. Annual automatic rate increase of 3% for each year of the contract.
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. Dunedin PCSO Fleet Lease v.05 AATF for Dunedin Signature 7-01-19.pdf,
Background: Since 1998, the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office North Fleet Division has been housed in a portion of the City's Fleet Services Building, approximately 5,908 81 square feet. The current lease agreement between Pinellas County and the City expired as of June 30, 2019. City Staff and Pinellas County Real Estate Management Staff negotiated a new five-year lease agreement (see attached). The new annual lease amount is is based on $8 per square foot, an increase of $2.90 per square foot over the initial proposed lease amount. The Sheriff's Office retains the same number of parking spaces and square footage, but Solid Waste will now have two parking spaces in proximity to the Solid Waste building for visitor parking.
The lease rate will increase each year by 3%. The contract will be in effect for five years with up to three additional renewal terms of 5 years each; the City retains the right to re-visit the lease rate every five years during the life of the contract.
Staff recommends that the Commission approve the Lease Agreement with the County.
82
LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT shall commence July 1, 2019 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF DUNEDIN, a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as “CITY,” and PINELLAS COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as “COUNTY,” jointly referred to as the “Parties” (the “Agreement”), which terms include each party’s respective heirs, assigns, executors, administrators, legal representatives and successors. W I T N E S S E T H 1. PREMISES. In consideration of the rent hereinafter agreed to be paid by COUNTY to CITY, and in consideration of the covenants of the respective Parties hereto, each to the other to be performed by them at the time and in the manner hereinafter provided, CITY does hereby lease and let unto the COUNTY, and COUNTY does hereby lease from CITY, a portion of the real property known as the City Vehicle Maintenance Facility (the “Facility”) located at 1080 Virginia St, Dunedin, Florida, consisting of a 5,908 Rentable Square Feet (“RSF”) vehicle garage containing six vehicle bays, an administrative office, and a parts room (the “Garage”), together with areas shown on Exhibit “A” “Parking Plan” (the “Premises”) and as further shown on Exhibit “B” “Site Plan”, both attached hereto and incorporated herein. COUNTY hereby accepts the Premises in its “as is” condition as of the Effective Date. 2. TERM AND RENEWAL. Subject to and upon the conditions set forth herein, including any exhibit or addendum hereto, the initial term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and will extend for a term of five (5) years thereafter (hereinafter referred to as “Lease Term”), unless sooner terminated or extended to a later date under any term or provision of this Agreement. In the event the Effective Date occurs on a date other than the first day of a month, said Lease Term shall extend for said number of days as to make the effective date of the first lease year the first day of the following month and subsequently, each anniversary date thereafter (each an “Anniversary Date”). Either Party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause at any time by giving the other Party one hundred and eighty (180) days written notice. This Agreement shall automatically be renewed for an additional five (5) years, not to exceed three (3) consecutive additional renewals (each an “Option Term”), unless either Party terminates this Agreement as set forth above. Notice of such Option Term will be provided from the COUNTY to the CITY as provided for in Paragraph 22. NOTICES or to such other place as CITY may hereinafter designate in writing. 3. USE AND ACCESS. COUNTY covenants that the Premises during the continuance of the Agreement shall be used and occupied as a vehicle maintenance facility and administrative office space and for no other use. CITY shall allow COUNTY reasonable access to the Premises. In the event of a local state of emergency, severe weather conditions or pending natural disaster, COUNTY will conduct its operations in accordance with the PCSO Hurricane Preparedness Plan, as it exists from time to time, as outlined on the attached Exhibit “D” “Hurricane Plan.” 4. CONDITION OF PREMISES. No agreement to alter, remodel, decorate, clean or improve the Premises has been made between CITY and COUNTY. COUNTY hereby accepts the Premises in its “as is” condition as of the Effective Date. 5. POSSESSION AND RENTAL COMMENCEMENT DATE. COUNTY shall be granted possession and Rent shall commence on the Effective Date. COUNTY agrees to pay CITY Annual Base Rent (“Base Rent”) for the Premises during the Lease Term beginning on Effective Date. A. Initial Annual Rate. During the first Lease Year, COUNTY shall pay to CITY Base Rent in an amount equal to $8.00 per square foot per annum. 83 Page 1 of 16
B. Time and Place of Payment. The Rent shall be due and payable, in advance, on the first (1st) day of each calendar month during the Lease Term. COUNTY shall pay the Rent to the “City of Dunedin” at the CITY’S address that appears in Paragraph 22. NOTICES or to such other place as CITY may hereinafter designate in writing. C. COUNTY is tax exempt. If COUNTY loses tax exempt status, COUNTY shall pay, together with Rent due under this Agreement, an amount equal to all sales, use, excise and other taxes now, or hereinafter, imposed by any lawful authority on all amounts due or required under this Agreement and classified as Rent by any such authority. D. Adjustment of Rental Rate. Base Rent shall increase annually upon each Anniversary Date at a rate of 1.03 times the Base Rent for the preceding Lease Year as set forth in the Rent Schedule attached to this lease as Exhibit “C” “RENT SCHEDULE” and incorporated herein. 6. TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. In the event that any ad valorem, rental, sales or similar taxes or special assessments are levied upon the leased Premises due to the existence of this Agreement, then COUNTY shall pay all such taxes and special assessments so imposed. 7. ALTERATIONS & IMPROVEMENTS TO PREMISES. A. COUNTY shall make no structural change or alteration to the Premises or other parts of the facility, without written consent of CITY, and COUNTY shall be responsible for any damages to the Premises caused by the COUNTY, or its, employees, invitees, customers, clients or guests, ordinary wear and tear excepted. COUNTY shall pay for all charges for permitting, labor, services and materials used in connection with any improvements or repairs to the Premises undertaken by COUNTY. Modifications or improvements made during this Agreement Term shall become property of CITY upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, unless COUNTY desires to remove said modifications or improvements which can be removed without damage or injury to the Premises. B. Nonstructural alterations may be made by COUNTY with CITY consent (subject to COUNTY complying with all codes and obtaining necessary permits) and may be removed (assuming doing so will not result in compromise to the existing facility) or abandoned at COUNTY’S election when COUNTY vacates the Premises. 8. CITY AND COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES. A. CITY Responsibilities Throughout the Lease Term, CITY shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain in reasonably good condition, order, and repair, the structural portions of the Premises and Building, including the foundation, floors, roof, and supporting walls and the exterior of Premises, including appurtenant grounds, site drainage, sidewalks, signs and parking areas. Subject to the COUNTY’S Maintenance Obligations hereafter defined, CITY shall also maintain in reasonably good condition, order, and repair, all electrical systems and lighting fixtures, sewer, plumbing pipes and fixtures, including main water and sewer piping, interior and exterior doors and locks (except for the replacement of keys and locking mechanisms which CITY will complete at the request and cost of COUNTY), windows, window hardware, walls, ceilings, ceiling tiles, exterior glass, janitorial, interior pest control, waste collections or recycling services within the Premises, all additional interior maintenance required to include the replacement of either light bulbs or ballasts or LED fixtures, all plumbing and sewage backups, and ensure compliance with any and all life safety code requirements. CITY shall also keep exterior of the building free of all graffiti, trash, rubbish, pests and similar debris and maintain the same in a clean, neat, orderly and sanitary condition at all times. CITY shall not be liable for injury to persons or property caused by any defects in the power, electric, heating, air conditioning and water unless injury or damages to property result from CITY’S negligence or conduct intended to cause such injury or damages. Further, CITY shall not be responsible for 84 Page 2 of 16
maintenance or repair needed due to COUNTY’S negligence; maintenance or repair arising out of such negligence shall be borne by COUNTY at COUNTY’S sole cost and expense. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Paragraph, COUNTY shall immediately give CITY written notice of any defects or need for repairs in Premises known to COUNTY, or claims or instances of bodily injury resulting or allegedly resulting from said defects or need for repairs known to COUNTY, whether CITY is obligated to make such repair or not. Reasonable written notice to CITY, specifying the repairs to be made, constitutes an absolute condition precedent to CITY’S duty of repair. CITY or his agent shall have sufficient time to commence correction of any deficiencies after notice by COUNTY. However, CITY shall not be required to make any such repairs where same are caused or occasioned by the negligence or willful misconduct of COUNTY, its agents, employees or invitees. B. COUNTY Responsibilities COUNTY, at all times, shall maintain the interior of the Premises in a clean and orderly condition, free from all debris, throughout the Lease Term. COUNTY shall, at its sole cost and expense install and maintain all telephone, internet, television, access control, communications, and data and security systems, if any with the exception of the communications systems related to the Fire System which shall be installed and maintained by the CITY. COUNTY shall use and operate in a reasonable and safe manner all electrical, heating, ventilating, air- conditioning, and other fixtures, equipment and appliances appurtenant to or serving the Premises. All of the foregoing are herein referred to as the “COUNTY Maintenance Obligations.” COUNTY shall not commit or allow to be committed any waste on any portion of the Premises. COUNTY shall be liable to CITY for any damage or destruction to the Premises caused or occasioned by the negligence or willful misconduct of COUNTY, its agents, employees or invitees. 9. QUIET ENJOYMENT. If COUNTY shall pay the Rent reserved herein and other amounts to be paid by COUNTY to CITY, and keep, perform and reserve all the covenants, agreements and conditions herein stipulated to be kept, performed and observed by COUNTY, COUNTY shall at all times during the Lease Term have the peaceful and quiet enjoyment of said Premises, subject, however, to the terms of this Agreement. 10. ASSIGNMENT AND SUB-LETTING. COUNTY may not assign or sublet this Agreement or any interest thereunder. 11. PROPERTY OF COUNTY. COUNTY shall, (if not in default hereunder) prior to the expiration of the Agreement, or any extension thereof, remove all personal property which it has placed in the Premises, provided COUNTY repairs all damages to the Premises caused by such removal, unless COUNTY obtains the written consent of CITY to keep such property on the Premises after expiration or termination of the Agreement. 12. DAMAGE OR THEFT OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. COUNTY agrees that all personal property brought into the Premises shall be at the risk of COUNTY only, and CITY shall not be liable for theft thereof or any damage thereto occasioned by any acts of any tenants, other occupants of the Building or any other person. 13. INDEMNIFICATION. COUNTY covenants and agrees that it will indemnify and hold harmless CITY and all of CITY'S officers, employees, contractors and subcontractors from any claim, loss, damage, cost, charge or expense arising out of any act, action, neglect or omission by COUNTY, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors, including Worker’s Compensation coverage pursuant to Florida law, during the performance of this Agreement, and any extensions thereof, whether direct or indirect, and whether to any person or property to which CITY or said Parties may be subject, except that neither COUNTY nor any of its officers, agents, employees, contractors or subcontractors will be liable under this section for damages arising out of injury or damage to persons or property directly caused by or 85 Page 3 of 16
resulting from the sole negligence of CITY or any of its officers or employees. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of COUNTY’S sovereign immunity pursuant to §768.28, Florida Statutes. This indemnification shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 14. COVENANT AGAINST LIENS. COUNTY shall have no power or authority to create any lien or permit any lien to attach to the present estate, reversion or other estate of CITY in the Premises herein demised or on the Building or other improvements thereon. COUNTY is hereby charged with the responsibility of notifying all materialmen, contractors, artisans, mechanics and laborers and other persons contracting with COUNTY with respect to the Premises or any part thereof, that such persons must look to COUNTY to secure payment of any bill for work done or material furnished to the COUNTY or for any other purpose during the term of this Agreement. 15. NO ESTATE IN CITY’S OWNERSHIP INTEREST. COUNTY has only a temporary leasehold interest in the Premises pursuant to the terms and conditions herein, which is not subject to levy and sale. Any security interest obtained in COUNTY’S leasehold shall not affect or encumber CITY’S fee simple interest in the Premises. 16. OBSERVANCE OF LAWS. COUNTY agrees, at its own expense, to promptly comply with all requirements of any legally constituted public authority necessitated by reason of COUNTY’S occupancy of said Premises, including complying with all laws, regulations and ordinances concerning its operations, and obtaining and maintaining any and all permits and licenses to provide services pursuant to this Agreement. 17. EMINENT DOMAIN. A. In the event the whole or any substantial part of the Building or the Premises shall be taken or condemned by any competent authority for any public or quasi-public use or purpose, this Agreement shall terminate as of the date of the taking of possession or by the condemning authority, and Rent shall be apportioned as of said date. B. In the event less than a substantial part of the Building or the Premises shall be taken or condemned for any public or quasi-public use or purpose, or if any adjacent property or street shall be condemned or improved in such manner as to require the use of any part of the Premises or of the Building, then at the election of CITY expressed by delivery of written notice to COUNTY within ninety (90) days after said date of taking, condemnation or improvements, this Agreement shall terminate as of said date without any payment from CITY to COUNTY therefore, other than COUNTY’S share of damages from said taking as referenced herein. C. CITY shall be entitled to receive the entire award from any taking or condemnation without any payment to COUNTY, as provided for in Florida Statutes; provided, however, COUNTY shall be entitled to receive any award or portion of any award specifically designated to COUNTY pursuant to Florida Statutes. 18. DAMAGE BY FIRE OR OTHER CASUALTY. A. Partial Destruction. If the Building or Premises shall be partially damaged by fire or other casualty, COUNTY shall provide written notice of the same to CITY as soon as practical thereafter (the “Casualty Notice”). If no such Casualty Notice is given, notice shall be deemed to be the date upon which CITY has actual knowledge of the fire or other casualty. Upon receipt of such notice, CITY shall determine, in its sole discretion, whether the repairs can be completed within one hundred eighty (180) days, and tender written notice of the same to COUNTY within thirty (30) days of the Casualty Notice. Where such repairs can be completed within one hundred eighty (180) days, CITY shall commence to repair the damage and shall thereafter diligently pursue repair of the damage to completion up to the amount of any insurance proceeds available. Where such repairs cannot be completed within one hundred eighty (180) days, the damage shall be treated as a Substantial or Total Destruction and the terms and conditions of subparagraph B of this 86 Page 4 of 16
Paragraph 19 shall apply. CITY shall not be liable for any inconvenience or annoyance to COUNTY resulting in any way from such damage or the repair thereof, except that, subject to the provisions of the next section. CITY shall allow COUNTY a fair and reasonable diminution of rent during the time and to the extent of, and proportionate to, the portion of the Premises rendered untenantable, as determined by CITY. B. Substantial or Total Destruction. If the Premises, Common Areas or Building shall be (i) totally destroyed or damaged by casualty, or (ii) the Building, whether the Premises is damaged or not, should be damaged to the extent of fifty (50%) percent or more of the then monetary value thereof, or (iii) if the Premises, Office Building or Common Areas shall be so damaged or destroyed to such an extent that COUNTY is unable to conduct its business at the Premises in the ordinary course, as determined by COUNTY, and if the estimated time to repair or replace such damage or destruction exceeds one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of the Casualty Notice, then either party may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the other within thirty (30) days after the date of the Casualty Notice, with such termination to be effective as of the date of the Casualty Notice. If neither party terminates this Agreement as set forth above, CITY shall promptly repair or replace any damage or destruction to the Premises and the Common Areas. The Base Rent shall abate until the Premises have been restored to their condition at the time of the occurrence of the damage: provided, however to the extent a portion of the Premises is restored and COUNTY occupies the same, the abatement of Base Rent shall cease and CITY shall allow COUNTY a fair and reasonable diminution of rent during the time, and to the extent of, and proportionate to, the portion of the Premises remaining untenantable. C. CITY’S Termination Option. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of Subparagraph B of this section, if such damages (i) are a result of a risk which is not covered by CITY’S insurance or exceeds the proceeds from such insurance or (ii) such damage shall occur during the last eighteen (18) months of the Term of this Agreement (or of any renewal Term), then in any of such events, CITY may, at its sole option and discretion, by written notice to COUNTY within thirty (30) days of the Casualty Notice, elect not to repair such damage and to cancel and terminate this Agreement effective as of a date of Casualty Notice. Upon the giving of such notice to COUNTY, the Term of this Agreement shall expire by lapse of time upon the third (3rd) day after such notice is given, and COUNTY shall vacate the Leased Premises and surrender the same to CITY as diligently as possible or within thirty (30) days of receipt of CITY’S notice of termination. 19. RIGHTS OF RECOVERY. CITY and COUNTY agree to have all fire and extended coverage and material damage insurance which may be carried with respect to the Premises or to the property located therein endorsed with a clause substantially as follows: “This insurance shall not be invalidated should the insured waive in writing prior to a loss any or all rights of recovery against any Party for loss occurring to the property described herein.” 20. ENTRY BY CITY. CITY may enter the Premises at reasonable hours to exhibit the same to prospective purchasers or tenants, and to inspect the Premises to see that the COUNTY is complying with all its obligations under the terms hereof. The CITY shall also be allowed to take any and all needed materials and equipment that may be required to make repairs, into and through the Premises without being liable to COUNTY in any manner whatsoever, unless damage is caused by CITY’S negligence, subject to section 768.28 Florida Statutes. Such repairs shall not unduly interfere with COUNTY’S business except as is naturally necessitated by the nature of the repairs being affected. During the time such work is being done in or about the Premises, the Rent provided herein shall in no way abate, and COUNTY waives any claim and cause of action against CITY for damages by reason of interruption to COUNTY’S business or loss of profits therefrom. CITY shall use its best efforts to notify COUNTY within 24 to 48 hours of CITY’S intent to enter Premises. In the event of emergency, the County may not provide prior notification. 21. SIGNS. COUNTY shall not erect, install, maintain, or display any signs, lettering, canopies, awnings, or advertising on the exterior of the Premises, exterior of the Building, or the lands of 87 Page 5 of 16
which the Premises and the Building constitute a part, without the prior written consent of CITY, except that COUNTY may install up to 7 “Reserved Parking” signs for the County Reserved Parking Spaces in the location shown on Exhibit “A” “Parking Plan”. In the event such consent of CITY is obtained, COUNTY, at its sole cost and expense, shall maintain the same in good condition and repair at all times during the Lease Term. Upon the termination of this Agreement, COUNTY agrees to remove all signs, lettering, canopies, awnings, advertising, and other personal insignia and to repair any and all damage caused to the Premises, the Building, or the lands of which the Premises and the Building constitute a part, by reason of such removal. 22. NOTICES. All notices and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly given (a) on the date of delivery if delivered personally, or (b) on the date of delivery by recognized national delivery service, or (c) on the fifth Business Day following the date of mailing, if mailed by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or (d) on the date sent by electronic mail if sent during normal business hours of the recipient during a Business Day, and otherwise on the next Business Day, if sent after normal business hours of the recipient, follow by a copy of such notice within one Business Day delivered pursuant to one of the other methods described herein.
All notices given to COUNTY hereunder shall be forwarded to COUNTY at the following address:
Pinellas County Real Estate Management Real Property Division 509 East Avenue S., 2nd Floor Clearwater, FL 33756
If via electronic mail: [email protected]
All notices given to CITY hereunder shall be forwarded to CITY at the following address:
City of Dunedin City Hall, 542 Main St Dunedin, Florida 34698 Attn: City Manager
If via electronic mail: [email protected]
23. DEFAULT. Either Party shall be in default under this Agreement if such Party has not commenced and pursued with reasonable diligence the cure of any failure to meet its obligations under this Agreement within thirty (30) days of the receipt of written notice from the injured Party. This grace period shall be extended if the default is of a nature that it cannot be completely cured within the thirty (30) day period solely as a result of non-financial circumstances outside of the Defaulted Party’s control, provided that such Party has promptly commenced all appropriate actions to cure the default within the thirty (30) day period and such actions are thereafter diligently and continuously pursued in good faith. Upon the occurrence of an event of Default, which Default is not cured after notice as outlined herein, to the extent provided for or required herein, either Party reserves the right to Terminate this Agreement by providing 90 days’ written notice. 24. SURRENDER OF PREMISES. Upon termination of this Agreement, whether by lapse of time or otherwise, COUNTY shall surrender and vacate the Premises immediately and deliver possession thereof to CITY in a clean, good and tenantable condition, ordinary wear excepted. Upon any termination 88 Page 6 of 16
which occurs other than by reason of COUNTY’S default, COUNTY shall remove from the Premises all furnishings, equipment, and records, provided that COUNTY shall repair all damage resulting from such removal and shall restore the Premises to a tenantable condition, unless otherwise agreed by CITY. All other additions, decorations, fixtures, hardware, and all permanent improvements remaining, in or about the Premises upon termination remain CITY’S property and shall remain upon the Premises without compensation, allowance, or credit to COUNTY, whether placed there by COUNTY or by CITY, unless CITY directs their removal. Any and all property which may be removed from the Premises by CITY pursuant to the above or pursuant to law shall be conclusively presumed to have been abandoned by COUNTY and title thereto shall pass to CITY without any cost by setoff, credit or otherwise, and CITY may, at its option: (i) accept title to such property in which event COUNTY shall be conclusively presumed to have conveyed such property to CITY under this Agreement as a bill of sale; or (ii) at COUNTY’S expense, dispose of such property in any manner that CITY shall choose. In no event, however, shall CITY be responsible for the value, preservation or safekeeping of such property. 25. COUNTY’S INSURANCE. In accordance with 768.28, Florida Statutes, the COUNTY is self-insured. This self-insurance includes Workers Compensation, Public Entity Liability Insurance coverage above a self-insured retention that may vary during the term of the Agreement; a Casualty Package insurance policy applies for General Liability, Auto Liability, Public Officials Liability, and Employment Related Practices Liability. 26. COMMON AREAS. COUNTY is hereby granted the nonexclusive right in common with other tenants of the Facility, as it shall exist from time to time, to use such common areas appurtenant to the Facility as may be designated by CITY. All of such common areas shall be subject to CITY’S sole and exclusive control and shall be operated and maintained in such a manner as CITY in his discretion may determine. CITY hereby expressly reserves the right to alter, from time to time, the dimensions and locations of the common areas, to construct additions to any building, and to grant tenants of any building owned by CITY on land adjacent or in proximity to the land for which the Premises constitutes a part, the right to use all or any portion of such areas in common with all tenants of the Facility, all without the consent of COUNTY. 27. PARKING. COUNTY shall have the exclusive right to utilize the parking spaces and the “County Vehicle Staging Area” as shown on Exhibit “A” “Parking Plan”. COUNTY shall also have the right to erect signage for those parking spaces designated on the Parking Plan as “County Reserved Parking Spaces.” CITY shall not be liable for any injuries, damage, theft, or loss to persons or property that may occur upon or near such parking areas. 28. WAIVER. One or more waivers of any covenant or condition by either Party shall not be construed as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same covenant or condition by the other Party, and the consent or approval by either Party to or of any act by the other Party requiring consent or approval shall not be construed as a consent or approval to or of any subsequent similar act by the other Party. 29. CAPTIONS. The headings or captions of Sections are for convenience only, are not part of this Agreement, and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 30. TIME. Time is of the essence as to this Contract. Any reference herein to time periods shall refer to calendar days, and any time period provided for herein which shall end on a Saturday, Sunday or County or legal holiday shall extend to 5:00 p.m. of the next full business day. 31. EXHIBITS. All exhibits attached to this Agreement, signed by CITY and COUNTY, are made a part hereof and are incorporated herein by reference. 89 Page 7 of 16
32. SMOKING. This building is smoke free. Any smoking must be done outside of the building. If COUNTY, its agents, employees or servants wish to smoke outside of a building, they will be required to do so away from all building entrances. 33. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (“ADA”). CITY warrants that the Premises are in and shall be maintained in compliance with the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act and any similar Act adopted by the State of Florida at CITY’S expense, at the commencement of this Agreement. 34. ASBESTOS. CITY warrants that to the best of its knowledge, there is no friable asbestos in the Building or the Premises at the commencement of this Agreement and that if any friable asbestos is discovered in the Building or the Premise during this Lease Term, the CITY shall, at its sole cost and expense, remove or encapsulate said asbestos within a reasonable period of time. 35. RADON GAS. Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that, when it has accumulated in a building in sufficient quantities, may present health risks to persons who are exposed to it over time. Levels of radon that exceed Federal and State guidelines have been found in buildings in Florida. Additional information regarding radon and radon testing may be obtained from your County Public Health Department. 36. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. COUNTY shall not cause or permit the presence, use, disposal, storage, or release of any Hazardous Substances on or in Premises. COUNTY shall not do, nor allow anyone else to do, anything affecting Premises that is in violation of any Environmental Law. The preceding sentences shall not apply to the presence, use, or storage on Premises of small quantities of Hazardous Substances that are generally recognized to be appropriate to normal maintenance use. CITY shall promptly give COUNTY written notice of any investigation, claim, demand, lawsuit or other action by any governmental or regulatory agency or private party involving Premises, and any Hazardous Substance or Environmental Law of which CITY has actual knowledge thereof. If CITY learns or is notified by any governmental or regulatory authority, that any removal or other remediation of any Hazardous Substance affecting Premises is necessary, CITY shall promptly take all necessary remedial actions in accordance with Environmental Law. CITY shall indemnify and hold COUNTY fully harmless for any liabilities and remedial actions of Hazardous Substances for which CITY is responsible under this Section, except if such liabilities and remedial actions were caused by COUNTY or its officers, employees or guests. CITY’S indemnification obligations under this Section shall survive the expiration or soon termination of the Lease Term. As used in this Paragraph, “Hazardous Substances” are those substances defined as toxic or hazardous substances by Environmental Law, as well as the following substances: gasoline, kerosene, other flammable or toxic petroleum products, toxic pesticides and herbicides, volatile solvents, materials containing asbestos or formaldehyde and radioactive materials. As used in this Paragraph, “Environmental Law” means Federal laws and laws of the jurisdiction where Premises is located that relate to health, safety, or environmental protection. 37. AIR QUALITY. The CITY shall maintain the Building and Building air handling systems to provide a healthy indoor air environment. The CITY shall maintain the Building and air handling systems sufficiently to prevent the amplification of biological agents (mold, mildew, fungi, and bacteria) and dust above proximate outdoor levels. The COUNTY shall be informed prior to any maintenance activities utilizing chemicals including pesticide applications that may impact indoor air quality (and reserve the right to require these activities to occur when Building is unoccupied). Prior to and during occupancy, the COUNTY reserves the right to conduct indoor air quality testing. Testing may include volatile organics, biological agents, humidity, temperature or other compounds. 38. PUBLIC ENTITY CRIME ACT. COUNTY is directed to the Florida Public Entity Crime Act, Section 287.133, Florida Statutes, as amended from time to time, and CITY’S requirement that COUNTY comply with it in all respects prior to and during this Lease Term. 90 Page 8 of 16
39. PETS. Pets shall not be allowed in or on the Property without prior written consent of CITY with the exception of service animals. 40. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed or construed by the Parties hereto, nor by any third party, as creating the relationship of principal and agent or of partnership or joint venture between the Parties hereto. It is further understood and agreed that neither the method of computation of Rent, nor any other provision contained herein shall be deemed to create any relationship between the Parties hereto other than the relationship of CITY and COUNTY. Whenever herein the singular is used, the same shall include the plural, and the masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter genders. 41. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and all exhibits, incorporates all covenants, promises, agreements, conditions and understandings between the Parties. No covenant, promise, agreement, condition or understanding, either written or oral, not specifically set forth herein, shall be effective to alter the performance or the rights of the Parties as stated herein. No modification, waiver or amendment of the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon CITY or COUNTY unless in writing and signed by CITY and COUNTY or by their duly authorized agents. {Signatures on following page}
91 Page 9 of 16
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement on the latest day and year written herein below.
WITNESSES: COUNTY: PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, Signature: By and through its Board of County Commissioners
Print Name: By: Karen Williams Seel, Chair Signature: Dated:
Print Name:
WITNESSES: CITY: CITY OF DUNEDIN Signature: a municipal corporation
Print Name: By: Jennifer K. Bramley, City Manager
Signature: By: Julie Ward Bujalski, Mayor Print Name: Dated:
92 Page 10 of 16
EXHIBIT “A” Parking Plan 1 of 2
PCSO Reserved Parking Spaces
93 Page 11 of 16
EXHIBIT “A” continued Parking Plan 2 of 2
PCSO Parking Spaces
PCSO Vehicle Staging Area
94 Page 12 of 16
EXHIBIT “B” Site Plan 1 of 2
Common Areas
Garage
95 Page 13 of 16
EXHIBIT “B” Site Plan 2 of 2
Facility
GARAGE
96 Page 14 of 16
EXHIBIT “C” Rent Schedule 5,908 Rentable Square Footage (RSF) 3.00% Rental Rate Increase
Annual Base Rent Monthly Base Lease Term Rate / RSF Due Rent Due Year 1 $8.00 $47,264.00 $3,938.67 Year 2 $8.24 $48,681.92 $4,056.83 Year 3 $8.49 $50,158.92 $4,179.91 Year 4 $8.74 $51,635.92 $4,302.99 Year 5 $9.00 $53,172.00 $4,431.00
Option Tern 1 Year 6 $9.27 $54,767.16 $4,563.93 Year 7 $9.55 $56,421.40 $4,701.78 Year 8 $9.84 $58,134.72 $4,844.56 Year 9 $10.14 $59,907.12 $4,992.26 Year 10 $10.44 $61,679.52 $5,139.96
Option Term 2 Year 11 $10.75 $63,511.00 $5,292.58 Year 12 $11.07 $65,401.56 $5,450.13 Year 13 $11.40 $67,351.20 $5,612.60 Year 14 $11.74 $69,359.92 $5,779.99 Year 15 $12.09 $71,427.72 $5,952.31
Option Term 3 Year 16 $12.45 $73,554.60 $6,129.55 Year 17 $12.82 $75,740.56 $6,311.71 Year 18 $13.20 $77,985.60 $6,498.80 Year 19 $13.60 $80,348.80 $6,695.73 Year 20 $14.01 $82,771.08 $6,897.59
97 Page 15 of 16
EXHIBIT “D” Hurricane Plan
98 Page 16 of 16
Agenda Item: 2.d
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-15
From: Jorge Quintas, Public Works & Utilities Director/Engineer
Subject: Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project
Presenter(s): Russell Ferlita, Ph.D., P.E., Section Engineer | PW & Utilities; Paul Stanek, Assistant Director, Public Works & Utilities Department
Recommend: Staff recommends to Award the Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project to G.A. Nichols Company, a Florida Corporation, in the amount of $281,815.60
Epic Goal(s): Goal #4 - Be the statewide model for environmental sustainability stewardship
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: Funds for this project are budgeted in the Water & Sewer Utility Fund, (Acct. #441-5266-535-6301) in fiscal year 2019, under Project #521707. A budget amendment appropriating $80,000 from Water & Sewer Fund Reserves will be required in order to fully fund this work.
Past Action: 1) Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Design Services were awarded to King Engineering of Tampa, FL in the amount of $32,103 by delegated authority on January 25, 2019.
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. Memo of Recommendation (CA).pdf, B. Memo of Recommendation (RF).pdf, C. Ardurra letter Bid Recommendation.pdf, D. Bid 19-1130 Tabulation.pdf, E. Budget Amendment Form.PDF, 99 Background: The Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project is located at Josiah Cephas Weaver Park (1258 Bayshore Blvd.). The project scope consists of the replacement of the gravity sewer piping from the terminal manhole to the lift station and installation of a new 12” force main to replace the existing 10” force main. This includes excavation, shoring, trenching, temporary bypass pumping, pipe installation, horizontal directional drilling, backfill, restoration, concrete and masonry work and painting as required to complete the project and maintain flow of sanitary sewer.
The current lift station piping from the terminal manhole is comprised of two pipes, is undersized and constructed of vitrified clay pipe. To increase capacity and to upgrade the piping material; a single, larger diameter PVC pipe will be installed between the terminal manhole and the lift station. The replacement of this segment of gravity sewer will significantly increase the capacity of the pipe as well as reduce potential infiltration of groundwater into this piping section.
The current force main from lift station #3 is original and constructed of 10” cast iron, which is subject to failure. Failure of the force main (either by a pipe break or leak) would result in an unauthorized raw sewage discharge and present a public health hazard. The original, cast iron force main will be abandoned in place and a new, 12” PVC / HDPE force main will be installed and placed into service. This replacement will significantly increase the reliability of the force main and reduce the potential of unauthorized discharges of raw sewage into the environment.
The City received five (5) submittals of bid packages, consisting of up to three bid alternates each. The bids received ranged from $281,815.60 to $530,948. G.A. Nichols Company’s submittal was determined to be the lowest, responsive and responsible bid.
Funds for this work are budgeted in the Water & Sewer Utility Fund (Acct. #441-5266-535-6301, under Project #521707). A budget amendment appropriating $80,000 from Water & Sewer Fund Reserves will be required to fully fund this work.
A “Notice to Proceed” is planned for the month of September 2019. Construction is expected to be Substantially Complete by February 2020.
Staff hereby recommends award of this design contract to G.A. Nichols Company, in the amount of $281,815.60.
100 101 ENGINEERING DIVISION P.O.BOX 1348 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34697-1348 (727) 298-3174
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Ankney, Purchasing Agent
FROM: Russell Ferlita, Ph.D., P.E. Section Engineer | PW – Engineering Division
DATE: July 3, 2019
SUBJECT: Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project
The Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement Project is located at Josiah Cephas Weaver Park (1258 Bayshore Blvd.). The force main and gravity sewer pipe from the terminal manhole are original and subject to failure and leaking. In addition, the gravity sewer pipe from the terminal manhole is undersized. The project scope consists of the replacement of the gravity sewer piping from the terminal manhole to the lift station with a larger diameter pipe and installation of a new 12” force main to replace the existing 10” force main. This includes excavation, shoring, trenching, temporary bypass pumping, pipe installation, horizontal directional drilling, backfill, restoration, concrete and masonry work and painting as required to complete the project and maintain flow of sanitary sewer. The City received five (5) submittals of bid packages for a total of thirteen (13) bids for this project. The bids received ranged from $281,815.60 to $530,948. G.A. Nichols Company’s submittal was determined to be the lowest, responsive and responsible bid. This company has successfully completed projects of similar scope and nature for other utilities, and their quality of work and timeliness is anticipated for this project. The contract amount for construction of the project is $281,815.60. The budgeted amount for the design phase of this project was $237,000 for fiscal year 2019 under project number 521707. A budget amendment of $80,000 from fund balance to account #441-5266-535.6301 will be required to complete this design project. If approved by commission, the Notice to Proceed is planned to be issued in September 2019, and substantial completion is expected to be February 2020.
102 103 DU N~D I N Home of Honeymoon Island
CITY OF DUNEDIN Bid # 19-1130 Tabulation City of Dunedin Lift Station #3 Sanitary Sewer Force Main Replacement Project
A bid opening was held on Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 2:00 P.M in the Engineering Conference Room located at 737 Louden, Dunedin, FL.
Attending were: Bill Gavitt; Rowland, Anthony Cerullo; C&T Contracting, Jim Barnes; Kamminga & Roodvoets, and Dana Marcano; GA Nichols
City of Dunedin: Russel Ferlita, Tim Calvit, Paul Stanek, Jorge Qu intas, Chuck Ankney, and Jacy Bussey
This bid was properly advertised in the Gulf Coast Business Review and demandstar.com on Friday, May 24, 2019. Forty (40) companies obtained plans and specifications. There was one (1) addendum issued to this bid.
The following companies submitted a bid: COMPANY NAME TOTAL BID AMOUNT GA Nichols Company Attn. Greg Nichols A) $333.000.00 1 5775 126 h Ave. N. B) $265, 780.00 Clearwater, FL 33760 C) $283,800.00 Phone: 727-561-0509 AL TO Construction Company, Inc. Attn. Nick Wright A) $427,916.62 4102 Causeway Blvd. B) $312,972.37 Tampa, FL 33619 C) $336,819.26 Phone: 813-494-5935 Kamminga & Roodvoets, Inc. Attn. Marcus B. Tidey, Jr. A) $456,907.00 5219 Cone Rd . B) $368,852.00 Tampa, FL 33610 C) $373,483.00 Phone: 813-623-3031 Rowland, Inc. Attn. Kevin D. Rowland A) $530,948.00 6855 102nd Ave. N. B) $403,194.00 Pinellas Park, FL 33782 C) $411,074.40 Phone: 727-545-3815
104 City of Dunedin, PO Box 1348, Dunedin, Florida 34697 - 727-298-3000 - dunedingov.com "Equal Opportunity Employer" D U N~D I N Home of Honeymoon Island C&T Contracting Services, LLC Attn. Chris Telson "-) ------1249 Woodlawn Terrace 8) $439, 131.00 Clearwater, FL 33755 (;) ------Phone: 813-616-3210
The cost estimate for the project was $290,000. The bid opening concluded at 2:30 p.m.
105
City of Dunedin, PO Box 1348, Dunedin, Florida 34697 - 727-298-3000 - dunedingov.com "Equal Opportunity Employer" Form Version 08-26-2014
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FL BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
FISCAL YEAR : 2019 DEPARTMENT: ------Wastewater
~ lnease (Decrease) Amended•.Mnlld .Blldaet Amcut Amount Budael. « 1-5266-535.6301 521707 WW Lift Station Forcemain Replacements 1,673,812 80,000 1,753,812
Justification: The budgeted amount for this project was $237,000 for fiscal year 2019. The City awarded design of the project to King Engineering in the amont of $32,103. The lowest responsive, responsl>le bid for the project was $281 ,815.60. A budget amendment of $80,000 from fund balance to account#-«1-5266-535.6301 will be required k> complete this project.
City Cuaa•shtffl Appronl: CitJ ...... Approul: - lncreaseJDecreas FLnf Balance -Transas Between DepartJ I elts, net zero - Transfers Between Fl.llds - Transfers Involving Persomel, net zero - lnlerflrld Loan - Trcmsfers Between Acau1ls (ine ilems) - Debt-relaEd wilhin a Depa l11e It .c: $25,000 - TIWISfers Between Capital Accoll1ts a- Projed:s >= $25,000 Depataent Head Approul: - Transters Between Accolllts (ine ilems) - Tnn.fers . Depai:b,eis, net zero, not perscmel wilhin a Oepi:iib1e,t > $25,000 - Transfers Between Projects willirl le Same Aaxult Nll'Tlber < $25,000
Routing:
City Manager Signature (if requi
Fnance Department ------RECEIPT
[])~ • DiPIH owed
fD J 1 BA or BT-= Group: Dale:
~ ·ll'lisliDa.-lllilSiall: Wdten request from Depa &relit D A.caud BalanceJnquiry (tar eacbaca,unt) •
JUL U8 2019 106 Agenda Item: 2.e
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-15
From: Jorge Quintas, Public Works & Utilities Director/Engineer
Subject: Award of Bid 19-2347 – Marina Sailboat Ramp Launch Improvements Project
Presenter(s): Bruce Wirth, P.E. Senior Engineer | Public Works, Engineering
Recommend: Staff recommends to approve the award of a construction contract to Midcoast Marine Group, LLC of Largo, FL, in the amount of $88,135, for the Marina Sailboat Ramp Launch Improvements Project (Bid #19-2347).
Epic Goal(s): Goal #3 – Promote Dunedin as the Premier Coastal Community, protecting and improving our natural resources for the enjoyment of all
Boards & Committees: Marina Advisory Committee
Budget Impact: Funds in the amount of $35,000 for this project were budgeted in FY 19 in the General Fund (Acct. #001-4647-572-054610-CR), under Project #461905. A budget amendment appropriating $55,000 from the One Cent Sales Tax Fund (Acct. #134-4647-572-6301) will be required in order to fully fund this work.
Past Action: None
Next Action: None
Attachments: A. Memo of Recommendation (CA).pdf, B. Memo of Recommendation (BW).pdf, C. Bid 2347 Tabulation.pdf, D. Budget Amendment Form.pdf, 107 Background: The Sailboat Ramp Launch Improvements Project is located at the City Marina, at 51 Main Street, Dunedin. The ramp will be located in the southwest corner of the marina property and will allow access directly to the Sound / Gulf. The project involves contracting with a company qualified to furnish all materials, labor and equipment necessary to construct a new non-vehicular boat ramp at the City marina, which replaces the previous concrete ramp which was removed by City staff in January 2019, as it had fallen into disrepair and was unsafe. The new ramp will be used to launch small sailboats by the various sailing clubs, and city sailing camps and programs, but will not extend into the water as these boats are wheeled by dollies to transport them onto the beach for launching.
Funds for this work in the amount of $35,000 were budgeted in the FY 19 General Fund (#001-4647-572-054610-CR), under Project #461905. A budget amendment appropriating $55,000 from the One Cent Sales Tax Fund (Acct. #134-4647-572-6301) will be required in order to fully fund this work.
The project was competitively bid and two (2) submittals were received, ranging from a cost of $88,135 to $90,731. Midcoast Marine Group, LLC of Largo, FL provided the most responsive and responsible low bid for this project. Notice to Proceed is planned for the month of October of 2019, with construction to start that same month. Construction is anticipated to be “Substantially Complete” by January of 2020.
Staff hereby recommends approval of the award of this work to Midcoast Marine Group, LLC, in the amount of $88,135, as noted herein.
108 109 ENGINEERING DIVISION P.O.BOX 1348 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34697-1348 (727) 298-3174
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Ankney, Purchasing Agent
FROM: Bruce Wirth, P.E. Senior Engineer | PW – Engineering Division
DATE: July 9, 2019
SUBJECT: Marina Boat Ramp Improvements Project
The City Marina Boat Ramp Improvements Project is located at the City Marina located at 51 Main Street, Dunedin. The ramp will be located in the southwest corner of the marina property and will allow access directly to the Gulf. The project scope consists of the construction of a limited access boat ramp in the same general location of a previous boat ramp removed in January 2019. The project will include construction of ramp, modifications to the existing seawall cap and parking area. The project was budgeted in the Park and Recreation Department’s CIP FY 19 budget. The City received two (2) submittals in response to the bid package for this project. The bids received ranged from $88,135 to $90,731. Midcoast Marine Group, LLC of Largo, FL provided the most responsive and responsible low bid for this project. The contract amount for construction of the project is $88,135.00. The budgeted amount for the construction was $35,000 from Parks FY 19 General Fund budget. Parks completed a budget transfer of $55,000 from FY 19 One Cent Sales Tax Fund, transfer form attached. The account information is, $35,000 budgeted in the FY 19 General Fund (Acct. #001-4647-572-4610, Project #461905) and $55,000 will be transferred from the FY 19 One Cent Sales Tax Fund (Acct. #134-4647-572-6301, Project #461905). If approved by commission, the Notice to Proceed is planned to be issued in September 2019, and substantial completion is expected to be February 2020.
110 111 Fonn Version 08-26-2014
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FL BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
FISCAL YEAR : ------2019 DEPARTMENT: Parks & Recreation
Account Number Project Number Project Name Annual Increase (Decrease) Amended Annual (Reauired) (If applicable) (If applicable) Budget Amount Amount Budoet 134-4647-572-6301 461905 Marina Sailboat Launch Improvements 283,259 55,000 - 338,259 - -
Justification: Additional funds are needed as the project came in over the projected cost estimate.
Required Authorization / Approval:
0 City Commission Approval: City Manager Approval: - Increase/Decrease Fund Balance • - Transfers Between Departments, net zero - Transfers Between Funds - Transfers Involving Personnel, net zero - lnterfund Loan - Transfers Between Accounts (line items) - Debt-related within a Department< $25,000 - Transfers Between Capital Accounts or Projects >= $25,000 De·partment Head Approval: - Transfers Between Accounts (line items) • - Transfers within Departments, net zero, not personnel within a Department> $25,000 - Transfers Between Projects within the Same Account Number< $25,000
Routing: Date: Department Head Signature: 1\3} t9 City Manager Signature (if required): =~====~==~==L==UA='-====:::::::~ 7--JS/c4 Finance Department: ------RECEIPT
City Commission Action:
D Approved Date: D Disapproved Agenda Item No.: Resolution No.:
Finance Department Action: BA or BT#: Group: Initials: Date:
Budget Adjustment Entered Back-up Documentation: Written request from Department • Account Balance Inquiry (for each account) • ' RECEIVED 112 JUL O8 2019
-·,. ~ '-~ Prepared On 7/3/2019 Agenda Item: 3.a
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-17
From: Les Tyler, Director of Finance
Subject: Resolution 19-39 Investment Policy Amendment
Presenter(s): Les Tyler, Director of Finance, David Jang, Water Walker Investments
Recommend: Staff recommends to adopt Resolution 19-39.
Epic Goal(s): Enhance community and employee relationship strategies that strengthen inclusiveness, respect, transparency and collaborative engagement
Boards & Committees: Board of Finance
Budget Impact: none
Past Action: none
Next Action: None
Attachments: A. Resolution 19-39 , B. Exhibit A- Investment Policy , C. Investment Policy Proposed Final red line vesion 7.14.pdf, D. Exhibit C- Eligible and Suitable Investments ,
Background: This memorandum is to provide the Commission a revised Investment Policy (Policy). The Government Finance Officers Association recommends that state and local governments adopt comprehensive written Investment Policies and the that Policy should be reviewed periodically and updated if necessary.
The most recent Investment Policy was approved by the Commission on 113 January 8, 2019. This revised Investment Policy is a replacement of the current policy with the goal of providing credibility, transparency, and to ensure that there is a common understanding among the Commission and staff regarding the City’s approach to Investments for the City. The revised policy does include a red-line version is attached (see exhibit B), as well as the revised policy in final form (see Exhibit A). Finance staff has presented the Draft Investment Policy to the Board of Finance in February and March 2019 for their review and comment. The Board of Finance had some questions and comments on the draft investment policy, all of which have been included in this revised investment policy.
114 RESOLUTION NO 19-39
A RESOLUTION AMENDING A PORTION OF THE INVESTMENT POLICY OF THE CITY OF DUNEDIN REGARDING, ELIGIBLE AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS AND DIVERSIFICATOIN OF INVESTMENTS; AMENDING A PORTION OF SECTION 8 AND SECTION 14 OF THE INVESTMENT POLICY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF.
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to amend the investment policy dated January 8, 2019 for the investment of City funds; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA, IN SESSION DULY AND REGULARLY ASSEMBLED:
SECTION 1. The City Commission desires to amend the Eligible and Suitable Investments and Diversification sections of the investment policy:
SECTION 2. It is hereby ascertained, determined and declared that:
A. The City of Dunedin hereby adopts the “City of Dunedin Investment Policy”, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and hereby incorporates the revision below:
Section 8 – Eligible and Suitable Investments: The types of securities the City may invest in per State Statute, local law and City Commission’s adoption of this Investment Policy have changes in some of the investment types descriptions; which include: b) US Government Agencies and Government Sponsored Enterprises “GSE”; c) Local Government Investment Pools; g) Money Market Savings Accounts; h) Commercial Paper and Corporate Instruments.
Section 14 – Diversification: The City’s diversity of investments by security type, individual security and financial institution shall not exceed certain limits of eligible securities. These limits are now included in the Table (Section 8) of this investment policy. There are changes to some of the investment type’s maximums percentages, which include:
• US Government Agencies and Federal Instruments • Added investment type- Money Market Savings Account. • Local Government Investment Pools • Money Market Mutual Funds • Commercial Paper
SECTION 3: That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon passage and adoption. 115
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA, THIS __ DAY OF ______, 2019.
CITY OF DUNEDIN FLORIDA
______Julie Bujalski Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
______Thomas J. Trask Denise M. Kirkpatrick City Attorney City Clerk
116 Exhibit A
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA
INVESTMENT POLICY
ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 7, 2002
AMENDED February 18, 2010
AMENDED January 8, 2019
AMENDED July 23, 2019
117 1
Investment Policy Table of Contents
1.0 Policy: 4
2.0 Scope: 4
3.0 Prudence: 4
4.0 Investment Objectives: 5
4.1 Safety: 5
4.2 Liquidity: 5
4.3 Transparency: 5
4.4 Return On Investments: 5
5.0 Delegation Of Authority: 6
5.1 Investment Procedures: 6
6.0 Ethics And Conflicts Of Interest: 6
6.1 Interest In Other Business Organizations: 7
6.2 Gifts, Favors, Entertainment And Payments To Employees: 7
7.0 Authorized Financial Broker/Dealers And Financial Institutions: 8
8.0 Eligible And Suitable Investments: 9
9.0 Master Repurchase Agreement: 11
10.0 Local Government Investment Pools And Money Market Funds Due Diligence: 11
11.0 Collateralization: 12
12.0 Bid Requirements: 12
13.0 Safekeeping And Custody: 12 118 2
14.0 Diversification: 13
15.0 Maximum Maturities: 13
16.0 Internal Controls: 14
17.0 Performance Standards: 14
17.0 Market Yield (Benchmarks): 15
18.0 Reporting Requirements: 15
19.0 Investment Policy Adoption: 15
20.0 Glossary (Appendix A): 16
21.0 Continuing Education: 16
22.0 Policy Exception: 16
Appendix A 17
Appendix B 28
Appendix C 29
119 3
1.0 Policy:
It is the policy of the City of Dunedin (“City”) to invest public funds in a manner which will meet the investment objectives set forth in Section 4.0, and comply with all controlling state statues, ordinances, and covenants governing the investment of public funds.
2.0 Scope:
Considering the exception below, this investment policy applies to all financial cash and investment assets of the City. These funds are accounted for in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and include:
a) General Fund b) Special Revenue Funds c) Debt Service and Debt Service Reserve Funds (unless governed under bond documents) d) Capital Project Funds (unless governed by bond documents) e) Permanent Funds f) Enterprise Funds g) Internal Service Funds h) Private Purpose, or Special Grant Trust Funds i) Agency Funds j) Any new fund created by the City Commission, unless specifically exempted.
Exception: The Investment Policy shall not apply to pension funds or funds related to the issuance of debt where there are other existing policies, bond resolutions, loan agreements, or indentures in effect for such funds. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, debt proceeds will not be subject to section 14.0- Diversification limits set forth in this policy.
3.0 Prudence:
Prudent Person Rule: Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived from the investment.
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the “prudent person rule” and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. The Director of the Finance Department, hereinafter referred to as Director, and other authorized staff approved by the Director, acting in accordance with written procedures and the Investment Policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from reasonable expectations are reported in a timely fashion by the Director to the City Manager and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. 120 4
The City Manager has the discretion to report any material events to the City Commission.
4.0 Investment Objectives:
The primary objectives, in priority order, of the City’s investment activities shall be:
4.1 Safety:
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain this objective, the City will diversify its investments by investing funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns with a number of preapproved financial institutions.
A. Credit Risk - The City will limit credit risk, the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer, by diversifying the investment portfolio so that potential losses on individual securities will be minimized and by limiting investments to specified minimum credit ratings. B. Interest Rate Risk - The City will minimize the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall due to changes in general interest rates by limiting the maximum maturity of any individual security and the duration of the overall portfolio to five years.
4.2 Liquidity:
The City’s investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating requirements, which may be reasonably anticipated, and also remain in compliance with any existing fiscal, financial covenant, or fund balance policies.
4.3 Transparency:
The City shall operate its portfolio in a transparent manner, making its periodic reports both available for public inspection and designed in a manner which communicates clearly and fully information about the portfolio, including market values, initial book values, investment type, maturity dates, yields, percentage of total portfolio by security and security type, and CUSIPs (Committee on Uniform Security Identification Procedures) of various securities.
4.4 Return on Investments:
The City’s investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a benchmark(s) or market comparable rate of return per Section 17.1 throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the City’s investment risk constraints and the portfolio’s cash flow characteristics. Return on investment is of secondary importance compared to the safety, liquidity and transparency objectives described above.
121 5
5.0 Delegation of Authority:
Authority to manage the City’s investment program is granted to the Director.
Responsibility for the operation of the investment program is hereby delegated to the Director, who shall act in accordance with established written procedures and internal controls for the operation of the investment program consistent with this investment policy.
The Director shall be responsible for all transactions undertaken and shall establish, maintain, and update, as needed, a system of internal controls and procedures to regulate the activities of subordinate authorized staff, and administrative staff. Assistance will be provided, as needed, by a Financial Consultant, and also reviewed on an annual basis by the City’s outside auditing firm.
5.1 Investment Procedures:
The Director shall establish, and review and update as needed, written investment policy procedures that includes a system of internal controls for the operation of the investment program consistent with this policy.
These procedures shall be reviewed, as needed, by the City’s Financial Consultant, and with the City Manager, as needed. They will include, but not be limited to, the procedures and processes to identify and address cash flow requirements, security or investment selection, procurement, authorizations required for various actions, settlement and disposal. The procedures will also include reference to: safekeeping or custodian arrangements, repurchase agreements, wire transfer process and authorization documentation, banking service contracts and collateral/depository agreements.
As noted, to insure an appropriate level of review and checks and balances, such procedures shall include explicit delegation of authority to persons responsible for investment decisions, wire transfers, communications with investment or banking firms, and transactions. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this policy and the more specific procedures established by the Director.
6.0 Ethics and Conflicts of Interest:
City Staff directly involved in the investment process shall refrain from activities that could conflict with either the proper execution and management of the investment program or impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions.
It is imperative that City Staff conduct themselves with a degree of honesty, transparency, and integrity which is beyond reproach or even suspicion. At all times, City Staff will act in strict accordance and consistent with the Florida ethics law as found in Chapter 112, Part 3 F.S. 122 6
While it is not possible to anticipate every situation and prescribe a precise rule for each, it is possible to set forth certain basic, general principles to be observed by City Staff authorized to be involved in the City’s investment process at all times. The essence of this policy is that authorized City Staff shall always deal with others doing, or seeking to do, business with the City in a manner that professionally represents the interest of the City and excludes all consideration of personal advantage. Accordingly, all authorized City Staff as determined by the Director involved in the Investment Process shall complete and keep current an ‘Investment Process Conflict of Interest Policy Disclosure Form’ to be filed with the Director (per Appendix B), with a copy provided also to the City Manager and City Clerk, and further, every authorized City Staff member involved with the investment process of the City is subject to the following policy:
6.1 Interest in Other Business Organizations:
City Staff involved in the City’s investment process, or any members of their immediate families, shall not have any material interest, direct or indirect, in any other business which in any degree conflicts with their primary responsibility to the City. In this regard, City Staff or members of their immediate families should not possess a significant financial ownership or management interest in any business that does, or seeks to do, business with the City. In addition, City Staff involved with the investment process should not conduct business on behalf of the City with members of their immediate family (persons residing in the same household as the City Staff member), or a business organization with which they or members of their immediate families have any association which could be construed as significant in terms of potential conflict of interest. This does not preclude an authorized City Staff member from maintaining standard checking, depository, or other non-investment related services with a banking, financial, or investment banking firm in the normal course of those activities.
6.2 Gifts, Favors, Entertainment and Payments to Employees:
City Staff involved in the investment process shall not seek or accept any gifts, payments, fees, services, valuable privileges, “insider trading” or other nonpublic, confidential investment or financial information, vacations or pleasure trips, loans (other than conventional loans or banking services from lending institutions) or other favors from any person or business organization that does, or seeks to do, business with the City. The term gift will include all matters or transactions as that term is defined in Chapter 112 F.S. No authorized employee or Officer shall accept anything of value in exchange for referral of parties to any person or business organization that does, or seeks to do, business with the City.
City Staff involved in the City’s investment decisions shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual or firm with whom business is conducted on behalf of the City. Any preexisting relationships will be disclosed for any newly hired or authorized City Staff at the time of execution of the Disclosure Statement noted in Section 6.0., with a copy provided to the City Manager and City Clerk.
123 7
7.0 Authorized Financial Broker/Dealers and Financial Institutions:
The Director, with assistance as needed by the City’s Financial Consultant, will maintain a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment services. In addition, a list will also be maintained of approved security broker-dealer firms selected by minimum standards of credit worthiness, capital, and other qualifications that are authorized to provide investment services in the State of Florida. These may include “primary” dealers or regional dealers that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-1 (uniform net capital rule).
No public deposit shall be made except in a Qualified Public Depository (“QPD”) authorized to hold Florida public deposit accounts per Chapter 280, Florida Statutes, with these reviewed on an annual basis, with assistance from the City’s Financial Consultant, as needed. Per Chapter 280, it is the City’s responsibility to maintain a current and up-to-date file on each QPD firm and related QPD investment. It is also important to require that any QPD firm providing, or seeking to provide, investment securities to the City also provide a copy of its most recently available Annual Financial Statement, and, as available, copies of any recent rating agency’s reports confirming any short-term and long-term credit ratings.
Security broker-dealers and financial institutions shall be aware and as part of their normal industry standard responsibilities related to disclosure and suitability, provide to authorized City Staff, information prior to the time of security purchase that includes reasonably foreseeable risks of market price loss, illiquidity, non-marketability, or default of investment instruments before they are purchased by the City.
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply, and agree to update as needed, the Director with the following:
a) Audited, fiscal year end, financial statements, b) Proof of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) or equivalent industry certification, c) Proof of State of Florida registration and licenses, d) Executed Certificate by an authorized Officer of their firm that they have read, understood and agree to comply with the City’s Investment Policy, including the ongoing responsibility to provide annual audited financial statements and any other material information regarding either their firm or any investment that they may have sold to the City.
An annual review of the financial condition and registrations of qualified bidders will be conducted by the Director, with assistance, as needed, by the City’s Financial Consultant.
A current audited financial statement is required to be on file for each financial institution and broker/dealer in which the City invests within a reasonable time following that institution’s fiscal year end.
124 8
8.0 Eligible and Suitable Investments:
The City is empowered by State statute, local law, and the City Commission’s adoption of this Investment Policy to invest in the following types of securities:
a) The United States Treasury: Direct Obligations issued by the Treasury of the United States, that has the full faith and credit of the United States government fully guaranteeing all principal and interest payments including, but not limited to:
U.S. Treasury Bills, U.S. Treasury Notes, and U.S. Treasury Bonds.
b) US Government Agencies and Government Sponsored Enterprises (“GSE”): Direct obligations issued by an Agency of the United States, that has the full faith and credit of the United States government fully guaranteeing all principal and interest payments including, but not limited to:
1. Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) 2. Federal Housing Authority (“FHA”), 3. Veterans Administration (“VA”), and 4. Small Business Administration (“SBA”).
125 9
GSE’s or Instrumentalities do not carry the full faith and credit support of the United Stated Government and have to varying degrees indirect/explicit backing the United States. The GSE Securities must be rated at least AAA/Aaa/AAA long-term from two of the rating agencies, Fitch, Moody’s, or Standard & Poor’s, issued by:
1. Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) 2. Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) 3. Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or “Fannie Mae”) 4. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Association (FHLMC or “Freddie Mac”) 5. Federal Agriculture Mortgage Corporation
Any other GSE shall be considered as Corporate debt and authorized per Section (h), with input from the Financial Consultant, as needed, and updated reports and credit structure material from the City’s Broker/Dealer assisting on this security transaction. c) Local Government Investment Pools: Shares in Local Government Investment Pools (LGIP’s) organized under Chapter 163, Part I, Florida Statutes and rated at least AAAm or equivalent from Fitch, Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s. d) The State Board of Administration (“SBA” or “Florida Prime”): Shares in the SBA , authorized under Chapter 218, Part IV, Florida Statutes. At the time of purchase, the SBA must carry either a AAAm or equivalent rating from Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s or Fitch. e) State & Local Governments: General or revenue debt obligations, including Build America Bonds or Notes, issued by the State of Florida or any political subdivisions thereof, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, rated at least A/A from at least two of either Fitch, Moody’s, or Standard & Poor’s due to the presence of any credit enhancement, with the direct issuer or obligor also having a minimum underlying credit rating on its own of “A” from a least two of the rating agencies. Notwithstanding either the credit enhancement rating or underlying rating, this does not include any Community Development District (“CDD”), Housing Finance Authority, Health Care Authority, Educational Development Authority, or any other conduit issuer securities. f) Money Market Mutual Funds: Shares in Money Market Mutual Funds registered under the federal “Investment Company Act of 1940”, as amended, at the time of purchase, a money market fund shall have a rating of at least AAAm or equivalent by Standard & Poors, Fitch or Moody’s. g) Money Market Savings Accounts or Certificates of Deposit: Deposits organized under the laws of Florida and/or in national banks organized under the laws of the United States and doing business and situated in Florida as Qualified Public Deposits, provided that any such deposits are secured and collateralized by the Florida Security for Public Deposits Act, F.S. Chapter 280, and that the firm is not on a credit watch information service from a nationally-recognized rating agency firm. 126 10
h) Commercial Paper and Corporate Debt Instruments: U.S. dollar denominated debt instruments issued by corporations or banks organized and doing business in the U.S., having a minimum of (a) two short term ratings of at least A1, P-1, and F1, from Standard & Poors, Moody’s or Fitch, respectively, and (b) two long term ratings of A-/A3/A- , respectively from either Fitch, Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s.
i) Repurchase Agreements: These securities must be collateralized with a minimum of 102% with securities noted in either (a) or (b) of this Section, be rated at least A1, P1, or F1 from Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s or Fitch, be marked to market no less frequently than weekly, and must have a coupon rate that is fixed from the time of settlement until its maturity date, and must be marketable. Said collateral to be held by the trust department of the City’s safekeeping bank, main operating bank’s safekeeping or trust department, or the City’s custodian bank, and securities governed by Section 9.
The use of derivatives is prohibited.
9.0 Master Repurchase Agreement:
Institutions and dealers transacting repurchase agreements shall execute and perform as stated in the City’s standard Master Repurchase Agreement, as approved by the Director, and reviewed, as needed, by the City’s Financial Consultant.
10.0 Local Government Investment Pools and Money Market Funds Due Diligence:
A thorough investigation of the LGIP or Fund authorized in Section 8(c) and 8(f) is required prior to investing, and on a continual basis. There shall be a Government Finance Officer’s or other industry, or comparable community relevant questionnaire developed by the Director, with assistance as needed by the Financial Consultant, that is utilized to review the proposed LGIP or Money Market Fund.
The key components of this due diligence process will include information that addresses the following typical questions:
• A description of eligible investment securities, and a written statement of Investment Policy and objectives. • A description of interest calculations and how it is distributed, and how gains and losses are treated. • An overview of LGIP or Fund oversight, board composition, portfolio manager information and reputation, degree of transparency. • A description of how the securities are safeguarded (including the settlement processes), how often the securities are priced and frequency of LGIP or Fund auditing process. 127 11
• A description of who may invest or participate in the program, how often, what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed, reporting capabilities to assist with City audit requirements and potential IRS Arbitrage requirements (if tax exempt bond proceeds are included), and frequency of interest payments. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings, or ability to obtain same via online security protected access. • The average duration or maturity of the LGIP or Fund. • Full disclosure of the fee schedule, and when and how is it assessed or paid. • Is the LGIP or Fund eligible for bond proceeds?
11.0 Collateralization:
Collateralization will be required on three types of investments: non-negotiable, Interest-bearing time certificates of deposit, other qualified public deposits (QPD’s) per Section 8(g), and repurchase agreements per Section 8(i). Collateralization for these investment types is provided with each investment type.
The City chooses to limit collateral to Direct Obligations of United States per Section 8(a).
The right of collateral substitution is granted, so long as the process for same is clearly laid out. The process commonly referred to as “securities lending” is not permitted without the prior approval of the Director, and sufficient review and recommendation of the City’s Financial Consultant.
12.0 Bid Requirements:
Director and other City staff authorized by the Director, with assistance from the Financial Consultant, as needed, shall determine the approximate maturity dates for investment securities based on cash-flow needs and forecasts, current market conditions, and ongoing budgetary and liquidity requirements. Once analyzed and one or more optimal types of investments are identified and selected, the Director, or authorized City staff , with assistance from the City’s Financial Consultant, as needed, will then work directly, or through approved broker/dealers, banks or financial institutions, to purchase the selected security or investment by a competitively bid process, when feasible and appropriate. This process should assist with creating an open process, and acceptable levels of market yields and fees, while also encouraging mutually beneficial relationships with prequalified firms. Except as otherwise required by law, the bidding or selection process deemed to best meet the investment objectives as determined by the Director, supported as needed by the City’s Financial Consultant, should be selected.
13.0 Safekeeping and Custody:
All security transactions, including collateral for repurchase agreements, entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery-versus-payment (“DVP”) basis. Securities will 128 12
be held by a third party custodian approved by the Director, and all transactional activity evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
All securities purchased by, and all collateral obtained by, the City should be properly designated as an asset of the City of Dunedin. Withdrawal of securities from safekeeping or custodial accounts, in whole or in part, shall not be made except by the Director or other City staff authorized by the Director. A copy of any Safekeeping or Custodial Agreement will be provided to the City Manager and City Clerk.
14.0 Diversification:
The City will diversify its investments by security type, individual security and financial institution. The City shall not exceed the following aggregate limits of eligible securities per Section 8 by security type/individual issuer.
No more than 50% of the City’s total investment portfolio will be invested with, or handled by, a single financial institution or broker/dealer. This excludes the City having one financial institution or trustee handle all of its safekeeping requirements per Section 13.0.
Compliance with the percentage limitations above shall be determined by the Director, or other Finance Staff authorized by the Director, when the security is purchased, and reviewed on a quarterly basis by the City’s Financial Consultant.
15.0 Maximum Maturities:
To the extent possible, the City will attempt to match the maturity dates of its investments with the anticipated cash flow requirements. Current operating funds may not be invested in any security having a maturity of greater than12 months. Unless matched to a specific cash flow or restricted fund, gift or grant related fund, the City will not directly invest in securities covering non-operating funds maturing more than five (5) years from the date of purchase.
Debt Service Reserve Funds may be invested in securities of up to five (5) years, if permitted by bond documents, and if the maturity of such investments is made to coincide as nearly as practical with the potential expected use of the funds.
The Investment Portfolio’s weighted average maturity shall not exceed 3 years.
Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds such as LGIPs, money market funds, QPD’s or repurchase agreements to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained to meet ongoing City obligations or unexpected requirements.
129 13
16.0 Internal Controls:
The Director is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure City assets are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. The internal controls shall address the following points:
• Control of collusion • Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping • Custodial safekeeping • Avoidance of physical delivery securities • Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members • Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers • Development, or update as needed, of a wire transfer agreement with the City’s lead operating bank and third-party custodian.
The City Auditor shall review internal controls of this investment policy and its related operating procedures on an annual basis. This review will confirm the levels of internal control by assuring compliance with policies and procedures.
17.0 Performance Standards:
The Investment Portfolio, after insuring the primary objectives of Safety, Liquidity, and Transparency, shall then be designed with the secondary objective of obtaining an acceptable market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the City’s cash flow needs.
130 14
17.0 Market Yield (Benchmarks):
The City’s investment strategy is passive. Given this strategy, the basis used by the Director to determine whether acceptable market yields are being achieved shall be: A. Operating Funds: 0 to 1.5 years: Standard & Poor’s LGIP Index or comparable indice. B. Non-Operating Funds: 1-5 years: Merrill Lynch 1-3 year Treasury Index or comparable indice.
Given constantly changing market conditions, the Director, following advice from the City’s Financial Consultant, may choose to replace any of the above-referenced performance benchmarks as needed, so as to more accurately monitor the portfolio’s performance.
18.0 Reporting Requirements:
As part of one of the key City objectives of Transparency, the Director shall provide the City Manager and City Commission with quarterly investment reports, which provide a clear picture of the status of the current investment portfolio. A copy of this quarterly report will also be provided to the Investment Sub-Committee of the Board of Finance, and reviewed by the City’s Financial Consultant. The investment report should include overview comments from the Director, current and relevant information on the fixed income capital and financial markets, update on general economic conditions, discussions regarding any recommended restrictions on percentage of investment by investment type or categories, possible changes in the portfolio structure going forward, and thoughts on investment strategies.
Schedules in the quarterly report should include the following:
• A listing of individual securities held at the end of the reporting period by authorized investment type per Section 8, • Average weighted yield to maturity of portfolio on investments as compared to applicable benchmarks, • Average life and final maturity of all investments listed, • Coupon, yield and earnings rate • Par Value, Amortized Book Value and Market Value, • Percentage of the Portfolio represented by each investment type per the limits set forth in Section 14.
Such reports shall be made available to the public pursuant to Chapter 119 F.S.
19.0 Investment Policy Adoption:
The City’s investment policy shall be adopted by resolution of the City Commission. The Investment Sub-Committee of the Board of Finance may review the policy annually
131 15
with the Director, and Financial Consultant, as needed. Any changes to the Investment Policy must be approved by the City Manager and City Commission.
20.0 Glossary (Appendix A):
This policy is to be available to various stakeholders (citizens, City Commission, City staff, investors, bondholders, financial institutions, rating agencies, and broker/dealers). The City has included a glossary of industry terminology in Appendix A for reference purposes only.
21.0 Continuing Education:
Per Florida Statutes, the Director, as the designated Investment Officer of the City, and any other City staff authorized by the Director to be involved with making investment decisions, must annually complete eight (8) hours of continuing education in subjects or courses of study related to investment practices and products. Copies of this annual compliance will be provided to the City Manager and the City Clerk.
22.0 Policy Exception:
Any investment currently held that does not meet the guidelines of this policy shall be exempted from the requirements of this policy. At maturity or liquidation, such monies shall be reinvested only as provided by this policy.
132 16
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY
UPDATED FEBRUARY 1, 2019
ACCRUED INTEREST: The accumulated interest due on a bond, calculated as of the last interest payment made by the issuer to the date of calculation.
AGENCY: A debt security issued by a federal agency or federally sponsored agency. Federal agencies’ obligations to make principal and interest payments are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. These are listed as part of the US Treasury class of permitted investments due to the full backing of the United States Governments and, in part, for state statute reference issues. Agencies are not typically purchased by municipalities as their issuance volume has been historically small, and they have traditionally issued only mortgage backed securities i.e. GNMA.
AMORTIZATION: The systematic reduction of the amount owed on a debt issue through periodic payments of principal.
ASKED: The price at which securities are offered.
BASIS POINT: A unit of measurement used in the valuation of fixed-income securities equal to 1/100 of 1%, e.g. “1/4 of 1% equals 25 basis points.
BANKER’S ACCEPTANCE (BAs): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer. Banker’s Acceptance is not directly cited by City’s Investment Policy, but it is allowable if it meets either the QPD or collateral requirements.
BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio’s operating or non-operating portion of its Investment Portfolio.
BID: The price offered by a buyer of securities. (When you are selling securities, you are asking for a bid.) See Offer.
BOOK VALUE: The value at which a security is carried on the inventory lists or other financial records of an investor. The book value may differ significantly from the security’s current value in the market.
BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together on an investment transaction for a commission.
133 17
CALL PRICE: The price at which an issuer may redeem a bond prior to maturity. The price is usually at a slight premium to the bond’s original issue price to compensate the holder for loss of income and ownership.
CALL RISK: The risk to a bondholder that a bond may be redeemed prior to maturity.
CALLABLE BOND: A bond issue in which all or part of its outstanding principal amount may be redeemed before maturity by the issuer under specified conditions.
CASH SALE/PURCHASE: A transaction, which calls for delivery and payment of securities on the same day that the transaction is initiated.
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a certificate. Large-denomination CD’s are typically negotiable.
COLLATERALIZATION: Process by which a borrower, or investment provider, pledges securities, property, or other deposits for the purpose of securing the repayment obligation of a loan and/or sold security to an investor.
COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured short-term promissory note issued by corporations or financial institutions, with maturities ranging from 2 to 270 days. Commercial paper is typically assigned short term ratings from at least two of the three nationally-recognized rating agencies: Fitch, Moody’s, or Standard & Poor’s.
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official consolidated annual audit report for the City of Dunedin. It includes multiple combined statements for each individual fund, enterprise and account group prepared in conformity with GAAP. It also includes supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions, financial covenants, extensive introductory material, and a detailed Statistical Section.
COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a securities’ issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.
CREDIT QUALITY: The measurement of either the bond issuer’s or security’s financial strength issued by nationally recognized rating agencies. Generally, the higher the credit quality of a bond issuer or security, the lower the interest rate paid by the issuer because the risk of default is lower. Issuers and certain securities can obtain short-term and long-term ratings.
CREDIT RISK: Investor’s risk that an issuer will default in the payment of interest and/or principal on a security.
CURRENT YIELD (CURRENT RETURN): A yield calculation determined by dividing the annual interest received on a security by the current market price of that security.
CURRENT EXPENSES: Expenses to meet known cash needs and anticipated cash- flow requirements for the short term. 134 18
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
DEBENTURE: An unsecured bond or fixed income security backed only by the general full faith and credit of the issuer.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT: A type of securities transaction in which the purchaser pays for the securities when they are delivered either to the purchaser or his/her custodian or safekeeping institution. (Note: Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.)
DERIVATIVE SECURITIES: Financial instruments whose value depends on, or is derived from, the value of one or more underlying assets, interest rates, index or asset values. To meet industry suitability standards, investment in derivatives should require a higher level of Staff knowledge and due diligence. Not permitted by City Investment Policy at this time.
DISCOUNT: The amount by which the par value of a security exceeds the price paid for the security, excluding accrued interest.
DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that are issued a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value, e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills.
DIVERSIFICATION: A process of investing eligible City assets among a range of security types, with further protections of credit and interest rate risk by also setting maturity, and minimum rating requirements. Comparable to an individual portfolio’s objective to spread the risk via buying multiple types of fixed income and equity securities so as to minimize risk to meet their suitability level and objectives.
FAIR VALUE: The amount at which an investment could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale.
FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L’s, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE COPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The daily rate of interest at which funds are traded among banks through the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve, through open-market helps to influence interest rates.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks), which lend funds and provide corresponding banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and insurance 135 19
companies. The mission of the FHLBs is to liquefy the housing-related assets of its members who must purchase stock in their district Bank.
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like GNMA, was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal, private stockholder-owned corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It has traditionally been the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. The corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA’s securities traditionally have been highly liquid and widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest. Recent housing market and securities issues have put some of this under review.
FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money. Their policy actions help to set the daily Federal Funds and Discount Rates. Its Chairman traditionally plays a major role, as head of this independent entity, in the markets with his/her testimony, and increasingly global coordination with other overseas Foreign Heads of State and Central Banks.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and approximately 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
FISCAL TRAUMA AND FEDERAL ACTIONS: Many exotic instruments resulted in an ever changing area of the investment market, recent economic trauma since the summer of 2008, and particularly related to certain types of securities, i.e., collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs), structured investments, etc. Current macroeconomic reviews, SEC and congressional investigations are underway, as are ongoing significant newly-employed federal fiscal and monetary policies and Federal Reserve actions.
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA OR Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. The FHA, VA or FmHA mortgages back Ginnie Mae securities. The term “pass- through” is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTITIES: Federal Government Sponsored Entities (GSE’s) are backed by each particular agency to various levels of support, subject to change by Federal Legislation, with a general market perception that there is an implicit government guarantee. 136 20
INTEREST RATE RISK: The risk associated with declines or rises in interest rates, which cause an investment in a fixed-income security to increase or decrease in value.
INTERNAL CONTROLS: A series of policies and procedures designed to ensure that the assets of the entity are protected from loss, theft, or misuse. Some key areas typically addressed can include the following points: 1. Control of collusion – Collusion is a situation where two or more employees are working in conjunction to defraud their employer. 2. Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping – By separating the person who authorizes or performs the transaction from the people who record or otherwise account for the transaction, a separation of duties is achieved. 3. Custodial safekeeping – Securities purchased from any bank or dealer including appropriate collateral (as defined by state law) shall be placed with an independent third party for custodial safekeeping. 4. Avoidance of physical delivery securities – Book-entry securities in the name of the City are much easier to transfer and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place. Delivered securities must be properly safeguarded against loss or destruction. The potential for fraud and loss increases with physically delivered securities. 5. Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members – Subordinate staff members must have a clear understanding of their authority and responsibilities from the Finance Director so as to avoid improper actions. Clear delegation of authority also preserves the internal control structure that is contingent on the various staff positions and their respective responsibilities. 6. Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers – Due to the potential for error and improprieties arising from telephone and electronic transactions, all transactions should be supported by written communications and approved by the appropriate person. Written communications may be via fax if on letterhead and if the safekeeping or custodial institution on behalf of the City has a list of authorized signatures. 7. Development of a wire transfer agreement with the lead bank and third- party custodian or safekeeping institution – The Finance Director, or other Finance Staff member authorized by the Finance Director, should ensure that an agreement will be entered into and will address the following points: controls, security provisions, and responsibilities of each party making and receiving wire transfers.
INVERTED YIELD CURVE: A graphic representation illustrating short-term securities having higher yields than long-term securities. This configuration has historically occurred during periods of high inflation, low levels of confidence in the economy and a restrictive monetary policy.
INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940: Federal legislation which sets the standards by which investment companies, such as mutual funds, are regulated in the areas of advertising, promotion, performance reporting requirements, and securities valuations.
LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money markets, a security is said to be liquid 137 21
if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL (LGIP): The aggregate of all funds from various governments or political subdivisions that are placed in custody for investment and reinvestment. LGIPs typically are governed by a board of either peer Government Investment Officers, or as with the SBA, a group of Elected Officials. Daily operations run by either LGIP staff or an outside Portfolio Manager providing assistance.
MARK-TO-MARKET: The process whereby the book value or collateral value of a security is adjusted to reflect its current market value. Required as part of a City’s annual audit, and to be provided as part of the City’s quarterly reporting process.
MARKET RISK: The risk that a security’s value will rise or decline as a result of changes in market conditions.
MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold.
MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all future transactions between the parties to repurchase certain securities and sets forth each party’s rights in the transactions. A master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities as Collateral in the event of default by the seller-borrower.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUND: Mutual funds can invest in a wide range of investments, and for City investment purposes, Money Market Mutual Funds, upon review, typically invest solely in money market instruments (short-term debt instruments, such as Treasury bills, commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, repos and federal funds) that are also permitted directly by the City’s Investment Policy.
MUTUAL FUND: An investment company that pools money and can invest in a variety of securities, including fixed-income securities and money market instruments. Mutual funds are regulated by the Investment Company Act of 1940 and must abide by the following Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) disclosure guidelines: 1. Report standardized performance calculations. 2. Disseminate timely and accurate information regarding the fund’s holdings, performance, management and general investment policy. 3. Have the fund’s investment policies and activities supervised by a board of trustees, which are independent of the adviser, administrator or other vendor of the fund. 4. Maintain the daily liquidity of the fund’s shares. 5. Value their portfolios on a daily basis. 6. Have all individuals who sell SEC-registered products licensed with a self- regulating organization. 138 22
7. Have an investment policy governed by a prospectus, which is updated and filed with the SEC annually.
NET ASSET VALUE: The market value of one share of an investment company, such as a mutual fund or local government investment pool. This figure is calculated by totaling a fund’s or LGIP’s assets which include securities, cash, and any accrued earnings, subtracting this from the fund’s liabilities and dividing this total by the number of shares outstanding. This is calculated once a day based on the closing price for each security in the fund’s portfolio.
NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STATISTICAL RATING ORGANIZATION (NRSRO): Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and FITCH IBCA are the three major national rating agencies. Additionally, Thomson Bank Watch and some other firms are available for financial institution ratings only.
NO LOAD FUND: A mutual fund, which does not levy a sales charge on the purchase of its shares.
NOMINAL YIELD: The stated rate of interest that a bond pays its current owner, based on par value of the security. It is also known as the “coupon”, “coupon rate” or “interest rate.”
OFFER: The price asked by a seller of securities. (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer.) See Asked.
OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are one of the Federal Reserve’s most important and flexible monetary policy tools.
PAR VALUE: Face value or principal value of a bond, typically $1,000 per bond.
POSITIVE (NORMAL) YIELD CURVE: A graphic representation illustrating short-term securities having lower yields than long-term securities. Typically seen as an indicator of inflationary expectations and a growth economy.
PREMIUM: The amount by which the price paid for a security exceeds the security’s par value.
PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor.
PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers who submit weekly reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)-registered securities broker/dealers and commercial, banking organizations subject to official supervision by the U.S. Federal bank. 139 23
PRIME RATE: A preferred interest rate charged by commercial banks to their most creditworthy customers. Many interest rates for consumers such as Home Equity Lines are keyed to this rate.
PRINCIPAL: The face value or par value of a debt instrument. Also may refer to the amount of capital invested in a given security.
PROSPECTUS OR OFFICIAL STATEMENT: A legal document that must be provided to any prospective purchaser of a new securities offering registered with the SEC, or typically provided for SEC-exempt securities such as municipal bonds or notes. This can include information on the issuer, the issuer’s business, the proposed use of proceeds, the experience of the issuer’s management, credit ratings, proposed source of repayment of principal and interest, timing and frequency of payments, and certain certified financial statements.
QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the City under a State Treasurer overseen program, some level of eligible collateral (levels vary on size of bank) and which has been approved by the Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits. Banks agree to severally and jointly support each other’s’ obligations for public deposits, with the responsibility to maintain confirmation of a QPD written letter confirming the level of investment and collateral assigned to the City.
RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized Yield To Maturity (“YTM”) on a bond or the current income return.
REINVESTMENT RISK: The risk that a fixed-income investor will be unable to reinvest income proceeds from a security in its Portfolio at the same rate of return currently generated by that holding.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed date. The security “buyer” in effect lends the “seller” money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. Dealers and banks have traditionally used RPs extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is said to be doing RP, it is lending money that is increasing bank reserves.
SEC RULE 2A-7 OF THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT: Applies to all money market mutual funds. This mandates such funds to maintain certain minimal standards, including a 13-month maturity limit and a 90-day average maturity on investments, so as to help maintain a constant Net Asset Value (“NAV”) of one dollar ($1.00). Market refers to this as trading to maintain the buck or dollar.
140 24
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by financial institutions for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank’s or Trust Departments, or Custodian for protection.
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues and securities following the initial distribution.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC): Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.
SEC RULE 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
SHORT-TERM: A maximum of 6 months of operation.
STRUCTURED NOTES: Notes traditionally issued by U.S. Government Agencies, or Government Sponsored Enterprises (FHLB, FNMA, SLMA, etc.) and Corporations, which have imbedded options (e.g., call features, step-up coupons, floating rate coupons, derivative-based returns) into their debt structure. Their market performance is impacted by the fluctuation of interest rates, the volatility of the imbedded options and shifts in the shape of the yield curve.
SURPLUS FUNDS: Any funds in any general or special account or fund of a unit of local government, or funds held by an independent trustee on behalf of a unit of local government, which in reasonable contemplation will not be immediately needed for the purposes intended.
SWAP: Trading one asset for another.
TOTAL RETURN: The sum of all investment income plus changes in the capital value of the portfolio. For mutual funds, return on an investment is composed of share price appreciation plus any realized dividends or capital gains.
TREASURY BILLS: Short-term U.S. government non-interest bearing discount securities with maturities of no longer than one year and issued in minimum denominations of $10,000. Auctions of three- and six-month bills are weekly, while auctions of one-year bills are monthly. The yields on these bills are monitored closely in the money markets for signs of interest rate trends.
TREASURY BONDS: Long-term U.S. government securities with maturities of ten years (or longer) and issued in minimum denominations of $1,000.
TREASURY NOTES: Intermediate U.S. government or agency debt securities with maturities of one to ten years and issued in denominations ranging from $1,000 to $1 million or more.
UNIFORM NET CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms, as well as nonmember broker/dealers in securities, maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio. Subject to review at Federal Level. Indebtedness covers all money 141 25
owed to a firm, including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one- reason new public issues are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
VOLATILITY: A degree of fluctuation in the price and valuation of securities.
“VOLATILITY RISK” RATING: A rating system to assist with identifying the level of volatility and other non-credit risks associated with securities and certain bond funds. The ratings for bond funds range from those that have extremely low sensitivity to changing market conditions and offer the greatest stability of the returns (“AAA” by S&P; “V-1” by Fitch) to those that are highly sensitive with currently identifiable market volatility risk (“CCC” by S&P, “V-10” by Fitch). Comparable to measures used to track volatility of equities and equity mutual funds.
WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (“WAM”): The average maturity of all the securities that comprise a portfolio. According to SEC Rule 2A-7, the WAM for SEC registered money market mutual funds may not exceed 90 days and no one security may have a maturity that exceeds 397 days.
WHEN ISSUED (WI): A conditional transaction in which an authorized new security has not been issued. All “when issued” transactions are settled when the actual security is issued.
YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. Income yield is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security.
YIELD –TO-CALL: The rate of return an investor earns from a bond assuming the bond is redeemed (called) prior to its nominal maturity date.
YIELD-TO-MATURITY (NET YIELD): The current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
YIELD CURVE: A graphic representation depicting the relationship at a given point in time between yields and maturity for bonds or securities that are identical in every way except maturity.
ZERO-COUPON SECURITIES: Securities issued at a discount that make no periodic interest payments. The rate of return consists of a gradual accretion of the principal of the security and is payable at par upon maturity.
DISCLAIMER
WHILE THIS APPENDIX OF GLOSSARY TERMS IS PROVIDED IN THE INTEREST OF BEING INFORMATIVE AND HELPFUL, PLEASE NOTE THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE, DUE TO THE CONTINUING HIGH DEGREE AND
142 26
FREQUENCY OF CHANGES IN THE MARKETS, FEDERAL EXECUTIVE BRANCH, REGULATORY BODY, FEDERAL RESERVE, SEC, AND ONGOING DIRECTIVES AND CHANGES. THE CITY WILL ENDEAVOR TO REVIEW THESE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS ON AN ONGOING ANNUAL BASIS. APPENDIX B
143 27
APPENDIX B
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA
INVESTMENT PROCESS CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY FORM
Complete, sign and return this form directly to:
Finance Director City of Dunedin 750 Milwaukee Avenue Dunedin, Florida 34698
I have read a copy of the City of Dunedin’s Officers and Employees conflict-of-interest policy with respect to the City’s investment process, and have read and understand it. I understand that upon receipt and review the Finance Director will supply a copy of this executed Form to the City Manager and City Clerk.
I further affirm that:
1. I am in compliance with the aforementioned conflict-of-interest policy, and any questions that I may have had in regard to this Policy have been fully addressed to my satisfaction; 2. I will remain in compliance with the aforementioned conflict-of-interest policy; 3. I have reported any breach of the conflict-of-interest policy of which I am aware; and 4. I understand that it is my obligation to report any breaches of the conflict-of- interest policy of which I am aware either through the open door policy, directly to the Finance Director, or City Manager.
The above statements are correct.
The above statements are correct except as indicated below:
I will report promptly through the aforementioned channels any such matters which may develop in the future.
Name (Please print) Signature
Date 144 28
APPENDIX C
City of Dunedin
Investment Procedure (Internal Controls)
1. Investment Portfolio reviewed monthly by Finance Director or Designee, or as securities mature, or events warrant, per prudent person standard. (Input from Financial Consultant, as needed.) 2. Cashflow needs of City, including Liquidity Requirements per Fiscal Policies, Fund Balance requirements, or Commission approved Budgetary or Capital Improvement Needs reviewed, prior to any new Investment decisions. 3. Maximum limits per institution and investment type per Policy also reviewed, as needed with Financial Consultant’s input, with Finance Director, or Designee and Financial Consultant to confirm new Investment security decisions, as well as confirmation of #2 requirements. 4. Any new due diligence requirements on new investments are done, with a Finance Director note to file. 5. Finance Director, or Designee, to communicate new Investment Security decisions to approved broker dealer (s), making sure % of annual business by Investment $, does not exceed Policy limits. 6. Selected Broker Dealer for those trades from City approved list, (with this support rotated so no more that 50% of trades, excluding any money market funds, does not go to any one broker/dealer in a given calendar year) provides market updates by email to Finance Director or Designee. 7. Written authorization for purchase and other information, as needed, for broker/dealer and City’s safekeeping bank, provided regarding the selected investment 8. Upon decision to invest funds, a memo describing the investment is sent to the City Manager for information purposes. 9. Finance Director or Designee confirms purchase of Permitted Investment at market rates in writing to Broker Dealer on DVP Basis to City’s Safekeeping or Custodial Account 10. Finance Director or Designee checks Deal Tickets or Written Confirms from Broker Dealer to confirm correct purchase, along with Safekeeping Bank’s review. 11. Investment Report updated at time of completed Trade by Finance Director or Designee, as Information is readily available. (Quarterly updates are provided to the City Manager and City Commission.) 12. Separate Accounting Staff do Entries into City accounts. (Verified by Finance Director.)
2-5-2010 145 29
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA
INVESTMENT POLICY
ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 7, 2002
AMENDED February 18, 2010
AMENDED January 8, 2019
146 Investment Policy Table of Contents
Section Page
1. Policy…………………………………………………………………………………4
2. Scope………………………………………………………………………………….4
3. Prudence…………………………………………………………….………………...4
4. Investment Objectives………………………………………………………………...5
5. Delegation of Authority………………………………………………………………5
6. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest……………………………………………………….6
7. Authorized Financial Broker/Dealers and Financial Institutions……………………………………………………..…………………...... 7
8. Eligible and Suitable Investments….…….………………………...…….…………...8
9. Master Repurchase Agreement……….……………………………………………...10
10. Local Government Investment Pools and Money Market Funds Due Diligence………………………………………………………………...…………...10
11. Collateralization……………………………………………………………………...11
12. Bid Requirements…………………………………………………………………… 11
13. Safekeeping and Custody…………………………………………………………….12
14. Diversification………………………………………………………………….…… 12
15. Maximum Maturities…………………………………………….………...... 13
16. Internal Control………………………………………...…………………………….13
17. Performance Standards.…..………………………………………………………….14
18. Reporting Requirements…………….………………………….…………..………..14
19. Investment Policy Adoption…………………………………………………………15
20. Glossary……………………………………………………………………………...15
21. Continuing Education ………….……………………………………………………15
22. Policy Exception……..………………..……………………………………………..15 Page 2 | 27
147
Appendix A - Glossary of Terms – For Reverence Purposes Only……………………………..16
Appendix B - Investment Process Conflict of Interest Form…………………...……………….26
Appendix C – City of Dunedin, Florida, Internal Controls…………………………………..….27
Page 3 | 27
148
1. Policy:
It is the policy of the City of Dunedin (“City”) to invest public funds in a manner which will meet the investment objectives set forth in Section 4.0, and comply with all controlling state statues, ordinances, and covenants governing the investment of public funds.
2. Scope:
Considering the exception below, this investment policy applies to all financial cash and investment assets of the City. These funds are accounted for in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and include:
a) General Fund b) Special Revenue Funds c) Debt Service and Debt Service Reserve Funds (unless governed under bond documents) d) Capital Project Funds (unless governed by bond documents) e) Permanent Funds f) Enterprise Funds g) Internal Service Funds h) Private Purpose, or Special Grant Trust Funds i) Agency Funds j) Any new fund created by the City Commission, unless specifically exempted.
Exception: The Investment Policy shall not apply to pension funds or funds related to the issuance of debt where there are other existing policies, bond resolutions, loan agreements, or indentures in effect for such funds. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, debt proceeds will not be subject to section 14.0- Diversification limits set forth in this policy.
3. Prudence:
Prudent Person Rule - Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived from the investment.
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the “prudent person rule” and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. The Director of the Finance Department, hereinafter referred to as Director, and other authorized staff approved by the Director, acting in accordance with written procedures and the Investment Policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from reasonable expectations are reported in a timely fashion by the Director to the City Manager and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. The City Manager has the discretion to report any material events to the City Commission.
Page 4 | 27
149
4.0 Investment Objectives:
The primary objectives, in priority order, of the City’s investment activities shall be:
4.1 Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain this objective, the City will diversify its investments by investing funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns with a number of preapproved financial institutions.
A. Credit Risk - The City will limit credit risk, the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer, by diversifying the investment portfolio so that potential losses on individual securities will be minimized and by limiting investments to specified minimum credit ratings.
B. Interest Rate Risk - The City will minimize the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall due to changes in general interest rates by limiting the maximum maturity of any individual security and the duration of the overall portfolio to five years.
4.2 Liquidity: The City’s investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating requirements, which may be reasonably anticipated, and also remain in compliance with any existing fiscal, financial covenant, or fund balance policies.
4.3 Transparency: The City shall operate its portfolio in a transparent manner, making its periodic reports both available for public inspection and designed in a manner which communicates clearly and fully information about the portfolio, including market values, initial book values, investment type, maturity dates, yields, percentage of total portfolio by security and security type, and CUSIPs (Committee on Uniform Security Identification Procedures) of various securities.
4.4 Return on Investments: The City’s investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a benchmark(s) or market comparable rate of return per Section 17.1 throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the City’s investment risk constraints and the portfolio’s cash flow characteristics. Return on investment is of secondary importance compared to the safety, liquidity and transparency objectives described above.
5.0 Delegation of Authority:
Authority to manage the City’s investment program is granted to the Director.
Responsibility for the operation of the investment program is hereby delegated to the Director, who shall act in accordance with established written procedures and internal controls for the operation of the investment program consistent with this investment policy.
The Director shall be responsible for all transactions undertaken and shall establish, maintain, and update, as needed, a system of internal controls and procedures to regulate the activities of subordinate authorized staff, and administrative staff. Assistance will be provided, as needed, by a Financial Consultant, and also reviewed on an annual basis by the City’s outside auditing firm.
Page 2 | 27
150
5.1 Investment Procedures: The Director shall establish, and review and update as needed, written investment policy procedures that includes a system of internal controls for the operation of the investment program consistent with this policy.
These procedures shall be reviewed, as needed, by the City’s Financial Consultant, and with the City Manager, as needed. They will include, but not be limited to, the procedures and processes to identify and address cash flow requirements, security or investment selection, procurement, authorizations required for various actions, settlement and disposal. The procedures will also include reference to: safekeeping or custodian arrangements, repurchase agreements, wire transfer process and authorization documentation, banking service contracts and collateral/depository agreements.
As noted, to insure an appropriate level of review and checks and balances, such procedures shall include explicit delegation of authority to persons responsible for investment decisions, wire transfers, communications with investment or banking firms, and transactions. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this policy and the more specific procedures established by the Director.
6.0 Ethics and Conflicts of Interest:
City Staff directly involved in the investment process shall refrain from activities that could conflict with either the proper execution and management of the investment program or impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions.
It is imperative that City Staff conduct themselves with a degree of honesty, transparency, and integrity which is beyond reproach or even suspicion. At all times, City Staff will act in strict accordance and consistent with the Florida ethics law as found in Chapter 112, Part 3 F.S.
While it is not possible to anticipate every situation and prescribe a precise rule for each, it is possible to set forth certain basic, general principles to be observed by City Staff authorized to be involved in the City’s investment process at all times. The essence of this policy is that authorized City Staff shall always deal with others doing, or seeking to do, business with the City in a manner that professionally represents the interest of the City and excludes all consideration of personal advantage. Accordingly, all authorized City Staff as determined by the Director involved in the Investment Process shall complete and keep current an ‘Investment Process Conflict of Interest Policy Disclosure Form’ to be filed with the Director (per Appendix B), with a copy provided also to the City Manager and City Clerk, and further, every authorized City Staff member involved with the investment process of the City is subject to the following policy:
1. Interest in Other Business Organizations
City Staff involved in the City’s investment process, or any members of their immediate families, shall not have any material interest, direct or indirect, in any other business which in any degree conflicts with their primary responsibility to the City. In this regard, City Staff or members of their immediate families should not possess a significant financial ownership or management interest in any business that does, or seeks to do, business with the City. In addition, City Staff involved with the investment process should not conduct business on behalf of the City with members of their immediate family (persons residing in the same household as Page 3 | 27
151 the City Staff member), or a business organization with which they or members of their immediate families have any association which could be construed as significant in terms of potential conflict of interest. This does not preclude an authorized City Staff member from maintaining standard checking, depository, or other non-investment related services with a banking, financial, or investment banking firm in the normal course of those activities.
2. Gifts, Favors, Entertainment and Payments to Employees
City Staff involved in the investment process shall not seek or accept any gifts, payments, fees, services, valuable privileges, “insider trading” or other nonpublic, confidential investment or financial information, vacations or pleasure trips, loans (other than conventional loans or banking services from lending institutions) or other favors from any person or business organization that does, or seeks to do, business with the City. The term gift will include all matters or transactions as that term is defined in Chapter 112 F.S. No authorized employee or Officer shall accept anything of value in exchange for referral of parties to any person or business organization that does, or seeks to do, business with the City.
City Staff involved in the City’s investment decisions shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual or firm with whom business is conducted on behalf of the City. Any preexisting relationships will be disclosed for any newly hired or authorized City Staff at the time of execution of the Disclosure Statement noted in Section 6.0., with a copy provided to the City Manager and City Clerk.
7.0 Authorized Financial Broker/Dealers and Financial Institutions:
The Director, with assistance as needed by the City’s Financial Consultant, will maintain a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment services. In addition, a list will also be maintained of approved security broker-dealer firms selected by minimum standards of credit worthiness, capital, and other qualifications that are authorized to provide investment services in the State of Florida. These may include “primary” dealers or regional dealers that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15C3-1 (uniform net capital rule).
No public deposit shall be made except in a Qualified Public Depository (“QPD”) authorized to hold Florida public deposit accounts per Chapter 280, Florida Statutes, with these reviewed on an annual basis, with assistance from the City’s Financial Consultant, as needed. Per Chapter 280, it is the City’s responsibility to maintain a current and up-to-date file on each QPD firm and related QPD investment. It is also important to require that any QPD firm providing, or seeking to provide, investment securities to the City also provide a copy of its most recently available Annual Financial Statement, and, as available, copies of any recent rating agency’s reports confirming any short-term and long-term credit ratings.
Security broker-dealers and financial institutions shall be aware and as part of their normal industry standard responsibilities related to disclosure and suitability, provide to authorized City Staff, information prior to the time of security purchase that includes reasonably foreseeable risks of market price loss, illiquidity, non-marketability, or default of investment instruments before they are purchased by the City.
Page 4 | 27
152
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become qualified bidders for investment transactions must supply, and agree to update as needed, the Director with the following: a) Audited, fiscal year end, financial statements, b) Proof of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) or equivalent industry certification, c) Proof of State of Florida registration and licenses, d) Executed Certificate by an authorized Officer of their firm that they have read, understood and agree to comply with the City’s Investment Policy, including the ongoing responsibility to provide annual audited financial statements and any other material information regarding either their firm or any investment that they may have sold to the City.
An annual review of the financial condition and registrations of qualified bidders will be conducted by the Director, with assistance, as needed, by the City’s Financial Consultant.
A current audited financial statement is required to be on file for each financial institution and broker/dealer in which the City invests within a reasonable time following that institution’s fiscal year end.
8.0 Eligible and Suitable Investments:
Page 5 | 27
153
The City is empowered by State statute, local law, and the City Commission’s adoption of this Investment Policy to invest in the following types of securities: a) The United States Treasury - Direct Obligations issued by the Treasury of the United States, that has the full faith and credit of the United States government fully guaranteeing all principal and interest payments including, but not limited to:
1. U.S. Treasury Bills, 2. U.S. Treasury Notes, and 3. U.S. Treasury Bonds. b) US Government Agencyies Securities and Government Sponsored Enterprises (“GSE”). b) Direct obligations issued by an Agency of the United States, that has the full faith and Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25", No bullets or credit of the United States government fully guaranteeing all principal and interest payments numbering including, but not limited to:
1. Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) 2. Federal Housing Authority (“FHA”), 3. Veterans Administration (“VA”), and 4. Small Business Administration (“SBA”).
GSE’s or Instrumentalities do not carry the full faith and credit support of the United Stated Government , and have to varying degrees indirect/explicit backing the United States. The GSE Securities must be rated at least AAA/Aaa/AAA long-term from two of the rating agencies, Fitch, Moody’s, or Standard & Poor’s, issued by:
1. Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) 2. Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) 3. Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or “Fannie Mae”) 4. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Association (FHLMC or “Freddie Mac”) 5. Federal Agriculture Mortgage Corporation
Any other GSE shall be considered as Corporate debt and authorized per Section (h), with input from the Financial Consultant, as needed, and updated reports and credit structure material from the City’s Broker/Dealer assisting on this security transaction. c) Local Government Investment Pools - Shares in Local Government Investment Pools (LGIP’s) organized under Chapter 163, Part I, Florida Statutes and rated at least AAAm or equivalent from Fitch, Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s. Cash flow analysis by the Director or authorized Finance Staff, with assistance as needed by the City’s Financial Consultant, should be done to determine if either a Stable Net Asset Value (“NAV”) or Variable NAV or Bond LGIP is appropriate. d) The State Board of Administration (“SBA” or “Florida Prime”) - Shares in the SBA , authorized under Chapter 218, Part IV, Florida Statutes. At the time of purchase, the SBA must carry either a AAAm or equivalent rating from Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s or Fitch.
Page 6 | 27
154 e) State & Local Governments: General or revenue debt obligations, including Build America Bonds or Notes, issued by the State of Florida or any political subdivisions thereof, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, rated at least Aaa/AAA from at least two of either Fitch, Moody’s, or Standard & Poor’s due to the presence of any credit enhancement, with the direct issuer or obligor also having a minimum underlying credit rating on its own of “A” from a least two of the rating agencies. Notwithstanding either the credit enhancement rating or underlying rating, this does not include any Community Development District (“CDD”), Housing Finance Authority, Health Care Authority, Educational Development Authority, or any other conduit issuer securities. f) Money Market Mutual Funds- Shares in Money Market Mutual Funds registered under the federal “Investment Company Act of 1940”, as amended, which stipulates that a money market fund must have an average weighted maturity of 60 days or less. aAt the time of purchase, a money market fund shall have a rating of at least AAAm or equivalent by Standard & Poors, Fitch or Moody’s. g) Bank Deposits , QPD InvestmentsMoney Market Savings Accounts, or Certificates of Deposit- Time deposits, demand deposits, and savings accounts, and non-negotiable certificates of dDeposits organized under the laws of Florida and/or in national banks organized under the laws of the United States and doing business and situated in Florida as Qualified Public Deposits, provided that any such deposits are secured and collateralized by the Florida Security for Public Deposits Act, F.S. Chapter 280, and that the firm is not on a credit watch information service from a nationally-recognized rating agency firm. h) Commercial Paper and Corporate Debt Instruments and Commercial Paper: U.S. dollar denominated debt instruments issued by corporations or banks organized and doing business in the U.S., having a minimum of (a) two short term ratings of at least A1+, P-1, and F1+, from Standard & Poors, Moody’s or Fitch, respectively, and (b) two long term ratings of AA- /Aa3/AA- , respectively from either Fitch, Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s. i) Repurchase Agreements: These securities must be collateralized with a minimum of 102% with securities noted in either (a) or (b) of this Section, be rated at least A1+, P1, or F1+ from Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s or Fitch, be marked to market no less frequently than weekly, and must have a coupon rate that is fixed from the time of settlement until its maturity date, and must be marketable. Said collateral to be held by the trust department of the City’s safekeeping bank, main operating bank’s safekeeping or trust department, or the City’s custodian bank, and securities governed by Section 9.
The use of derivatives is prohibited.
9.0 Master Repurchase Agreement:
Institutions and dealers transacting repurchase agreements shall execute and perform as stated in the City’s standard Master Repurchase Agreement, as approved by the Director, and reviewed, as needed, by the City’s Financial Consultant.
10.0 Local Government Investment Pools and Money Market Funds Due Diligence:
Page 7 | 27
155
A thorough investigation of the LGIP or Fund authorized in Section 8(c) and 8(f) is required prior to investing, and on a continual basis. There shall be a Government Finance Officer’s or other industry, or comparable community relevant questionnaire developed by the Director, with assistance as needed by the Financial Consultant, that is utilized to review the proposed LGIP or Money Market Fund.
The key components of this due diligence process will include information that addresses the following typical questions:
A description of eligible investment securities, and a written statement of Investment Policy and objectives. A description of interest calculations and how it is distributed, and how gains and losses are treated. An overview of LGIP or Fund oversight, board composition, portfolio manager information and reputation, degree of transparency. A description of how the securities are safeguarded (including the settlement processes), how often the securities are priced and frequency of LGIP or Fund auditing process. A description of who may invest or participate in the program, how often, what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed, reporting capabilities to assist with City audit requirements and potential IRS Arbitrage requirements (if tax exempt bond proceeds are included), and frequency of interest payments. A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings, or ability to obtain same via online security protected access. Is it Stable NAV or Variable NAV Fund?
Stable NAV: At the time of purchase, the LGIP must carry a rating of “AAAm” from Standard & Poor’s, or Aaa from Moody’s, or AAA from Fitch.
Variable NAV or Bond Fund: At time of purchase, the LGIP must carry a rating of “AAA” and a volatility rating of “S1+” from Standard & Poor’s, Aaa from Moody’s, or AAA from Fitch.
The average duration or maturity of the LGIP or Fund. Full disclosure of the fee schedule, and when and how is it assessed or paid. Is the LGIP or Fund eligible for bond proceeds?
11.0 Collateralization:
Collateralization will be required on three types of investments: non-negotiable, Interest-bearing time certificates of deposit, other qualified public deposits (QPD’s) per Section 8(g), and repurchase agreements per Section 8(i). Collateralization for these investment types is provided with each investment type.
The City chooses to limit collateral to Direct Obligations of United States per Section 8(a).
The right of collateral substitution is granted, so long as the process for same is clearly laid out. The process commonly referred to as “securities lending” is not permitted without the prior
Page 8 | 27
156 approval of the Director, and sufficient review and recommendation of the City’s Financial Consultant.
12.0 Bid Requirements:
Director and other City staff authorized by the Director, with assistance from the Financial Consultant, as needed, shall determine the approximate maturity dates for investment securities based on cash-flow needs and forecasts, current market conditions, and ongoing budgetary and liquidity requirements. Once analyzed and one or more optimal types of investments are identified and selected, the Director, or authorized City staff , with assistance from the City’s Financial Consultant, as needed, will then work directly, or through approved broker/dealers, banks or financial institutions, to purchase the selected security or investment by a competitively bid process, when feasible and appropriate. This process should assist with creating an open process, and acceptable levels of market yields and fees, while also encouraging mutually beneficial relationships with prequalified firms. Except as otherwise required by law, the bidding or selection process deemed to best meet the investment objectives as determined by the Director, supported as needed by the City’s Financial Consultant, should be selected.
13.0 Safekeeping and Custody:
All security transactions, including collateral for repurchase agreements, entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery-versus-payment (“DVP”) basis. Securities will be held by a third party custodian approved by the Director, and all transactional activity evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
All securities purchased by, and all collateral obtained by, the City should be properly designated as an asset of the City of Dunedin. Withdrawal of securities from safekeeping or custodial accounts, in whole or in part, shall not be made except by the Director or other City staff authorized by the Director. A copy of any Safekeeping or Custodial Agreement will be provided to the City Manager and City Clerk.
14.0 Diversification:
The City will diversify its investments by security type, individual security and financial institution. The City shall not exceed the following aggregate limits of eligible securities per Section 8 by security type/individual issuer:
U.S. Treasuries and Federal Agencies 95%/N/A U.S. Government Agencies & 40%/25% Government Sponsored Enterprises 507540%/4025% Local Government Investment Pools Constant NAV or dollar in/dollar out 75%/50% Floating NAV 50%/35% Formatted: Justified State Board of Administration Florida Prime Fund A 5% Comment [DJ1]: SBA Pool A no longer exists. State and Local Governments 10%/5% Florida Prime Fund is now professionally managed Money Market Mutual Funds 50%/25% by Federated Investors Money Market Savings Account 40%/25% Page 9 | 27
157
Certificates of Deposit (QPD’s) 40%/25% Commercial Paper 40%/25% Money Market Savings Account 40%/25% Corporate Debt Securities/ 10%/5% Commercial Paper 40%/25%10% Repurchase Agreements 10%
In addition to a maximum level of investment in aggregate by security type, no more than 25% of the City’s investment portfolio will be invested in a single security (issue). No more than 50% of the City’s total investment portfolio will be invested with, or handled by, a single financial institution or broker/dealer. This excludes the City having one financial institution or trustee handle all of its safekeeping requirements per Section 13.0.
Compliance with the percentage limitations above shall be determined by the Director, or other Finance Staff authorized by the Director, when the security is purchased, and reviewed on a quarterly basis by the City’s Financial Consultant.
15.0 Maximum Maturities:
To the extent possible, the City will attempt to match the maturity dates of its investments with the anticipated cash flow requirements. Current operating funds may not be invested in any security having a maturity of greater than12 months. Unless matched to a specific cash flow or restricted fund, gift or grant related fund, the City will not directly invest in securities covering non-operating funds maturing more than five (5) years from the date of purchase.
Debt Service Reserve Funds may be invested in securities of up to five (5) years, if permitted by bond documents, and if the maturity of such investments is made to coincide as nearly as practical with the potential expected use of the funds.
The Investment Portfolio’s weighted average maturity shall not exceed 3 years.
Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds such as LGIPs, money market funds, QPD’s or repurchase agreements to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained to meet ongoing City obligations or unexpected requirements.
16.0 Internal Controls:
The Director is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure City assets are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. The internal controls shall address the following points: . Control of collusion . Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping . Custodial safekeeping . Avoidance of physical delivery securities . Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members . Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers Page 10 | 27
158
. Development, or update as needed, of a wire transfer agreement with the City’s lead operating bank and third-party custodian.
The City Auditor shall review internal controls of this investment policy and its related operating procedures on an annual basis. This review will confirm the levels of internal control by assuring compliance with policies and procedures.
17.0 Performance Standards:
The Investment Portfolio, after insuring the primary objectives of Safety, Liquidity, and Transparency, shall then be designed with the secondary objective of obtaining an acceptable market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints and the City’s cash flow needs.
17.1 Market Yield (Benchmarks): The City’s investment strategy is passive. Given this strategy, the basis used by the Director to determine whether acceptable market yields are being achieved shall be : A. Operating Funds: 0 to 1.5 years: Standard & Poor’s LGIP Index or comparable indice B. Non Operating Funds: 1-5 years: Merrill Lynch 1-3 year Treasury Index or comparable indice
Given constantly changing market conditions, the Director, following advice from the City’s Financial Consultant, may choose to replace any of the above-referenced performance benchmarks as needed, so as to more accurately monitor the portfolio’s performance.
18.0 Reporting Requirements:
As part of one of the key City objectives of Transparency, the Director shall provide the City Manager and City Commission with quarterly investment reports, which provide a clear picture of the status of the current investment portfolio. A copy of this quarterly report will also be provided to the Investment Sub-Committee of the Board of Finance, and reviewed by the City’s Financial Consultant. The investment report should include overview comments from the Director, current and relevant information on the fixed income capital and financial markets, update on general economic conditions, discussions regarding any recommended restrictions on percentage of investment by investment type or categories, possible changes in the portfolio structure going forward, and thoughts on investment strategies.
Schedules in the quarterly report should include the following:
A listing of individual securities held at the end of the reporting period by authorized investment type per Section 8, Average weighted yield to maturity of portfolio on investments as compared to applicable benchmarks, Average life and final maturity of all investments listed, Coupon, yield and earnings rate Page 11 | 27
159
Par Value, Amortized Book Value and Market Value, Percentage of the Portfolio represented by each investment type per the limits set forth in Section 14.
Such reports shall be made available to the public pursuant to Chapter 119 F.S.
19.0 Investment Policy Adoption:
The City’s investment policy shall be adopted by resolution of the City Commission. The Investment Sub-Committee of the Board of Finance may review the policy annually with the Director, and Financial Consultant, as needed. Any changes to the Investment Policy must be approved by the City Manager and City Commission.
20.0 Glossary (Appendix A):
This policy is to be available to various stakeholders (citizens, City Commission, City staff, investors, bondholders, financial institutions, rating agencies, and broker/dealers). The City has included a glossary of industry terminology in Appendix A for reference purposes only.
21.0 Continuing Education:
Per Florida Statutes, the Director, as the designated Investment Officer of the City, and any other City staff authorized by the Director to be involved with making investment decisions, must annually complete eight (8) hours of continuing education in subjects or courses of study related to investment practices and products. Copies of this annual compliance will be provided to the City Manager and the City Clerk.
22.0 Policy Exception:
Any investment currently held that does not meet the guidelines of this policy shall be exempted from the requirements of this policy. At maturity or liquidation, such monies shall be reinvested only as provided by this policy.
Page 12 | 27
160
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF TERMS FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY
UPDATED JANUARY FEBRUARY 14, 20190
ACCRUED INTEREST: The accumulated interest due on a bond, calculated as of the last interest payment made by the issuer to the date of calculation.
AGENCY: A debt security issued by a federal agency or federally sponsored agency. Federal agencies’ obligations to make principal and interest payments are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. These are listed as part of the US Treasury class of permitted investments due to the full backing of the United States Governments and, in part, for state statute reference issues. Agencies are not typically purchased by municipalities as their issuance volume has been historically small, and they have traditionally issued only mortgage backed securities i.e. GNMA.
AMORTIZATION: The systematic reduction of the amount owed on a debt issue through periodic payments of principal.
ASKED: The price at which securities are offered.
BASIS POINT: A unit of measurement used in the valuation of fixed-income securities equal to 1/100 of 1%, e.g. “1/4 of 1% equals 25 basis points.
BANKER’S ACCEPTANCE (BAs): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer. Banker’s Acceptance is not directly cited by City’s Investment Policy, but it is allowable if it meets either the QPD or collateral requirements.
BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio’s operating or non-operating portion of its Investment Portfolio.
BID: The price offered by a buyer of securities. (When you are selling securities, you are asking for a bid.) See Offer.
BOOK VALUE: The value at which a security is carried on the inventory lists or other financial records of an investor. The book value may differ significantly from the security’s current value in the market.
BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together on an investment transaction for a commission.
Page 13 | 27
161
CALL PRICE: The price at which an issuer may redeem a bond prior to maturity. The price is usually at a slight premium to the bond’s original issue price to compensate the holder for loss of income and ownership.
CALL RISK: The risk to a bondholder that a bond may be redeemed prior to maturity.
CALLABLE BOND: A bond issue in which all or part of its outstanding principal amount may be redeemed before maturity by the issuer under specified conditions.
CASH SALE/PURCHASE: A transaction, which calls for delivery and payment of securities on the same day that the transaction is initiated.
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a certificate. Large-denomination CD’s are typically negotiable.
COLLATERALIZATION: Process by which a borrower, or investment provider, pledges securities, property, or other deposits for the purpose of securing the repayment obligation of a loan and/or sold security to an investor.
COMMERCIAL PAPER: An unsecured short-term promissory note issued by corporations or financial institutions, with maturities ranging from 2 to 270 days. Commercial paper is typically assigned short term ratings from at least two of the three nationally-recognized rating agencies: Fitch, Moody’s, or Standard & Poor’s.
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official consolidated annual audit report for the City of Dunedin. It includes multiple combined statements for each individual fund, enterprise and account group prepared in conformity with GAAP. It also includes supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions, financial covenants, extensive introductory material, and a detailed Statistical Section.
COUPON: (a) The annual rate of interest that a securities’ issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.
CREDIT QUALITY: The measurement of either the bond issuer’s or security’s financial strength issued by nationally recognized rating agencies. Generally, the higher the credit quality of a bond issuer or security, the lower the interest rate paid by the issuer because the risk of default is lower. Issuers and certain securities can obtain short-term and long-term ratings.
CREDIT RISK: Investor’s risk that an issuer will default in the payment of interest and/or principal on a security.
CURRENT YIELD (CURRENT RETURN): A yield calculation determined by dividing the annual interest received on a security by the current market price of that security.
CURRENT EXPENSES: Expenses to meet known cash needs and anticipated cash-flow requirements for the short term.
Page 14 | 27
162
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account.
DEBENTURE: An unsecured bond or fixed income security backed only by the general full faith and credit of the issuer.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT: A type of securities transaction in which the purchaser pays for the securities when they are delivered either to the purchaser or his/her custodian or safekeeping institution. (Note: Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.)
DERIVATIVE SECURITIES: Financial instruments whose value depends on, or is derived from, the value of one or more underlying assets, interest rates, index or asset values. To meet industry suitability standards, investment in derivatives should require a higher level of Staff knowledge and due diligence. Not permitted by City Investment Policy at this time.
DISCOUNT: The amount by which the par value of a security exceeds the price paid for the security, excluding accrued interest.
DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that are issued a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value, e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills.
DIVERSIFICATION: A process of investing eligible City assets among a range of security types, with further protections of credit and interest rate risk by also setting maturity, and minimum rating requirements. Comparable to an individual portfolio’s objective to spread the risk via buying multiple types of fixed income and equity securities so as to minimize risk to meet their suitability level and objectives.
FAIR VALUE: The amount at which an investment could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale.
FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L’s, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE COPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The daily rate of interest at which funds are traded among banks through the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve, through open-market helps to influence interest rates.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks), which lend funds and provide corresponding banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and insurance companies. The mission of the FHLBs is to liquefy the housing-related assets of its members who must purchase stock in their district Bank.
Page 15 | 27
163
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like GNMA, was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal, private stockholder-owned corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It has traditionally been the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. The corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA’s securities traditionally have been highly liquid and widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest. Recent housing market and securities issues have put some of this under review.
FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money. Their policy actions help to set the daily Federal Funds and Discount Rates. Its Chairman traditionally plays a major role, as head of this independent entity, in the markets with his/her testimony, and increasingly global coordination with other overseas Foreign Heads of State and Central Banks.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and approximately 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
FISCAL TRAUMA AND FEDERAL ACTIONS: Many exotic instruments resulted in an ever changing area of the investment market, recent economic trauma since the summer of 2008, and particularly related to certain types of securities, i.e., collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs), structured investments, etc. Current macro economic reviews, SEC and congressional investigations are underway, as are ongoing significant newly-employed federal fiscal and monetary policies and Federal Reserve actions.
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA OR Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. The FHA, VA or FmHA mortgages back Ginnie Mae securities. The term “pass-through” is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTITIES: Federal Government Sponsored Entities (GSE’s) are backed by each particular agency to various levels of support, subject to change by Federal Legislation, with a general market perception that there is an implicit government guarantee.
INTEREST RATE RISK: The risk associated with declines or rises in interest rates, which cause an investment in a fixed-income security to increase or decrease in value.
INTERNAL CONTROLS: A series of policies and procedures designed to ensure that the assets of the entity are protected from loss, theft, or misuse. Some key areas typically addressed can include the following points: 1. Control of collusion – Collusion is a situation where two or more employees are working in conjunction to defraud their employer. Page 16 | 27
164
2. Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping – By separating the person who authorizes or performs the transaction from the people who record or otherwise account for the transaction, a separation of duties is achieved. 3. Custodial safekeeping – Securities purchased from any bank or dealer including appropriate collateral (as defined by state law) shall be placed with an independent third party for custodial safekeeping. 4. Avoidance of physical delivery securities – Book-entry securities in the name of the City are much easier to transfer and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place. Delivered securities must be properly safeguarded against loss or destruction. The potential for fraud and loss increases with physically delivered securities. 5. Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members – Subordinate staff members must have a clear understanding of their authority and responsibilities from the Finance Director so as to avoid improper actions. Clear delegation of authority also preserves the internal control structure that is contingent on the various staff positions and their respective responsibilities. 6. Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers – Due to the potential for error and improprieties arising from telephone and electronic transactions, all transactions should be supported by written communications and approved by the appropriate person. Written communications may be via fax if on letterhead and if the safekeeping or custodial institution on behalf of the City has a list of authorized signatures. 7. Development of a wire transfer agreement with the lead bank and third-party custodian or safekeeping institution – The Finance Director, or other Finance Staff member authorized by the Finance Director, should ensure that an agreement will be entered into and will address the following points: controls, security provisions, and responsibilities of each party making and receiving wire transfers.
INVERTED YIELD CURVE: A graphic representation illustrating short-term securities having higher yields than long-term securities. This configuration has historically occurred during periods of high inflation, low levels of confidence in the economy and a restrictive monetary policy.
INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940: Federal legislation which sets the standards by which investment companies, such as mutual funds, are regulated in the areas of advertising, promotion, performance reporting requirements, and securities valuations.
LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money markets, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL (LGIP): The aggregate of all funds from various governments or political subdivisions that are placed in custody for investment and reinvestment. LGIPs typically are governed by a board of either peer Government Investment Officers, or as with the SBA, a group of Elected Officials. Daily operations run by either LGIP staff or an outside Portfolio Manager providing assistance.
Page 17 | 27
165
MARK-TO-MARKET: The process whereby the book value or collateral value of a security is adjusted to reflect its current market value. Required as part of a City’s annual audit, and to be provided as part of the City’s quarterly reporting process.
MARKET RISK: The risk that a security’s value will rise or decline as a result of changes in market conditions.
MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold.
MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all future transactions between the parties to repurchase certain securities and sets forth each party’s rights in the transactions. A master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of the buyer- lender to liquidate the underlying securities as Collateral in the event of default by the seller- borrower.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUND: Mutual funds can invest in a wide range of investments, and for City investment purposes, Money Market Mutual Funds, upon review, typically invest solely in money market instruments (short-term debt instruments, such as Treasury bills, commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, repos and federal funds) that are also permitted directly by the City’s Investment Policy.
MUTUAL FUND: An investment company that pools money and can invest in a variety of securities, including fixed-income securities and money market instruments. Mutual funds are regulated by the Investment Company Act of 1940 and must abide by the following Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) disclosure guidelines: 1. Report standardized performance calculations. 2. Disseminate timely and accurate information regarding the fund’s holdings, performance, management and general investment policy. 3. Have the fund’s investment policies and activities supervised by a board of trustees, which are independent of the adviser, administrator or other vendor of the fund. 4. Maintain the daily liquidity of the fund’s shares. 5. Value their portfolios on a daily basis. 6. Have all individuals who sell SEC-registered products licensed with a self-regulating organization. 7. Have an investment policy governed by a prospectus, which is updated and filed with the SEC annually.
NET ASSET VALUE: The market value of one share of an investment company, such as a mutual fund or local government investment pool. This figure is calculated by totaling a fund’s or LGIP’s assets which include securities, cash, and any accrued earnings, subtracting this from the fund’s liabilities and dividing this total by the number of shares outstanding. This is calculated once a day based on the closing price for each security in the fund’s portfolio.
NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STATISTICAL RATING ORGANIZATION (NRSRO): Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and FITCH IBCA are the three major national rating Page 18 | 27
166 agencies. Additionally, Thomson Bank Watch and some other firms are available for financial institution ratings only.
NO LOAD FUND: A mutual fund, which does not levy a sales charge on the purchase of its shares.
NOMINAL YIELD: The stated rate of interest that a bond pays its current owner, based on par value of the security. It is also known as the “coupon”, “coupon rate” or “interest rate.”
OFFER: The price asked by a seller of securities. (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer.) See Asked.
OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are one of the Federal Reserve’s most important and flexible monetary policy tools.
PAR VALUE: Face value or principal value of a bond, typically $1,000 per bond.
POSITIVE (NORMAL) YIELD CURVE: A graphic representation illustrating short-term securities having lower yields than long-term securities. Typically seen as an indicator of inflationary expectations and a growth economy.
PREMIUM: The amount by which the price paid for a security exceeds the security’s par value.
PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor.
PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers who submit weekly reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)-registered securities broker/dealers and commercial, banking organizations subject to official supervision by the U.S. Federal bank.
PRIME RATE: A preferred interest rate charged by commercial banks to their most creditworthy customers. Many interest rates for consumers such as Home Equity Lines are keyed to this rate.
PRINCIPAL: The face value or par value of a debt instrument. Also may refer to the amount of capital invested in a given security.
PROSPECTUS OR OFFICIAL STATEMENT: A legal document that must be provided to any prospective purchaser of a new securities offering registered with the SEC, or typically provided for SEC-exempt securities such as municipal bonds or notes. This can include information on the issuer, the issuer’s business, the proposed use of proceeds, the experience of the issuer’s management, credit ratings, proposed source of repayment of principal and interest, timing and frequency of payments, and certain certified financial statements. Page 19 | 27
167
QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the City under a State Treasurer overseen program, some level of eligible collateral (levels vary on size of bank) and which has been approved by the Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits. Banks agree to severally and jointly support each others’ obligations for public deposits, with the responsibility to maintain confirmation of a QPD written letter confirming the level of investment and collateral assigned to the City.
RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized Yield To Maturity (“YTM”) on a bond or the current income return.
REINVESTMENT RISK: The risk that a fixed-income investor will be unable to reinvest income proceeds from a security in its Portfolio at the same rate of return currently generated by that holding.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed date. The security “buyer” in effect lends the “seller” money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this. Dealers and banks have traditionally used RPs extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is said to be doing RP, it is lending money that is increasing bank reserves.
SEC RULE 2A-7 OF THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT: Applies to all money market mutual funds. This mandates such funds to maintain certain minimal standards, including a 13- month maturity limit and a 90-day average maturity on investments, so as to help maintain a constant Net Asset Value (“NAV”) of one dollar ($1.00). Market refers to this as trading to maintain the buck or dollar.
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by financial institutions for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank’s or Trust Departments, or Custodian for protection.
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues and securities following the initial distribution.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC): Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.
SEC RULE 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
SHORT-TERM: A maximum of 6 months of operation.
STRUCTURED NOTES: Notes traditionally issued by U.S. Government Agencies, or Government Sponsored Enterprises (FHLB, FNMA, SLMA, etc.) and Corporations, which have imbedded options (e.g., call features, step-up coupons, floating rate coupons, derivative-based
Page 20 | 27
168 returns) into their debt structure. Their market performance is impacted by the fluctuation of interest rates, the volatility of the imbedded options and shifts in the shape of the yield curve.
SURPLUS FUNDS: Any funds in any general or special account or fund of a unit of local government, or funds held by an independent trustee on behalf of a unit of local government, which in reasonable contemplation will not be immediately needed for the purposes intended.
SWAP: Trading one asset for another.
TOTAL RETURN: The sum of all investment income plus changes in the capital value of the portfolio. For mutual funds, return on an investment is composed of share price appreciation plus any realized dividends or capital gains.
TREASURY BILLS: Short-term U.S. government non-interest bearing discount securities with maturities of no longer than one year and issued in minimum denominations of $10,000. Auctions of three- and six-month bills are weekly, while auctions of one-year bills are monthly. The yields on these bills are monitored closely in the money markets for signs of interest rate trends.
TREASURY BONDS: Long-term U.S. government securities with maturities of ten years (or longer) and issued in minimum denominations of $1,000.
TREASURY NOTES: Intermediate U.S. government or agency debt securities with maturities of one to ten years and issued in denominations ranging from $1,000 to $1 million or more.
UNIFORM NET CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms, as well as nonmember broker/dealers in securities, maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio. Subject to review at Federal Level. Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one-reason new public issues are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
VOLATILITY: A degree of fluctuation in the price and valuation of securities.
“VOLATILITY RISK” RATING: A rating system to assist with identifying the level of volatility and other non-credit risks associated with securities and certain bond funds. The ratings for bond funds range from those that have extremely low sensitivity to changing market conditions and offer the greatest stability of the returns (“AAA” by S&P; “V-1” by Fitch) to those that are highly sensitive with currently identifiable market volatility risk (“CCC” by S&P, “V-10” by Fitch). Comparable to measures used to track volatility of equities and equity mutual funds.
WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (“WAM”): The average maturity of all the securities that comprise a portfolio. According to SEC Rule 2A-7, the WAM for SEC registered money market mutual funds may not exceed 90 days and no one security may have a maturity that exceeds 397 days.
Page 21 | 27
169
WHEN ISSUED (WI): A conditional transaction in which an authorized new security has not been issued. All “when issued” transactions are settled when the actual security is issued.
YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. Income yield is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security.
YIELD –TO-CALL: The rate of return an investor earns from a bond assuming the bond is redeemed (called) prior to its nominal maturity date.
YIELD-TO-MATURITY (NET YIELD): The current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
YIELD CURVE: A graphic representation depicting the relationship at a given point in time between yields and maturity for bonds or securities that are identical in every way except maturity.
ZERO-COUPON SECURITIES: Securities issued at a discount that make no periodic interest payments. The rate of return consists of a gradual accretion of the principal of the security and is payable at par upon maturity.
DISCLAIMER
WHILE THIS APPENDIX OF GLOSSARY TERMS IS PROVIDED IN THE INTEREST OF BEING INFORMATIVE AND HELPFUL, PLEASE NOTE THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE, DUE TO THE CONTINUING HIGH DEGREE AND FREQUENCY OF CHANGES IN THE MARKETS, FEDERAL EXECUTIVE BRANCH, REGULATORY BODY, FEDERAL RESERVE, SEC, AND ONGOING DIRECTIVES AND CHANGES. THE CITY WILL ENDEAVOR TO REVIEW THESE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS ON AN ONGOING ANNUAL BASIS.
Page 22 | 27
170
APPENDIX B
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA
INVESTMENT PROCESS CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY FORM
Complete, sign and return this form directly to:
Finance Director City of Dunedin 750 Milwaukee Avenue Dunedin, Florida 34698
I have read a copy of the City of Dunedin’s Officers and Employees conflict-of-interest policy with respect to the City’s investment process, and have read and understand it. I understand that upon receipt and review the Finance Director will supply a copy of this executed Form to the City Manager and City Clerk.
I further affirm that:
1. I am in compliance with the aforementioned conflict-of-interest policy, and any questions that I may have had in regard to this Policy have been fully addressed to my satisfaction; 2. I will remain in compliance with the aforementioned conflict-of-interest policy; 3. I have reported any breach of the conflict-of-interest policy of which I am aware; and 4. I understand that it is my obligation to report any breaches of the conflict-of-interest policy of which I am aware either through the open door policy, directly to the Finance Director, or City Manager.
The above statements are correct.
The above statements are correct except as indicated below:
I will report promptly through the aforementioned channels any such matters which may develop in the future.
Name (Please print) Signature
Date
Page 23 | 27
171
Appendix C
City of Dunedin Investment Procedure (Internal Controls)
1) Investment Portfolio reviewed monthly by Finance Director or Designee, or as securities mature, or events warrant, per prudent person standard. (Input from Financial Consultant, as needed.) 2) Cashflow needs of City, including Liquidity Requirements per Fiscal Policies, Fund Balance requirements, or Commission approved Budgetary or Capital Improvement Needs reviewed, prior to any new Investment decisions. 3) Maximum limits per institution and investment type per Policy also reviewed, as needed with Financial Consultant’s input, with Finance Director, or Designee and Financial Consultant to confirm new Investment security decisions, as well as confirmation of #2 requirements. 4) Any new due diligence requirements on new investments are done, with a Finance Director note to file. 5) Finance Director, or Designee, to communicate new Investment Security decisions to approved broker dealer (s), making sure % of annual business by Investment $, does not exceed Policy limits. 6) Selected Broker Dealer for those trades from City approved list, (with this support rotated so no more that 50% of trades, excluding any money market funds, does not go to any one broker/dealer in a given calendar year) provides market updates by email to Finance Director or Designee. 7) Written authorization for purchase and other information, as needed, for broker/dealer and City’s safekeeping bank, provided regarding the selected investment 8) Upon decision to invest funds, a memo describing the investment is sent to the City Manager for information purposes. 9) Finance Director or Designee confirms purchase of Permitted Investment at market rates in writing to Broker Dealer on DVP Basis to City’s Safekeeping or Custodial Account 10) Finance Director or Designee checks Deal Tickets or Written Confirms from Broker Dealer to confirm correct purchase, along with Safekeeping Bank’s review. 11) Investment Report updated at time of completed Trade by Finance Director or Designee, as Information is readily available. (Quarterly updates are provided to the City Manager and City Commission.) 12) Separate Accounting Staff do Entries into City accounts. (Verified by Finance Director.)
2-5-2010
Page 24 | 27
172 Exhibit C- Eligible and Suitable Investments
Diversification Diversification Revised Current Portfolio Portfolio Investment Maximum Maximum US Government Treasury 95% 95% US Government Agencies Federal Instruments "GSE" 40% 50% Reduced Local Government Investment Pools Stable NAV or managed to dollar in/dollar out 75% 50% Increased State Board Administration "SBA" 5% 5% State & Local Gov'ts General or revenue debt obligations 10% 10% Money Market Mutual Funds 50% 25% Increased Money Market Savings Account 40% 25% New Certificates of Deposit 40% 40% Commercial Paper 40% 10% Increased Corporate Debt Instruments 10% 10% Repurchase Agreements 10% 10%
173 Agenda Item: 3.b
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-16
From: Les Tyler, Director of Finance
Subject: Resolution 19-33, Establishes a Maximum Millage Rate for FY 2020
Presenter(s): Les Tyler, Director of Finance, Ashley Kimpton, Budget Manager
Recommend: Staff recommends to adopt Resolution 19-33.
Epic Goal(s): Establishing a Maximum Millage Rate impacts all Epic Goals.
Boards & Committees: Board of Finance
Budget Impact: Adopting a maximum millage rate of 4.1345 will increase revenue generated from gross taxable value to $11,683,668 in FY 2020. This is a $944,425 increase to the General Fund, and a $140,528 increase to the CRA Fund.
Past Action: 1.) City Commission Strategic Planning Session on January 29, 2019. 2.) FY 2020 Budget Workshop #1: FY 2020 Municipal Business Plan & Capital Improvement Plan on May 17, 2019. 3.) FY 2020 Budget Workshop #2: FY 2020 Proposed Budget on July 16, 2019.
Next Action: Commission Special Meeting, Monday, September 9, 2019, first public hearing and adoption of Resolution 19-34 Establishing a Tentative Millage Rate for FY 2020 and Resolution 19-35 Establishing a Tentative Budget for FY 2020. 174 Attachments: A. Res 19-33 Proposed Maximum Millage Rate for Fiscal Year 2020.docx, B. Form DR-420, C. Form DR-420TIF, D. Form DR-420MM-P,
Background: As required by the State's Truth in Millage (TRIM) regulations, taxing authorities must advise the Property Appraiser of their maximum millage rate and the date, time and place of their first public hearing within thirty-five (35) days of certification of values. The information provided to the Property Appraiser will be used in the TRIM notices to be mailed to property owners in August.
The "Certification of Taxable Value" form has been completed with the following information:
Proposed Millage Rate: 4.1345 mills Roll Back Rate: 3.8814 Increase from the "Roll Back Rate": 6.52% First Budget Hearing: 5:30pm September 9, 2019 Dunedin City Hall 542 Main St.
The proposed millage rate included on the "Certification of Taxable Value" form is the maximum rate the City may levy, unless the City provides for additional mailings of revised notices to property owners.
Staff is recommending that the Commission approve the maximum rate of 4.1345 mills at this time. A millage rate of 4.1345 is 6.52% over the “rollback rate” which is the tax rate that would generate the same amount of ad valorem tax revenue as the prior year.
Approval of this maximum millage rate of 4.1345 mills, while not binding, does establish a rate cap. Approval of this rate preserves the Commission's ability to adopt any rate below this rate without additional cost.
Following adoption of Resolution 19-33, the following forms; DR-420, DR-420TIF and DR-420MM-P will be submitted to the State of Florida Department of Revenue for TRIM Notices sent through the Pinellas County Property Appraiser's Office.
175 RESOLUTION 19-33 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DUNEDIN, FL, PROVIDING FOR A PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE FOR AD VALOREM TAX REVENUE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 AT A RATE NOT TO EXCEED 4.1345 MILLS OR $4.13 PER $1,000.00 OF ASSESSED PROPERTY VALUE; PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING DATES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Commission not to exceed the maximum rate of 4.1345 mills or a millage rate of $4.13 per $1,000.00 of assessed property value for ad valorem tax revenue for the coming fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has set the Public Hearing dates for the proposed Fiscal Year 2020 City of Dunedin Budget to be held in City Hall, City Commission Chambers on Monday, September 9, 2019 at 5:30 p.m. and Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 6:00 p.m.; now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA, DULY ASSEMBLED THAT: Section 1. The proposed millage rate for ad valorem taxes for the City of Dunedin, Florida for Fiscal Year 2020 shall not exceed 4.1345 mills. Section 2. The Public Hearings on the Fiscal Year 2020 Budget are hereby established as Monday, September 9, 2019 at 5:30p.m. and Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. in City Hall, City Commission Chambers where interested parties may appear and address the City Commission on these issues. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA, THIS 23rd day of July , 2019.
Julie Ward Bujalski Mayor ATTEST:
Denise Kirkpatrick City Clerk 176 Reset Form Print Form DR-420 R. 5/12 CERTIFICATION OF TAXABLE VALUE Rule 12D-16.002 Florida Administrative Code Effective 11/12
Year : 2019 County : PINELLAS Principal Authority : Taxing Authority : CITY OF DUNEDIN CITY OF DUNEDIN
SECTION I : COMPLETED BY PROPERTY APPRAISER 1. Current year taxable value of real property for operating purposes $ 2,729,226,796 (1) 2. Current year taxable value of personal property for operating purposes $ 96,669,324 (2) 3. Current year taxable value of centrally assessed property for operating purposes $ 0 (3) 4. Current year gross taxable value for operating purposes (Line 1 plus Line 2 plus Line 3) $ 2,825,896,120 (4) Current year net new taxable value (Add new construction, additions, rehabilitative 5. improvements increasing assessed value by at least 100%, annexations, and tangible $ 80,326,898 (5) personal property value over 115% of the previous year's value. Subtract deletions.)
6. Current year adjusted taxable value (Line 4 minus Line 5) $ 2,745,569,222 (6) 7. Prior year FINAL gross taxable value from prior year applicable Form DR-403 series $ 2,551,388,421 (7) Does the taxing authority include tax increment financing areas? If yes, enter number 8. ✔ YES NO Number (8) of worksheets (DR-420TIF) attached. If none, enter 0 1 Does the taxing authority levy a voted debt service millage or a millage voted for 2 Number 9. years or less under s. 9(b), Article VII, State Constitution? If yes, enter the number of YES ✔ NO (9) DR-420DEBT, Certification of Voted Debt Millage forms attached. If none, enter 0 0 I certify the taxable values above are correct to the best of my knowledge. Property Appraiser Certification SIGN Signature of Property Appraiser: Date : HERE Electronically Certified by Property Appraiser 6/28/2019 3:08 PM SECTION II : COMPLETED BY TAXING AUTHORITY If this portion of the form is not completed in FULL your taxing authority will be denied TRIM certification and possibly lose its millage levy privilege for the tax year. If any line is not applicable, enter -0-. Prior year operating millage levy (If prior year millage was adjusted then use adjusted 10. per $1,000 (10) millage from Form DR-422) 4.1345 11. Prior year ad valorem proceeds (Line 7 multiplied by Line 10, divided by 1,000) $ 10,548,715 (11)
Amount, if any, paid or applied in prior year as a consequence of an obligation measured by a 12. $ (12) dedicated increment value (Sum of either Lines 6c or Line 7a for all DR-420TIF forms) 392,459
13. Adjusted prior year ad valorem proceeds (Line 11 minus Line 12) $ 10,156,256 (13) 14. Dedicated increment value, if any (Sum of either Line 6b or Line 7e for all DR-420TIF forms) $ 128,911,885 (14) 15. Adjusted current year taxable value (Line 6 minus Line 14) $ 2,616,657,337 (15) 16. Current year rolled-back rate (Line 13 divided by Line 15, multiplied by 1,000) 3.8814 per $1000 (16) 17. Current year proposed operating millage rate 4.1345 per $1000 (17) Total taxes to be levied at proposed millage rate (Line 17 multiplied by Line 4, divided (18) 18. by 1,000) $ 11,683,668 177
Continued on page 2 DR-420 R. 5/12 Page 2 County Independent Special District TYPE of principal authority (check one) 19. (19) ✔ Municipality Water Management District
Applicable taxing authority (check one) ✔ Principal Authority Dependent Special District 20. (20) MSTU Water Management District Basin
21. Is millage levied in more than one county? (check one) Yes ✔ No (21)
DEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND MSTUs STOP HERE - SIGN AND SUBMIT
22. Enter the total adjusted prior year ad valorem proceeds of the principal authority, all dependent special districts, and MSTUs levying a millage. (The sum of Line 13 from all DR-420 $ (22) 10,156,256 forms) 23. Current year aggregate rolled-back rate (Line 22 divided by Line 15, multiplied by 1,000) 3.8814 per $1,000 (23) 24. Current year aggregate rolled-back taxes (Line 4 multiplied by Line 23, divided by 1,000) $ 10,968,433 (24) Enter total of all operating ad valorem taxes proposed to be levied by the principal 25. taxing authority, all dependent districts, and MSTUs, if any. (The sum of Line 18 from all $ 11,683,668 (25) DR-420 forms)
26. Current year proposed aggregate millage rate (Line 25 divided by Line 4, multiplied per $1,000 (26) by 1,000) 4.1345 Current year proposed rate as a percent change of rolled-back rate (Line 26 divided by 27. 6.52 % (27) Line 23, minus 1, multiplied by 100)
First public Date : Time : Place : budget hearing
I certify the millages and rates are correct to the best of my knowledge. Taxing Authority Certification The millages comply with the provisions of s. 200.065 and the provisions of either s. 200.071 or s. 200.081, F.S. S I Signature of Chief Administrative Officer : Date : G N Title : Contact Name and Contact Title : Ashley Kimpton, Budget Manager Les Tyler, Finance Director H E Mailing Address : Physical Address : R PO BOX 1348 PO BOX 1348 E City, State, Zip : Phone Number : Fax Number : DUNEDIN, FL 34697 7272983036 7272983067
178 Instructions on page 3 DR-420 CERTIFICATION OF TAXABLE VALUE R. 5/12 INSTRUCTIONS Page 3 “Principal Authority” is a county, municipality, or independent special district (including water management districts). “Taxing Authority” is the entity levying the millage. This includes the principal authority, any special district dependent to the principal authority, any county municipal service taxing unit (MSTU), and water management district basins. Each taxing authority must submit to their property appraiser a DR-420 and the following forms, as applicable: · DR-420TIF, Tax Increment Adjustment Worksheet · DR-420DEBT, Certification of Voted Debt Millage · DR-420MM-P, Maximum Millage Levy Calculation - Preliminary Disclosure
Section I: Property Appraiser Section II: Taxing Authority Use this DR-420 form for all taxing authorities except school Complete Section II. Keep one copy, return the original and districts. Complete Section I, Lines 1 through 9, for each county, one copy to your property appraiser with the applicable municipality, independent special district, dependent special DR-420TIF, DR-420DEBT, and DR-420MM-P within 35 days district, MSTU, and multicounty taxing authority. Enter only of certification. Send one copy to the tax collector. “Dependent taxable values that apply to the taxing authority indicated. Use a special district” (ss. 200.001(8)(d) and 189.403(2), F.S.) separate form for the principal authority and each dependent means a special district that meets at least one of the district, MSTU and water management district basin. following criteria: Line 8 l The membership of its governing body is identical to that of the governing body of a single county or a single Complete a DR-420TIF for each taxing authority making municipality. payments to a redevelopment trust fund under Section 163.387 (2)(a), Florida Statutes or by an ordinance, resolution or l All members of its governing body are appointed by the agreement to fund a project or to finance essential infrastructure. governing body of a single county or a single municipality. Check "Yes" if the taxing authority makes payments to a redevelopment trust fund. Enter the number of DR-420TIF forms l During their unexpired terms, members of the special attached for the taxing authority on Line 8. Enter 0 if none. district's governing body are subject to removal at will by the governing body of a single county or a single Line 9 municipality. Complete a DR-420DEBT for each taxing authority levying either l The district has a budget that requires approval through an a voted debt service millage (s.12, Article VII, State Constitution) affirmative vote or can be vetoed by the governing body or a levy voted for two years or less (s. 9(b), Article VII, State of a single county or a single municipality. Constitution). "Independent special district” (ss. 200.001(8)(e) and 189.403 Check “Yes” if the taxing authority levies either a voted debt (3), F.S.) means a special district that is not a dependent service millage or a levy voted for 2 years or less (s. 9(b), Article special district as defined above. A district that includes more VII, State Constitution). These levies do not include levies than one county is an independent special district unless the approved by a voter referendum not required by the State district lies wholly within the boundaries of a single Constitution. Complete and attach DR-420DEBT. Do not municipality. complete a separate DR-420 for these levies. “Non-voted millage” is any millage not defined as a “voted Send a copy to each taxing authority and keep a copy. When the millage” in s. 200.001(8)(f), F.S. taxing authority returns the DR-420 and the accompanying forms, immediately send the original to: Lines 12 and 14 Florida Department of Revenue Adjust the calculation of the rolled-back rate for tax increment Property Tax Oversight - TRIM Section values and payment amounts. See the instructions for P. O. Box 3000 DR-420TIF. On Lines 12 and 14, carry forward values from Tallahassee, Florida 32315-3000 the DR-420TIF forms. Line 24 Include only those levies derived from millage rates.
179
All TRIM forms for taxing authorities are available on our website at http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/property/trim Reset Form Print Form DR-420TIF R. 6/10 Rule 12D-16.002 TAX INCREMENT ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET Florida Administrative Code Effective 11/12
Year : 2019 County : PINELLAS Principal Authority : Taxing Authority : CITY OF DUNEDIN CITY OF DUNEDIN
Community Redevelopment Area : Base Year : DNI 1988
SECTION I : COMPLETED BY PROPERTY APPRAISER 1. Current year taxable value in the tax increment area $ 171,108,221 (1) 2. Base year taxable value in the tax increment area $ 35,411,500 (2) 3. Current year tax increment value (Line 1 minus Line 2) $ 135,696,721 (3) 4. Prior year Final taxable value in the tax increment area $ 135,330,331 (4) 5. Prior year tax increment value (Line 4 minus Line 2) $ 99,918,831 (5) Property Appraiser Certification I certify the taxable values above are correct to the best of my knowledge. SIGN HERE Signature of Property Appraiser : Date : Electronically Certified by Property Appraiser 6/28/2019 3:08 PM
SECTION II: COMPLETED BY TAXING AUTHORITY Complete EITHER line 6 or line 7 as applicable. Do NOT complete both. 6. If the amount to be paid to the redevelopment trust fund IS BASED on a specific proportion of the tax increment value: 6a. Enter the proportion on which the payment is based. 95.00 % (6a)
6b. Dedicated increment value (Line 3 multiplied by the percentage on Line 6a) $ (6b) If value is zero or less than zero, then enter zero on Line 6b 128,911,885 6c. Amount of payment to redevelopment trust fund in prior year $ 392,459 (6c) 7. If the amount to be paid to the redevelopment trust fund IS NOT BASED on a specific proportion of the tax increment value: 7a. Amount of payment to redevelopment trust fund in prior year $ 0 (7a) 7b. Prior year operating millage levy from Form DR-420, Line 10 0.0000 per $1,000 (7b) Taxes levied on prior year tax increment value 7c. $ (7c) (Line 5 multiplied by Line 7b, divided by 1,000) 0 Prior year payment as proportion of taxes levied on increment value 7d. % (7d) (Line 7a divided by Line 7c, multiplied by 100) 0.00
7e. Dedicated increment value (Line 3 multiplied by the percentage on Line 7d) $ (7e) If value is zero or less than zero, then enter zero on Line 7e 0 I certify the calculations, millages and rates are correct to the best of my knowledge. Taxing Authority Certification S Signature of Chief Administrative Officer : Date : I G Title : Contact Name and Contact Title : N Les Tyler, Finance Director Ashley Kimpton, Budget Manager
H Mailing Address : Physical Address : E PO BOX 1348 PO BOX 1348 R E 180 City, State, Zip : Phone Number : Fax Number : DUNEDIN, FL 34697 7272983036 7272983067 DR-420TIF R. 6/10 TAX INCREMENT ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET Page 2 INSTRUCTIONS
Property appraisers must complete and sign Section I of Section I: Property Appraiser this worksheet and provide it with form DR-420, Certification of Taxable Value, to all taxing authorities who A. Complete Section I of this form for each county, make payments to a redevelopment trust fund under: municipality, independent special district, dependent • s. 163.387(2)(a), Florida Statutes, or special district, and MSTU that: • An ordinance, resolution, or agreement to fund a • Has a tax increment value and
project or to finance essential infrastructure. • Is not exempted from making payments to a community redevelopment trust fund based on “Tax increment value” is the cumulative increase in tax increments (s. 163.387(2)(c), F.S.). taxable value from the base year to the current year within If a taxing authority has more than one tax increment the defined geographic area. It is used to determine the value, they must complete a separate form for each tax payment to a redevelopment trust fund under: • increment value. Send a copy to each taxing authority s. 163.387(1), F.S. or with the DR-420 and keep a copy. When the taxing • An ordinance, resolution, or agreement to fund a authority returns the completed forms, immediately send project or finance essential infrastructure. In this the original to: case, the taxing authority must certify the Florida Department of Revenue boundaries and beginning date to the property Property Tax Oversight Program - TRIM Section appraiser. P. O. Box 3000 “Dedicated increment value” is the portion of the tax Tallahassee, Florida 32315-3000 increment value used to determine the payment to the B. Enter only tax increment values that apply to the redevelopment trust fund. (See s. 200.001(8)(h), F.S.) value located within the taxing authority indicated. Calculate the dedicated increment value on this form and enter on either Line 6b or Line 7e.
“Specific proportion,” used to determine whether to Section II: Taxing Authority complete Line 6 or Line 7, refers to the calculation of the tax increment payment. Examples: Complete Section II of the form, keep one copy, and • Example 1. return the original and one copy to your property Section.163.387(1), F.S., states the payment appraiser with DR-420 within 35 days of certification. made by the taxing authority should equal 95% of Send one copy to your tax collector. the millage levied times the tax increment value. The specific proportion in this case is 95%. The ordinance providing for the payment may set a Additional Instructions for Lines 6 and 7 percentage lower than 95%. In these cases, the lower percentage would be the specific proportion. Complete Line 6 if the payment into the redevelopment • Example 2. trust fund is a specific proportion of the tax increment Some required tax increment payments are not value. directly related to the tax increment value. A Complete Line 7 if the payment is based on a calculation constant dollar payment is a payment not based other than a specific proportion. Do not complete both on a specific proportion of the tax increment value. Lines 6 and 7. Line 7 converts these payments into a proportion based on the prior year's payment and tax increment value to reach the current year's dedicated increment value.
181 All TRIM forms for taxing authorities are available on our website at http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/property/trim Reset Form Print Form DR-420MM-P MAXIMUM MILLAGE LEVY CALCULATION R. 5/12 Rule 12D-16.002 PRELIMINARY DISCLOSURE Florida Administrative Code For municipal governments, counties, and special districts Effective 11/12
Year: 2019 County: PINELLAS Principal Authority : Taxing Authority: CITY OF DUNEDIN CITY OF DUNEDIN
Is your taxing authority a municipality or independent special district that has levied 1. Yes ✔ No (1) ad valorem taxes for less than 5 years?
IF YES, STOP HERE. SIGN AND SUBMIT. You are not subject to a millage limitation.
2. Current year rolled-back rate from Current Year Form DR-420, Line 16 3.8814 per $1,000 (2) 3. Prior year maximum millage rate with a majority vote from 2018 Form DR-420MM, Line 13 4.6665 per $1,000 (3) 4. Prior year operating millage rate from Current Year Form DR-420, Line 10 4.1345 per $1,000 (4)
If Line 4 is equal to or greater than Line 3, skip to Line 11. If less, continue to Line 5. Adjust rolled-back rate based on prior year majority-vote maximum millage rate 5. Prior year final gross taxable value from Current Year Form DR-420, Line 7 $ 2,551,388,421 (5) Prior year maximum ad valorem proceeds with majority vote 6. $ (6) (Line 3 multiplied by Line 5 divided by 1,000) 11,906,054 Amount, if any, paid or applied in prior year as a consequence of an obligation 7. $ (7) measured by a dedicated increment value from Current Year Form DR-420 Line 12 392,459 8. Adjusted prior year ad valorem proceeds with majority vote (Line 6 minus Line 7) $ 11,513,595 (8) 9. Adjusted current year taxable value from Current Year form DR-420 Line 15 $ 2,616,657,337 (9) 10. Adjusted current year rolled-back rate (Line 8 divided by Line 9, multiplied by 1,000) 4.4001 per $1,000 (10) Calculate maximum millage levy Rolled-back rate to be used for maximum millage levy calculation 11. per $1,000 (11) (Enter Line 10 if adjusted or else enter Line 2) 4.4001 12. Adjustment for change in per capita Florida personal income (See Line 12 Instructions) 1.0339 (12) 13. Majority vote maximum millage rate allowed (Line 11 multiplied by Line 12) 4.5493 per $1,000 (13) 14. Two-thirds vote maximum millage rate allowed (Multiply Line 13 by 1.10) 5.0042 per $1,000 (14) 15. Current year proposed millage rate 4.1345 per $1,000 (15) 16. Minimum vote required to levy proposed millage: (Check one) (16) a. Majority vote of the governing body: Check here if Line 15 is less than or equal to Line 13. The maximum millage rate is equal ✔ to the majority vote maximum rate. Enter Line 13 on Line 17. b. Two-thirds vote of governing body: Check here if Line 15 is less than or equal to Line 14, but greater than Line 13. The maximum millage rate is equal to proposed rate. Enter Line 15 on Line 17. c. Unanimous vote of the governing body, or 3/4 vote if nine members or more: Check here if Line 15 is greater than Line 14. The maximum millage rate is equal to the proposed rate. Enter Line 15 on Line 17. d. Referendum: The maximum millage rate is equal to the proposed rate. Enter Line 15 on Line 17. The selection on Line 16 allows a maximum millage rate of 17. per $1,000 (17) (Enter rate indicated by choice on Line 16) 4.5493 182 18. Current year gross taxable value from Current Year Form DR-420, Line 4 $ 2,825,896,120 (18)
Continued on page 2 Taxing Authority : DR-420MM-P R. 5/12 CITY OF DUNEDIN Page 2 19. Current year proposed taxes (Line 15 multiplied by Line 18, divided by 1,000) $ 11,683,668 (19) Total taxes levied at the maximum millage rate (Line 17 multiplied by Line 18, divided 20. $ (20) by 1,000) 12,855,849 DEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND MSTUs STOP HERE. SIGN AND SUBMIT.
Enter the current year proposed taxes of all dependent special districts & MSTUs levying 21. $ (21) a millage . (The sum of all Lines 19 from each district's Form DR-420MM-P) 0 22. Total current year proposed taxes (Line 19 plus Line 21) $ 11,683,668 (22) Total Maximum Taxes Enter the taxes at the maximum millage of all dependent special districts & MSTUs 23. $ (23) levying a millage (The sum of all Lines 20 from each district's Form DR-420MM-P) 0 24. Total taxes at maximum millage rate (Line 20 plus Line 23) $ 12,855,849 (24) Total Maximum Versus Total Taxes Levied Are total current year proposed taxes on Line 22 equal to or less than total taxes at the 25. ✔ YES NO (25) maximum millage rate on Line 24? (Check one) I certify the millages and rates are correct to the best of my knowledge. The millages Taxing Authority Certification comply with the provisions of s. 200.065 and the provisions of either s. 200.071 or s. S 200.081, F.S. I Signature of Chief Administrative Officer : Date : G N Title : Contact Name and Contact Title : H Les Tyler, Finance Director Ashley Kimpton, Budget Manager E R Mailing Address : Physical Address : E PO BOX 1348 PO BOX 1348
City, State, Zip : Phone Number : Fax Number : DUNEDIN, FL 34697 7272983036 7272983067
Complete and submit this form DR-420MM-P, Maximum Millage Levy Calculation-Preliminary Disclosure, to your property appraiser with the form DR-420, Certification of Taxable Value.
183
Instructions on page 3 MAXIMUM MILLAGE LEVY CALCULATION DR-420MM-P R. 5/12 PRELIMINARY DISCLOSURE Page 3 INSTRUCTIONS
General Instructions Line Instructions
Each of the following taxing authorities must Lines 5-10 complete a DR-420MM-P. Only taxing authorities that levied a 2018 millage rate less • County than their maximum majority vote rate must complete these • Municipality lines. The adjusted rolled-back rate on Line 10 is the rate • Special district dependent to a county or that would have been levied if the maximum vote rate for municipality 2018 had been adopted. If these lines are completed, enter • County MSTU the adjusted rate on Line 11. • Independent special district, including water management districts Line 12 • Water management district basin This line is entered by the Department of Revenue. The
same adjustment factor is used statewide by all taxing Voting requirements for millages adopted by a authorities. It is based on the change in per capita Florida two-thirds or a unanimous vote are based on the personal income (s. 200.001(8)(i), F.S.), which Florida Law full membership of the governing body, not on requires the Office of Economic and Demographic Research the number of members present at the time of to report each year. the vote.
Lines 13 and 14 This form calculates the maximum tax levy for 2019 allowed under s. 200.065(5), F.S. Counties Millage rates are the maximum that could be levied with a and municipalities, including dependent special majority or two-thirds vote of the full membership of the districts and MSTUs, which adopt a tax levy at the governing body. With a unanimous vote of the full final hearing higher than allowed under s. membership (three-fourths vote of the full membership if 200.065, F.S., may be subject to the loss of their the governing body has nine or more members) or a half-cent sales tax distribution. referendum, the maximum millage rate that can be levied is the taxing authority’s statutory or constitutional cap. DR-420MM-P shows the preliminary maximum millages and taxes levied based on your Line 16 proposed adoption vote. Each taxing authority Check the box for the minimum vote necessary at the final must complete, sign, and submit this form to hearing to levy your adopted millage rate. their property appraiser with their completed DR-420, Certification of Taxable Value. Line 17 Enter the millage rate indicated by the box checked in Line The vote at the final hearing and the resulting 16. If the proposed millage rate is equal to or less than the maximum may change. After the final hearing, majority vote maximum millage rate, enter the majority vote each taxing authority will file a final Form maximum. If a two-thirds vote, a unanimous vote, or a DR-420MM, Maximum Millage Levy Calculation referendum is required, enter the proposed millage rate. For Final Disclosure, with Form DR-487, Certification a millage requiring more than a majority vote, the proposed of Compliance, with the Department of Revenue. millage rate must be entered on Line 17, rather than the maximum rate, so that the comparisons on Lines 21 through Specific tax year references in this form are 25 are accurate. updated each year by the Department. 184 All TRIM forms for taxing authorities are available on our website at http://floridarevenue.com/property/Pages/Forms.aspx Agenda Item: 3.c
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-16
From: Theresa Smalling
Subject: RFP 19-112X Award of contract to the Gehring Group for Employee Benefits Broker and Consulting Services
Presenter(s): Theresa Smalling, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management
Recommend: Staff recommends Commission approval of the proposed contract with the Gehring Group..
Epic Goal(s): EPIC Goal #5: Enhance community and employee relationship strategies that strengthen inclusiveness, respect, transparency and collaborative engagement.
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: See schedule included in attached contract
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. COD Benefits Consultant Contract - 072319 signed by GG.pdf, B. SUPPLEMENT FOR ITEM 3.c. 19-07-22 Memorandum from Chuck Ankney re RFP -1125 Employee Benefits Brokerage and Consulting Services.pdf,
Background: In March 2019, the City advertised a Request for Proposals (RFP 19-1125) to obtain Employee Benefits Brokerage and Consulting Services. The process 185 is detailed in the attached memorandum from Purchasing Agent Chuck Ankney. A selection committee comprised of Payroll & Benefits Coordinator Paula McLemore, HR/Risk Manager Terri Kearnes, Parks & Recreation Administration Superintendent Lanie Sheets, Fire Lieutenant Kevin Naylor and me individually reviewed and scored the initial six proposals. The committee then met and ranked the proposals to create a short-list of three firms. The three finalists were invited to make presentations to the Evaluation Committee. Afterwards, the Evaluation Committee discussed the presentations and ultimately selected the Gehring Group, Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, FL (Gehring), to continue as the City's broker and consultant. Gehring has been an excellent service provider, and has a proven record of service delivery to the City which has been supportive and reliable.
Gehring submitted a Service Agreement with their scope of services and proposed fee schedule as well as services that are included at no additional cost (see attached contract). The majority of fees are commission-based; commissions for all placements are required to be disclosed to the City. The BenTek Online Benefits Enrollment & Administration System is an included service, along with support for and attendance at onsite attendance at the City's annual Open Enrollment meetings and other benefits related events such as the Employee Wellness Fair. The contract’s initial term is for a three-year period, with an option to renew for an additional two-year period.
Staff recommends that the Commission approve the new service agreement with the Gehring Group, effective August 1, 2019.
186
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE AGENT OF RECORD AND INSURANCE BROKERAGE SERVICES RELATING TO EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made this _____ day of ______2019, by and between the CITY OF DUNEDIN, whose mailing address is 542 Main Street, Dunedin, FL 34698, hereinafter referred to as “CITY”, and THE GEHRING GROUP, INC., with its principal place of business located at 4200 Northcorp Parkway, Suite 185, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410, hereinafter referred to as “CONTRACTOR”.
RECITALS:
The CITY is a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Florida. The CITY desires to obtain certain consulting services relating to its benefits program.
CONTRACTOR is an active corporation, existing under the laws of the State of Florida, experienced in the foregoing and agrees to perform these services for the CITY under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
In consideration of the mutual premises set forth in this Agreement, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONTRACTOR as follows:
SECTION ONE NATURE OF WORK
CONTRACTOR will perform consulting, advisory and insurance brokerage services for the placement of insurance on behalf of the CITY with respect to its benefits program, as more particularly described in the “SCOPE OF SERVICES” as set forth in EXHIBIT “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION TWO PLACE OF WORK
CONTRACTOR agrees, upon request, to come to the CITY’s offices in Dunedin, Florida, or such other places as reasonably designated by the City, to meet with representatives of the City, as necessary.
187 1
SECTION THREE TIME DEVOTED TO WORK
In the performance of services, the services and hours CONTRACTOR is to work on any given day, will be entirely within CONTRACTOR’S control and the CITY will rely upon CONTRACTOR to devote such time, as is reasonably necessary, to fulfill the intent and purpose of this Agreement.
SECTION FOUR COMPENSATION
The fee to be paid to CONTRACTOR shall be paid by the benefits provider(s), selected by the CITY, as set forth in EXHIBIT “B” attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FIVE TERM
The initial term of this Agreement shall commence upon the parties’ execution of this Agreement (“Commencement Date”) and shall be for a term of three (3) years. This Agreement may be extended for one (1) additional two (2) year period under the same terms and conditions upon mutual written agreement of both CITY and CONTRACTOR.
SECTION SIX INDEMNIFICATION
CONTRACTOR shall protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless, the CITY, its employees, agents, elected or appointed officials, and representatives from any and all claims and liabilities, including all attorney’s fees and court costs, including appeals, for which the CITY, its employees, agents, elected or appointed officials, and representatives can or may be held liable as a result of injury to persons or damage to property occurring by reason of any negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of CONTRACTOR, its employees, or agents arising out of or connected with this Agreement or any breach of this Agreement by CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify the CITY or its agents, employees, or representatives when an occurrence results solely from the wrongful acts or omissions of the CITY, or its board members, agents, elected or appointed officials, employees, or representatives.
188 2
SECTION SEVEN TERMINATION
Notwithstanding Section Five, the CITY may terminate this Agreement for any reason, with or without cause, by giving CONTRACTOR sixty (60) days’ advance written notice of the CITY’s intent to terminate the Agreement.
SECTION EIGHT MISCELLANEOUS
1. As an independent contractor, CONTRACTOR shall pay all expenses in connection with its consulting business and CONTRACTOR will not incur any indebtedness on behalf of the CITY with this AGREEMENT. 2. In the event either party hereto shall file a lawsuit to enforce any of the terms hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all costs, charges, and expenses of enforcement, including reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in a trial of appellate proceeding. 3. The CONTRACTOR is required to comply with Section 119.0701, Florida Statutes. The CONTRACTOR shall keep and maintain public records required by the City to perform the service. Upon request from the City's custodian of public records, the CONTRACTOR shall provide the City with a copy of the requested records or allow the records to be inspected or copied within a reasonable time at a cost that does not exceed the cost provided Chapter 119, Florida Statutes or as otherwise provided by law.
The CONTRACTOR shall ensure that the records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law for the duration of the contract term and following completion of the contract if the CONTRACTOR does not transfer the records to the City.
Upon completion of the contract, the CONTRACTOR shall transfer, at no cost, to the City all public records in possession of the Contractor or keep and maintain public records required by the City to perform the service. If the CONTRACTOR transfers all public records to the City upon completion of the contract, the CONTRACTOR shall destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt or confidential and exempt from public records disclosure requirements. If the CONTRACTOR keeps and maintains public records upon completion of the contract, the CONTRACTOR shall meet all applicable requirements for retaining public records. All records stored electronically must be provided to the City, upon request from the City's custodian of public records, in a format that is compatible with the information technology systems of the City.
189 3
IF THE CONTRACTOR HAS QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CHAPTER 119, FLORIDA STATUTES, TO THE CONTRACTOR'S DUTY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RECORDS RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, CONTACT THE CUSTODIAN OF PUBLIC RECORDS (DENISE KIRKPATRICK) AT:
(727) 298-3034; VIA EMAIL AT [email protected]; OR AT 750 MILWAUKEE AVE., DUNEDIN, FL 34698.
4. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties relative to the transaction contemplated herein and neither this Agreement nor any term or provision hereof may be waived, except by an instrument in writing executed by the CITY and CONTRACTOR. 5. This Agreement shall be interpreted and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida, and the venue for any action brought or arising out of this Agreement shall be Pinellas County, Florida. 6. Should any term or provision of this Agreement be held, to any extent, invalid or unenforceable, as against any person, entity or circumstance during the term hereof, by force of any statute, law, or ruling of any forum of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect any other term or provision of this Agreement, to the extent that the Agreement shall remain operable, enforceable and in full force and effect to the extent permitted by law. 7. This Agreement may be amended, extended, or renewed only with the written approval of the parties. 8. This Agreement states the entire understanding and agreement between the parties and supersedes any and all written or oral representations, statements, negotiations, or agreements previously existing between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR recognizes that any representations, statements or negotiations made by CITY staff do not suffice to legally bind the CITY in a contractual relationship unless they have been reduced to writing and signed by an authorized CITY representative. 9. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the parties, their respective assigns, and successors in interest.
190 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties or their duly authorized representatives hereby execute this Agreement on the date first written above.
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA THE GEHRING GROUP, INC.
By: ____ _ By: ______Jennifer K. Bramley Kurt N. Gehring City Manager President and CEO
By: ______Julie Ward Bujalski Mayor
ATTEST: City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM (Corporate Seal)
By: Thomas J. Trask, B.C.S. City Attorney
191 5
EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY GEHRING GROUP
1. Scope of Work
The City is soliciting proposals for the services of an independent benefits consulting organization to strategically plan, consult, implement, and support the City's employee benefits programs. The selected organization will work closely with the City's Human Resources personnel as a proactive partner in assisting with achieving the most beneficial plan funding designs, selecting insurance carriers and benefits providers. The Contractor will also assist the City with the design and development of Request for Proposals (RFPs), as well as evaluating and identifying high value proposals and comprehensive services for each benefit offered to City of Dunedin employees, including but not limited to: Medical, Prescription Drug and Dental plans, Basic Life Insurance with AD&D, Voluntary Life Insurance, Vision Insurance, Short-term and Long-term disability, COBRA, retiree benefits, a Wellness program, disease management and preventive care options, and an effective Employee Assistance Plan (EAP).
The City is particularly interested in a benefits consulting organization with a proven track record that can offer creative, innovative approaches which will allow the City to maintain quality benefits and contain or reduce overall costs. The contracted firm may be required to provide a self-service, internet-based solution that can electronically transmit benefit data to multiple carriers for various insurance products. The awarded Contractor shall provide services, including, but not limited to:
1.1 Review, on an ongoing basis, the existing employee benefit programs for competitiveness, appropriateness and overall acceptance by plan participants. 1.2 Analyze existing coverage, identify and develop cost-saving alternative benefit strategies and plans. Provide innovative approaches to benefit challenges facing the City of Dunedin and recommendations for benefit plan changes. 1.3 Recommend appropriate premium rates and reserves, and the most economical funding methods to maintain the viability of each benefit plan to ensure that quality and cost-effective benefits are provided by the plans. This includes evaluation of both fully insured and self-funded options, for both current plan year and upcoming plan year. 1.4 Determine annual estimates of renewal rates and cost trends and assist C ity staff in preparation of budget figures. 1.5 Assist in the development of short and long-range goals and strategies, including making projections of potential savings. 192 6
1.6 Serve and assist the City in negotiating benefits provider contract(s) resulting from the review and recommendations noted above including the use of available provider networks. 1.7 Assist the City with plan design changes, plan implementation strategies, plan design and/or benefits communications relating to coverage. 1.8 Provide periodic reports using carrier data on claims and fixed expenses and relate those to total premium and expectations for renewal. 1.9 Provide assistance to City staff, and employees, with issues involving provider billing, claims, vendor service issues/problems, advocacy for services, disputes, interpretation of contracts and services, changes and general troubleshooting. 1.10 Attendance, as needed, at meetings with City staff, elected officials, and employees to facilitate and assist in the management of the City's employee benefits plans. 1.11 Attend and assist with coordination of the annual Open Enrollment meetings and Employee Benefits Fair. Attend on-site annual open enrollment meetings and continuing enrollment services as appropriate for both current and new City of Dunedin employees. 1.12 Assist with ongoing plan administration and ensure that City benefit programs comply with State and Federal legislation. 1.13 Review and disseminate information to City staff, on an ongoing basis, regarding new or revised State and Federal legislation that impacts benefit programs. 1.14 Assist City staff in ensuring compliance with all mandated reporting and posting/notice requirements for benefit plans. 1.15 Develop and assist in creating, as needed, various communication materials and tools including, but not limited to, open enrollment annual meetings, new hire orientation, qualifying events and wellness programs. 1.16 Assist in the ongoing process of an employee wellness program, to improve employee health and reduce employee health-care costs, both in the short and long-term. 1.17 Assist in research of the available options of web site technologies to support on-line enrollments, qualifying event changes and employee education to assist employees in self-management of benefits. 1.18 Provide the Bentek® online enrollment and administration system.
193 7
EXHIBIT “B” COMPENSATION
Coverage Consultant Fee / Commission
Medical ASO $8 PEPM
Reinsurance 12%
Dental 5%
Life & AD&D 10%
Vision 10%
Disability (LTD/STD) 10%
Supplemental/Worksite Carrier Schedule
Please note that under the above compensation proposal, there be will no additional charges to the City for the following:
• BenTek Online Enrollment & Administration System • Annual 112.08 Filing of Actuarial Soundness for the City’s self-funded medical plan • Travel costs associated with servicing the City • Onsite attendance at annual Open Enrollment meetings as needed • Development, production and printing of annual employee benefit booklet • Access to Gehring Group Client Portal • Access to ThinkHR online H.R. research tool
194 8
Department of Finance Interoffice Memorandum
TO: Jennifer K. Bramley, City Manager
THROUGH: Les Tyler, Finance Director ~1, / FROM: Chuck Ankney, Purchasing Agent (fr
DATE: July 22 , 2019
RE: RFP 19-1125 Employee Benefits Brokerage and Consulting Services
This RFP was properly advertised in the Gulf Coast Business Review and on demandstar.com on Friday, March 22 , 2019. Sixteen (16) companies obtained specifications. Six (6) proposals were received by the Friday, April 26 , 2019 submittal deadline.
The purpose of this project was to identify a company qualified to provide employee benefits brokerage and consulting services for the City of Dunedin (the "City") to strategically plan , consult, implement, and support the City's employee benefits programs. The organization would work closely with the City's Human Resources personnel as a proactive partner in assisting with achieving the most beneficial plan funding designs, selecting insurance carriers and benefits providers. The Contractor will also assist the City with the design and development of Request for Proposals (RFPs) , as well as evaluating and identifying high value proposals and comprehensive services for each benefit offered to City of Dunedin employees, including but not limited to : Medical, Prescription Drug and Dental plans, Basic Life Insurance with AD&D, Voluntary Life Insurance, Vision Insurance, Short-term and Long-term disability, COBRA, retiree benefits, a Wellness program, disease management and preventive care options, and an effective Employee Assistance Plan (EAP). There are also a number of voluntary benefits, including pet insurance and supplemental insurance through Aflac and Colonial Life. The contract is for a three year period and may be renewed for an additional two-year period .
A team was developed to review and score the proposals. The team ranked the proposals and created a Short-List of three firms . The three firms were invited on site to speak to the Eva I uation Committee. Subsequently, the Evaluation Committee met and selected one of the three firms, The Gehring Group, Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, FL (Gehring), as the firm submitting the proposal that was in the best interest of the City. Gehring has been an excellent service provider. Their service has been supportive , and reI i a b I e. Fees paid for all services are offset by the commissions that the broker receives from the insurance company for the placement of insurance. Commissions for all placements are required to be disclosed to the City. 195 Consultant Fee/ C overage C . . om miSSIOn Medical ASO $8 PEPM Reinsurance 12% Dental 5% Life & AD&D 10% Vision 10% Disability (L TD/STD) 10% Sup pIe menta 1/Wo rks ite Carrier Schedule
Under the above compensation proposal, there will be no additional charges to the City for:
• BenTek Online Enrollment & Administration System • Annual 112.08 Filing of Actuarial Soundness for the City's self-funded medical plan • Travel costs associated with servicing the City • Onsite attendance at annual Open Enrollment meetings as needed • Development, production and printing of annual employee benefit booklet • Access to Gehring Group Client Portal • Access to ThinkHR online H.R. research tool
Funds for this project are budgeted in the Health Benefits Fund (Acct. # 555-1616-513-34- 05). The team is recommending that a contract be awarded to The Gehring Group, Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, FL.
196 Agenda Item: 3.d
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-15
From: Jorge Quintas, Public Works & Utilities Director/Engineer
Subject: Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical System Upgrades Design Services.
Presenter(s): Russell Ferlita, Ph.D., P.E., Section Engineer | PW & Utilities, Paul Stanek, Assistant Director, Public Works & Utilities Department
Recommend: Staff recommends to Award the Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical System Upgrades Design Contract to Engineering Design Technologies Corporation, of Tampa, FL, in the amount of $843,484.
Epic Goal(s): Goal #4 - Be the statewide model for environmental sustainability stewardship.
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: Funds for these professional services are budgeted in the Water & Sewer Utility Fund, (Acct. #441-5265-535-6301) in Fiscal Year 2019, under Project #521902. A budget amendment appropriating $350,000 from Water & Sewer Fund Reserves will be required in order to fully fund this work, which is included in the FY 2020 proposed budget, and will be brought forward to FY 2019.
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: Award future bid for construction contract.
Attachments: A. Memo of Recommendation (CA).pdf, B. Memo of Recommendation (RF).pdf, C. Dunedin WWTP Electrical System Upgrades Proposal - 06-25-19.pdf, D. Dunedin 197 WWTP Fee Worksheet - 06-25-19.pdf, E. RFQ Summary Score Sheet.pdf, F. Budget Amendment Form.pdf,
Background: The Electrical System Upgrades Project is located at the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) (1140 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave.). The electrical system consists of all electrical gear, motor controls, circuit breakers, transformers, switchgears, etc., required for the proper operation of the WWTP. This project consists of design for the removal of all current electrical equipment and the installation of new electrical equipment. As the plant cannot be taken offline, this project requires the design of temporary motor control centers to allow for the installation of the new equipment.
The electrical system at the WWTP is the original system installed at the time of commissioning of the plant in 1990, which is an outdated technology that has reached the end of its service life. Failure of the electrical system would cause portions of, if not the entire plant to shut down. The replacement of the electrical system will significantly increase the reliability of the WWTP. The completed Master Plan (by King Engineering) identified the replacement of the electrical system as a high priority project for the City that should be completed as soon as possible.
The City received seven (7) submittals of qualifications for this design project. An Evaluation Team (Team) was developed to review and rank the submittals. The team, which consisted of representatives from operations and engineering, evaluated and ranked the qualifications based submittals. As a result of that process, the Team ranked Engineering Design Technologies (EDT) Corporation highest and decided to move forward with negotiating a contract.
Funds for this work are budgeted in the Water & Sewer Utility Fund (Acct. #441-5265-535-6301, under Project #521902). A budget amendment appropriating $350,000 from Water & Sewer Fund Reserves will be required to fully fund this work.
The Notice to Proceed is planned for the month of August 2019. Design is expected to be Complete by June 2020, after which the project will be bid for construction.
Staff hereby recommends award of this design contract to Engineering Design Technologies Corporation, of Tampa, FL, in the amount of $843,484.
198 199 200 ENGINEERING DIVISION P.O.BOX 1348 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34697-1348 (727) 298-3174
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Ankney, Purchasing Agent
FROM: Russell Ferlita, Ph.D., P.E. Section Engineer | PW – Engineering Division
DATE: July 3, 2019
SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical System Upgrades Design Services
The Electrical System Upgrades Project is located at the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) (1140 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave.). The WWTP was constructed and commissioned in 1990 to treat wastewater for the City’s residents and customers. The permitted capacity of the plant is 6 MGD with a current average daily flow of approximately 4.5 MGD. The design life of the WWTP at the time of construction was 20 years. The plant has undergone a series of upgrade and rehabilitation projects to extend its service life and now requires replacement of the electrical equipment in order to ensure the proper operation of the WWTP. The Design Services Contract for the WWTP Electrical System Upgrades Project will include all personnel, materials and services required to complete the design, provide a detailed cost estimate, prepare the bid package and provide professional services for construction. The total estimated cost for design and construction of the improvements is $8.5 million. The City received seven consultant submittals for this project. Engineering Design Technologies Corporation, of Tampa, FL, was determined to be the most qualified firm for this project. This company has successfully completed projects of similar scope and nature for other utilities, and their quality of work and timeliness is anticipated to provide benefit and value to the City throughout the duration of this project. The contract amount for design and construction services for the project is $843,484. The budgeted amount for the design phase of this project was $500,000 for fiscal year 2019 under project number 521902. Since the scope of services includes construction services, and due to the complexity of design of the project, the scope and fee is greater that initial estimate. A budget amendment of $350,000 from fund balance to account #441-5265-535.6301 will be required to complete this design project. If approved by commission, the Notice to Proceed is planned to be issued immediately upon award, and work will continue through the end of construction. After the design phase is complete (Approximately 9 months after the Notice to Proceed), staff will advertise the bid package for award of construction. 201
FEE PROPOSAL
City of Dunedin, Florida Public Works and Utilities Department
ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR WWTP ELECTRICAL SYSTEM UPGRADES
Engineering Design Technologies Corp.
June 25, 2019
SCOPE OF PROJECT
The City of Dunedin, Florida is a municipality of approximately 37,000 residents located in Pinellas County, Florida located on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico in the Tampa Bay area. Dunedin is a full-service City that employs approximately 350 people. The City owns and operates a centralized Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located at 1140 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, Dunedin, Florida 34698 that services its population. The WWTP was built in 1991 and has been in continuous operation since that date. The Plant has a total of nine (9) existing Motor Control Centers (MCC’s) and a whole plant generator which are nearly all original to the Plant. The City is planning a project that includes an extensive replacement of all the existing MCC’s and the switchgear with new, arc flash resistant equipment and the installation of new generators and transfer switches at identified locations. In addition, the City has forty-four (44) lift stations that need new electrical panels and equipment (excluding PLC/RTU cabinets and components). The design for this project will take into consideration the uninterrupted operation of the WWTP and minimal interruption at the lift stations.
This project will be composed of phases defined herein, which are necessary to plan, design, permit, bid and construct the Electrical System Upgrades for the Wastewater Treatment Plant and forty-four (44) lift stations. Engineering Design Technologies Corp. (EDT) will provide the necessary tasks for the following project phases:
Project Management Preliminary Engineering Design Phase Services Bid Phase Services Construction Phase Services
This project will be delivered in a conventional design/bid/build approach, where EDT will prepare design drawings and technical specifications. These drawings and technical specifications will be used by the CITY to solicit bids from licensed construction contractors. The CITY will select the appropriate bidder and enter into a construction contract for the work on the Electrical System Upgrades.
No services are included by EDT to pre-qualify contractors or to pre-purchase 202 equipment for this project.
Page A-1 06/25/19 SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our services will include, but not be limited to, providing a Technical Design Memorandum, providing constructible and permittable drawings and technical specifications, assisting in securing permits, providing assistance during the bid phase and providing construction phase services.
The Scope of Services provided by EDT will consist of the following:
1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
EDT will manage each phase of the project by maintaining a project schedule and budget, reporting progress to the CITY, and providing invoices in a timely manner. This phase will be active throughout the project.
Deliverables: Progress reporting for EDT and subconsultants will be included in monthly invoicing.
2. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
EDT will prepare a Technical Memorandum, describing the recommended design features for review by and approval of the CITY. EDT will review material provided by the CITY, as well as, make general observations of the facility in the field to develop the Technical Memorandum. EDT will meet with CITY representatives to review the Technical Memorandum and to review the overall design concepts prior to commencing design.
The Technical Memorandum will provide preliminary information on electrical improvements, switchgear and MCC selections, generator selection, generator fuel tank sizing, general layout of equipment and other information needed to describe the design criteria for the project.
Following the review of the Technical Memorandum by the CITY, EDT will address comments provided by the CITY and make appropriate changes to the Technical Memorandum. EDT will address each comment and provide responses concerning the action to be taken or an explanation for resolution. EDT will update the Technical Memorandum based on the CITY’s input and will provide a Final Technical Memorandum.
Deliverables: Draft Technical Memorandum, one (1) electronic copy, .pdf, and Final Technical Memorandum, one (1) electronic copy, .pdf and one (1) bound hard copy.
203
Page A-2 06/25/19 3. DESIGN PHASE SERVICES
Design Phase Services will be provided by EDT after the Preliminary Engineering is completed.
A. Structural
Structural engineering services will consist of developing design drawings and technical specifications for this project. The tasks anticipated include:
1) Conduct a site investigation to obtain field data for use in the preparation of the design drawings and technical specifications.
2) Design of a new building to house the new switchgear and new MCC-A. The building will be concrete slab on grade with CMU walls with a stucco finish. The roof will be supported by pre- engineered trusses or bar joists. The top of the finished building floor will be coordinated with floodplain requirements.
3) Structural design of three (3) new concrete generator slabs. The design will include slab and foundation design and details. The top of the slab elevations will be coordinated with floodplain requirements.
4) Structural design for new stairs, platforms and railings, if necessary, for access to the new generators.
5) Relocation, as required, of the CMU wall between the electrical room and the pump room of Facility #16 (Reuse Pump Station) to ensure there is proper clearance in front of the new MCC to be installed in this building.
6) Modifications, as required, to Facility #16 (Reuse Pump Station) second floor electrical room to provide an additional doorway and stairway for an additional means of egress for the new MCC installation.
7) Structural design for two (2) concrete slabs or platforms for the Duke Energy utility transformers providing electrical power to the plant. Stairs and handrails will be provided, as required.
8) Structural design for a new canopy, if needed, for the new MCC-6 located in the Equalization Tank Area.
9) Structural design for new platforms for mounting approximately eighteen (18) lift station control panels, if required, to elevate the control panels above the floodplain. Platform framing, handrails and stairs are included for the platform designs. 204
Page A-3 06/25/19 10) Prepare technical specifications.
11) Provide drawing submittals for the CITY’s review at the 60%, 90% and 100% design milestones.
12) Provide technical specifications submittals for the CITY’s review at the 90% and 100% design milestones.
13) Provide a cost estimate with the 90% design milestone submittal. This cost estimate will be based on the drawings and specifications submitted at the 90% design milestone.
B. Civil
Civil engineering services will consist of developing design drawings and technical specifications for this project. The tasks anticipated include:
1) Conduct a site investigation to obtain field data for use in the preparation of the design drawings and technical specifications.
2) Conduct subsurface utility (SUE) investigation using ground penetrating radar (GPR) and vacuum extraction methods, as needed, to locate and confirm the presence of existing utilities and mark the horizontal location in the project site. This includes up to eight (8) verified vertical and horizontal (VVH) locations.
Utilization of the GPR and vacuum extraction is the industry recognized procedure for locating underground utilities and features. Although effective and reliable, there is the possibility that not all utilities will be detected due to environmental conditions, soil conditions, water table, excessive depth and/or feature makeup. Identification of utilities is limited to the above the water table or to a maximum depth of 4 to 5 feet below the ground surface.
3) Civil design of site stormwater and drainage control necessary for the new switchgear building and three (3) engine/generator set concrete slabs.
4) Prepare technical specifications.
5) Provide drawing submittals for the CITY’s review at the 60%, 90% and 100% design milestones.
6) Provide technical specification submittals for the CITY’s review at the 90% and 100% design milestones.
7) Provide a cost estimate with the 90% design milestone submittal. This cost estimate will be based on the drawings and specifications 205 submitted at the 90% design milestone.
Page A-4 06/25/19 C. Electrical / Instrumentation / Control
Electrical / Instrumentation / Control engineering services will consist of developing design drawings and technical specifications for this project. The tasks anticipated include:
1) Conduct site investigations and obtain field data for the preparation of design drawings and technical specifications.
2) Specify three (3) new diesel-fueled engine/generator sets (approximately 500 KW, 400 KW and 250 KW) each with a weatherproof, sound attenuating unit enclosure, silencer, day tank, panelboard and engine control panel. Each generator will be sized in accordance with the connected loads.
3) Design and detail the connections for the automatic transfer of the load from utility power to generator power. This automatic transfer will include controls and circuit breakers to accommodate the new engine/generator sets at Facility #13 and Facility #4. The generator installation in Facility #7 will include an automatic transfer switch (ATS).
4) Design a conduit routing plan for the necessary power wiring and controls for the three (3) new engine/generator sets.
5) Prepare demolition drawings for the removal of the main switchgear presently located in the Administration Building.
6) Prepare demolition drawings for the removal of the Duke Energy pad-mounted transformer and the nearby splice box.
7) Prepare demolition drawings for the removal of the following motor control centers:
a) MCC-A (Facility #2 - Administration Building). b) MCC (Standby Generator/Maintenance Facility). c) MCC-6 (Facility #3 - Equalization Tank Area). d) MCC (Facility #16 - Reuse Pump Station). e) MCC-D (Facility #8 - Denite Filter Building). f) MCC-B (Facility #4 - Headworks Building). g) MCC-E (Facility #13 - Blower Building).
8) Prepare demolition drawings for the removal of the Panelboard CC (Facility #7 - Sludge Pumping Building) and Panelboard FF (Facility #14 - Chemical Storage Building).
206
Page A-5 06/25/19 9) Prepare demolition drawings for the removal of electrical disconnects, transformers and panelboards (used for 240 VAC, 208 VAC and 120 VAC loads for lighting, A/C, etc.) in each of the nine (9) facilities in the WWTP.
10) Evaluate the load and feeder size for each MCC and panelboard to be replaced.
11) Design and develop the layouts for the new switchgear, seven (7) new MCC’s and two (2) new panelboards.
a) Design related to the replacement of the switchgear and installation of a redundant power feed and transformer with automatic switchgear with new, arc flash resistant equipment (Current equipment is in Facility #2). b) Design related to the replacement of MCC-A, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #2 (Administrative Building) with new, arc flash resistant equipment. The design will include connections for a temporary backup generator to operate the anoxic and anaerobic tanks and mixed liquor recycle pumps (Facility # 5 and Facility #6). c) Design related to the replacement of the MCC, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in the Standby Generator and Maintenance Facility with new, arc flash resistant equipment. d) Design related to the replacement of MCC-B, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #4 (Headworks Building) with new, arc flash resistant equipment. The design includes a permanent backup generator and automatic transfer switching. e) Design related to the replacement of Panel CC, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #7 (Sludge Pump Building) with new, arc flash resistant equipment. The design includes a permanent backup generator and automatic transfer switch. f) Design related to the replacement of MCC-D, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #8 (Denite Filter Building) with new, arc flash resistant equipment. g) Design related to the replacement of the MCC-E, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #13 (Blower Building) with new, arc flash resistant equipment. The design includes a backup generator and transfer switch to operate 2 blowers. h) Design related to the replacement of the MCC-6, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #3 (Equalization Tank Area) with new, arc flash resistant 207 equipment.
Page A-6 06/25/19 i) Design related to the replacement of Panel-FF, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility # 14 (Chemical Storage Facility Area) with new, arc flash resistant equipment. j) Design related to the replacement of the MCC, electrical disconnects, breakers, transformers, etc. in Facility #16 (Master Reuse Pump Station Area) with new, arc flash resistant equipment.
12) Coordinate and detail the connections required for the loads to the new switchgear, seven (7) new MCC’s and two (2) new panelboards. It is anticipated all existing loads, including the associated conduits and conductors, will remain and will be reconnected to the new switchgear, MCC’s and panelboards. Deteriorated and corroded conduits will be shown to be replaced, as necessary.
13) Coordinate and detail the connections required for the new “in-kind” replacements of disconnects, transformers and panelboards (used for 240 VAC, 208 VAC and 120 VAC loads for lighting, A/C, etc.). It is anticipated the existing loads, including conduits and conductors, will remain and will be reconnected to the new disconnects, transformers and panelboards. Deteriorated and corroded conduits will be shown to be replaced, as necessary.
14) Design electrical power feeder connections, as required, to the new switchgear, seven (7) new MCC’s and two (2) new panelboards.
15) Design electrical power connections, as required, to the new disconnects, transformers and panelboards.
16) Provide connection details for conduit and wiring for the electrical service connections to the new switchgear.
17) Coordinate with Duke Energy and prepare drawings for the installation of two (2) utility power transformers and independent primary feeders to these transformers.
18) Prepare one-line diagrams for the installations of the proposed switchgear, MCC’s, panelboards, electrical disconnects and transformers.
19) Prepare load calculations.
20) Design the equipment grounding system for each of the three (3) new engine/generator set installations.
208
Page A-7 06/25/19 21) Develop the design requirements for an electrical system-grounding system for the new switchgear installation and main service to the plant.
22) Develop a lightning protection plan that includes air terminals, ground conductors and ground rods for the new switchgear building.
23) Verify and specify additional grounding that may be necessary at each of the seven (7) MCC installations and the grounding at Facilities #7 and #14.
24) Develop a lighting plan, including emergency lighting, in the new switchgear building.
25) Prepare drawings that designate the requirements for the removal of the forty-four (44) lift station control panels.
26) Prepare standard duplex and triplex lift station control panels, including full voltage non-reversing NEMA motor starters and reduced voltage solid state starters (RVSSS). These lift station control panels will interface with the recently designed RTU panels for the lift stations.
a) Design related to the replacement of the electrical panels and related equipment (excluding the PLC cabinet and equipment and lift station pumps) at the CITY's 44 Lift Stations (43 off-site lift stations and Facility #15 on-site).
27) Specify the parameters for conducting arc flash hazard analysis, including short circuit current analysis and circuit breaker/protective relay coordination study, to be conducted on all installed electrical equipment.
28) Prepare technical specifications.
29) Provide drawing submittals for the CITY’s review at the 60%, 90% and 100% design milestones.
30) Provide technical specification submittals for the CITY’s review at the 90% and 100% design milestones.
31) Provide a cost estimate with the 90% design milestone submittal. This cost estimate will be based on the drawings and specifications submitted at the 90% design milestone.
32) Develop a plan for executing the installations at each facility without interrupting the operation of the Plant. 209
Page A-8 06/25/19 Deliverables for Design Phase Services: EDT will provide drawing submittals in electronic .pdf format at the 60%, 90% and 100% design milestones. EDT will provide technical specifications in electronic .pdf format at the 90% and 100% design milestones. Drawing submittals will be in AutoCAD (.dwg) format and technical specifications in Word (.doc) format at the final design milestone. EDT will deliver to the CITY final files in .doc and .dwg formats.
D. Permitting
1) The following permits / registrations will be required for this project.
a) General ERP permit modification or exemption. b) Florida Department of Environmental Registration (FDEP) Storage Tank Facility Registration, as required. c) City Building Department Permit. d) FDEP Air General Permit, if required.
2) Tasks included for permitting include:
a) Preparation of all required permit applications and coordination of review with the CITY. b) Submit applications to the permitting agencies. c) Review up to two (2) requests for information (RFI’s) per permit and prepare draft response for the CITY’s review and approval. EDT will submit responses to the RFI’s to the permitting agency and resubmit permits, as required.
CITY will submit and pay fees for the City Building Department Permit.
All other permit application fees will be paid by EDT from a Permit Allowance of $2,000.00. Additional permitting application fees in excess of $2,000.00 will be paid by the CITY through a supplement to this Permit Allowance. Any unused funds from the Permit Allowance will not be invoiced to the CITY.
Deliverables for Permitting: EDT will provide all required permit applications in electronic .pdf format and one (1) bound hard copy. EDT will respond to RFI’s for all required permits.
E. Geotechnical
Geotechnical services will be provided as follows:
1) Conduct a visual reconnaissance of the project site and coordinate utility clearances.
210
Page A-9 06/25/19 2) The CITY will provide, if available, geotechnical data for use in determining foundation requirements. EDT will use this geotechnical data provided by the CITY to further assist in the determination of the foundation requirements the structural engineer will require for design.
3) Perform up to five (5) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings in the vicinity of the proposed switchgear building and engine/generator locations. The SPT borings will be performed to an approximate depth of 20 feet below existing grades using standard drilling equipment.
4) Visually classify and stratify all recovered soil samples in the laboratory using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Perform laboratory testing on selected soil samples.
5) Collect groundwater level measurements within the borings and estimate the Seasonal High Groundwater Table (SHGWT) depth at selected locations.
6) Prepare a formal engineering report summarizing the existing geotechnical data, the field and laboratory data generated (if applicable), the subsurface conditions encountered (if applicable) and recommendations including geotechnical design parameters for the anticipated foundation systems.
Deliverables for Geotechnical: EDT will provide geotechnical data in .pdf and AutoCAD (.dwg) formats and one (1) hard copy.
F. Surveying
EDT will obtain horizontal and vertical locations of all features located within the project area near the switchgear building, the three (3) engine/generator set locations, and the two (2) Duke Energy utility transformers, and prepare a topographic survey suitable for use as a base map. The survey will show the following:
1) Horizontal and vertical control network for the project area. 2) Poles and towers. 3) Edges of any existing pavements, sidewalks, and curbs at 50-foot intervals. 4) Existing manholes, hydrants, catch basins, valve boxes, meter boxes, and underground utility markers. 5) Visible culverts and storm structures. 6) Buildings and structures within the project area.
211
Page A-10 06/25/19 All surveying output will be base mapped in AutoCAD electronic format suitable for plotting at 1” = 20’. All horizontal coordinates shall be in U.S. Survey feet. Survey deliverables will be referenced to NAD83 and NAVD88.
Deliverables for Surveying: EDT will provide survey data in .pdf and AutoCAD (.dwg) formats and one (1) hard copy.
G. Meetings
EDT will attend meetings with the CITY’s staff:
1) One (1) kickoff meeting. 2) One (1) Technical Memorandum review meeting. 3) One (1) 60% design milestone review meeting. 4) One (1) 90% design milestone review meeting. 5) One (1) pre-bid meeting. 6) One (1) pre-construction meeting.
Deliverables for Meetings: EDT will provide a meeting agenda and meeting minutes for each meeting in electronic .pdf format.
4. BID PHASE SERVICES
A. EDT will provide responses to the CITY for requests from bidders for clarification or additional information during the bid period.
B. EDT will prepare addenda items, as required, to clarify the drawings and technical specifications.
5. CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES
A. During construction of the Electrical System Upgrades project, EDT will support the CITY by providing the following construction phase services.
1) Review shop drawings and submittals prepared by the Contractor.
2) Attend seven (7) construction site meetings.
3) Answer RFI’s generated by the Contractor and prepare revisions to the drawings and technical specifications, as necessary.
4) Conduct twenty (20) construction observation visits and prepare “punch lists”, as necessary.
5) Limited review of Operations and Maintenance Manuals prepared 212 by the Contractor.
Page A-11 06/25/19 6) Provide twenty (20) site visits for start-up assistance and commissioning.
7) Prepare record drawings from red-lined “as-built” drawings prepared by the Contractor.
Deliverables for Construction Phase: EDT will provide electronically sealed record drawings in electronic .pdf format. Additionally, EDT will provide record drawings in AutoCAD (.dwg) format.
COMPENSATION
EDT will provide all services described herein for a not-to-exceed fee of $843,484.00 as shown in Attachment A.
All services will be provided on an hourly reimbursable basis in accordance with the Fee Schedule included in Attachment B.
213
Page A-12 06/25/19
NOTE: This is a not-to-exceed fee estimate for the tasks included in the proposal. This should not be construed as a not-to-exceed amount for each individual task. 214
Page A-13 06/25/19 ATTACHMENT B FEE SCHEDULE
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Engineering Design Services for WWTP Electrical Upgrades
Engineering Design Technologies Corp. June 25, 2019
Fee Schedule
Staff Hourly Rate
Principal / Project Manager $225.00 Sr. Professional Engineer 170.00 Professional Land Surveyor 155.00 Professional Engineer 150.00 Survey Crew 135.00 Sr. Design Engineer / Sr. Associate 125.00 Project Associate 115.00 Survey Technician 110.00 Design Engineer 110.00 Sr. Designer 95.00 Designer 90.00 Sr. CADD Technician 100.00 CADD Technician II 85.00 CADD Technician I 75.00 Sr. Clerical 73.00 Clerical II 70.00 Clerical I 65.00
215
Page A-14 06/25/19 FEE WORKSHEET
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Engineering Design Services for WWTP Electrical Upgrades
Engineering Design Technologies Corp. June 25, 2019
Sr. Design Principal / Sr. Professional Professional Professional Engineer / Sr. Survey Sr. CADD Project Manager Engineer Land Surveyor Engineer Survey Crew Associate Project Associate Technician Design Engineer Sr. Designer Designer Technician Task No. Task Billing Rate: $225.00 $170.00 $155.00 $150.00 $135.00 $125.00 $115.00 $110.00 $110.00 $95.00 $90.00 $100.00 1.0 Project Management 1.1 Project Management, QA/QC 90.0 272.0 84.0 TOTAL TASK 1.0 2.0 Preliminary Engineering 2.1 Kickoff Meeting, Information Collection and Site Visits 6.0 12.0 10.0 68.0 38.0 49.0 2.2 Prepare Draft Technical Memorandum 4.0 16.0 8.0 49.0 28.0 48.0 2.3 Attend Review Meeting and Incorporate City Review Comments 4.0 4.0 2.4 Prepare Final Technical Memorandum 2.0 2.0 6.0 7.0 TOTAL TASK 2.0 3.0 Design Phase Services 3.1 Prepare and Submit 60% Design Documents 71.0 110.0 12.0 225.0 120.0 284.0 158.0 50.0 322.0 216.0 9.0 3.2 Attend 60% Review Meeting and Incorporate City Comments 12.0 32.0 31.0 12.0 16.0 3.3 Prepare and Submit 90% Design Documents 20.0 94.0 53.0 123.0 157.0 41.0 33.0 3.4 Attend 90% Review Meeting and Incorporate City Comments 7.0 11.0 28.0 13.0 12.0 21.0 3.5 Prepare and Submit 100% Design Documents 18.0 67.0 69.0 74.0 88.0 40.0 33.0 3.6 Permit Application Preparation and Submittal 2.0 39.0 13.0 10.0 8.0 3.7 Responses to Permit RFI's 2.0 11.0 3.0 TOTAL TASK 3.0 4.0 Bid Phase 4.1 Attend Pre-Bid Meeting and Responses to RFI's 6.0 6.0 12.0 7.0 16.0 4.2 Preparation of Addenda to Drawings & Specifications 2.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 4.0 TOTAL TASK 4.0 5.0 Construction Phase 5.1 Attend Pre-Con Meeting & Review Shop Drawings and Submittals 6.0 38.0 168.0 187.0 191.0 5.2 Construction Site Meetings 22.0 10.0 46.0 45.0 5.3 Respond to RFI's 4.0 19.0 8.0 16.0 5.4 Construction Observation Visits 13.0 20.0 90.0 102.0 100.0 5.5 Review O&M Manuals 4.0 10.0 20.0 5.6 Provide Start-Up Assistance 20.0 70.0 89.0 5.7 Prepare Record Drawings 2.0 6.0 8.0 14.0 16.0 TOTAL TASK 5.0 6.0 Allowances / Expenses 6.1 Permit Allowance 6.2 Geotechnical Services (Includes 5 Soil Borings) 6.3 SUE Division (Three (3) Days at $1500/Day) 6.4 Expenses (Local Travel, Prints, Copies, Shipping Charges, etc.) TOTAL TASK 6.0
TOTAL $57,150.00 $137,020.00 $1,860.00 $98,850.00 $16,200.00 $105,500.00 $54,395.00 $5,500.00 $96,030.00 $28,880.00 $41,940.00 $14,000.00 216
NOTE: This is a not-to-exceed fee estimate for the tasks included in the proposal. This should not be construed as a not-to-exceed amount for each individual task. Page 1 of 2 FEE WORKSHEET
CITY OF DUNEDIN, FLORIDA PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Engineering Design Services for WWTP Electrical Upgrades
Engineering Design Technologies Corp. June 25, 2019
CADD CADD Technician II Technician I Sr. Clerical Clerical II Clerical I Allowances / Task No. Task Billing Rate: $85.00 $75.00 $73.00 $70.00 $65.00 Expenses Fee 1.0 Project Management 1.1 Project Management, QA/QC 80.0 16.0 $83,030.00 TOTAL TASK 1.0 $83,030.00 2.0 Preliminary Engineering 2.1 Kickoff Meeting, Information Collection and Site Visits $21,410.00 2.2 Prepare Draft Technical Memorandum 20.0 30.0 2.0 $22,755.00 2.3 Attend Review Meeting and Incorporate City Review Comments $1,120.00 2.4 Prepare Final Technical Memorandum 19.0 10.0 $4,550.00 TOTAL TASK 2.0 $49,835.00 3.0 Design Phase Services 3.1 Prepare and Submit 60% Design Documents 629.0 186.0 120.0 3.0 4.0 $278,060.00 3.2 Attend 60% Review Meeting and Incorporate City Comments 10.0 2.0 $16,570.00 3.3 Prepare and Submit 90% Design Documents 282.0 46.0 50.0 $99,135.00 3.4 Attend 90% Review Meeting and Incorporate City Comments 5.0 2.5 2.0 $13,360.00 3.5 Prepare and Submit 100% Design Documents 112.0 16.0 20.0 2.5 $63,975.00 3.6 Permit Application Preparation and Submittal 5.0 4.0 $10,950.00 3.7 Responses to Permit RFI's 5.0 $3,030.00 TOTAL TASK 3.0 $485,080.00 4.0 Bid Phase 4.1 Attend Pre-Bid Meeting and Responses to RFI's 8.0 5.0 4.0 $8,030.00 4.2 Preparation of Addenda to Drawings & Specifications 11.0 4.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 $6,380.00 TOTAL TASK 4.0 $14,410.00 5.0 Construction Phase 5.1 Attend Pre-Con Meeting & Review Shop Drawings and Submittals 4.0 80.0 2.0 $78,940.00 5.2 Construction Site Meetings $15,940.00 5.3 Respond to RFI's 8.0 10.0 4.0 $8,680.00 5.4 Construction Observation Visits 13.0 $37,629.00 5.5 Review O&M Manuals 20.0 $5,040.00 5.6 Provide Start-Up Assistance $21,940.00 5.7 Prepare Record Drawings 36.0 16.0 2.0 $10,410.00 TOTAL TASK 5.0 $178,579.00 6.0 Allowances / Expenses 6.1 Permit Allowance $2,000.00 $2,000.00 6.2 Geotechnical Services (Includes 5 Soil Borings) $5,714.00 $5,714.00 6.3 SUE Division (Three (3) Days at $1500/Day) $4,500.00 $4,500.00 6.4 Expenses (Local Travel, Prints, Copies, Shipping Charges, etc.) $20,336.00 $20,336.00 TOTAL TASK 6.0 $32,550.00
TOTAL $94,265.00 $21,600.00 $34,164.00 $980.00 $2,600.00 $32,550.00 $843,484.00 217
TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT: $843,484.00 NOTE: This is a not-to-exceed fee estimate for the tasks included in the proposal. This should not be construed as a not-to-exceed amount for each individual task. Page 2 of 2 SUMMARY SCORE SHEET RFQ 19-1123 Engineering Design Services for the WWTP Electrical System Upgrades
Company NameArcadis McKim & Creed Pegasus TSI Russell Brian Russell Brian Russell Brian Category Points Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total
Project Team 25 24 23 20 67 23 24 18 65 21 22 18 61
Firm Experience 15 15 14 10 39 14 15 9 38 12 13 10 35
Proposed Project Plan 30 25 28 15 68 24 28 25 77 25 27 28 80
Schedule 20 18 20 10 48 20 20 15 55 15 18 17 50
References 10 10 10 8 28 10 10 8 28 7 7 5 19
Total 100 92 95 63 250 91 97 75 263 80 87 78 245
14611234967316
Company Name Tetra Tech Black & Veatch Corp Engineering Design Technologies Russell Brian Russell Brian Russell Brian Category Points Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total
Project Team 25 22 23 20 65 23 25 20 68 22 25 25 72
Firm Experience 15 15 14 13 42 15 15 11 41 14 15 13 42
Proposed Project Plan 30 25 27 28 80 24 30 12 66 26 30 30 86
Schedule 20 17 20 20 57 19 20 19 58 20 20 20 60
References 10 10 10 10 30 10 10 8 28 9 10 8 27
Total 100 89 94 91 274 91 100 70 261 91 100 96 287
5421121582114
Company Name CES Consultants Company Score Rank Rank Russell Brian Category Points Ferlita Antonian Tim Calvit Total Arcadis 250 5114
Project Team 25 22 24 18 64 McKim & Creed 263 393
Firm Experience 15 10 14 8 32 Pegasus TSI 245 6166
Proposed Project Plan 30 23 29 10 62 Tetra Tech 274 2114
Schedule 20 15 18 8 41 Black & Veatch Corp 261 482 Engineering Design References 10 5 10 5 20 Technologies 287 141
Total 100 75 95 49 219 CES Consultants 219 7187
74718 218 219 Agenda Item: 3.e
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-12
From: Thomas J Trask, City Attorney
Subject: STARRED ITEM: Code Enforcement Lien at 977 Victor Drive, Dunedin, Florida regarding DCEB Case Nos. 16-612, 16-614, 16-1048, 16-1049, 17-162 and 17-441 (Estate Buyers LLC} for a Partial Release of Code Enforcement Board Liens
Presenter(s): Thomas J. Trask, City Attorney
Recommend: A. Staff recommends to place this item on the agenda.
B. Staff recommends to authorize the City Attorney to accept a $3,500.00 settlement offer from Attorney Ted Topouzis, on behalf of the current property owner, in exchange for a Partial Release of the Code Enforcement Board Liens at 977 Victor Drive, Dunedin.
Epic Goal(s): N/A
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. Code Enforcement Settlement offer re 977 Victor Drive.pdf, 220 Background: See Exhibit A.
221 THOMAS J. TRASK, B.C.S.* T R A S K JAY DAIGNEAULT RANDY MORA DAIGNEAULT ERICA F. AUGELLO ---LLP --- DAVID E. PLATTE A T T 0 R N E Y S PATRICK E. PEREZ ROBERT M. ESCHENFELDER, B.C.S. *
• Board Certified by the .Florida Bar In City, Ccrunty and Local Government Law
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 17, 2019
TO: Mayor Julie Ward Bujalski Vice Mayor Maureen "Moe" Freaney Commissioner Heather Gracy Commissioner Deborah Kynes Commissioner Jeff Gow Jennifer K. Bramley, City Manager I FROM: Thomas J. Trask, City Attorney'~
RE: Property at 977 Victor Drive, D(J;edin, Florida DCEB Case Nos. 16-612, 16-614, 16-1048, 16-1049, 17-162 and 17-441 (Estate Buyers LLC) Partial Release of Code Enforcement Board Liens
The purpose of this memorandum is to obtain your authorization to accept a $3,500.00 settlement offer from Attorney Ted Topouzis, on behalf of the current property owner, in exchange for a Partial Release of the Code Enforcement Board Liens at 977 Victor Drive, Dunedin.
BACKGROUND
The subject property has six (6) code enforcement liens, all of which were inferior to the lien of Bank of America in a foreclosure which was filed in 2012 and completed in March 2019. I was recently contacted by Atty. Ted Topouzis, who represents the current owner, MTGLQ Investors, L.P., who presented a settlement offer of $3,500.00 in exchange for a partial release of the Code Enforcement Board liens.
RECOMMENDATION
Since the Code Enforcement Board liens are unenforceable against the property, a Partial Release in return for the payment of $3,500.00 is a good deal for the City. In that regard, I am requesting authority to accept the offer.
222
1001 South Fort Harrison Avenue, Suite 201 • Clearwater, Florida 33756 E-Mail [email protected] Telephone 727-733-0494 Fax 727-733-2991 A Limited Liability Partnersllip Respectfully submitted.
T JT/kt
cc: Greg Rice, Director of Planning & Development Tom Colbert, Enforcement Inspector Joan McHale, Code Enforcement Administrator Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
223
1001 South Fort Harrison Avenue, Suite 20 1 • Cle;mvater, Florida 33756 E-1\·tail [email protected] egal Telephone 727-733-0494 Fax 727-733-299 1 A Limited Liabili(y Partners !tip Agenda Item: 3.f
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-12
From: Thomas J Trask, City Attorney
Subject: STARRED ITEM: Code Enforcement Lien at 1618 Amberglen Drive, Dunedin regarding DCEB Case No. 18-757 (Carlsbad Funding Mtg Trust)
Presenter(s): Thomas J. Trask, City Attorney
Recommend: A. Staff recommends to place this item on the agenda.
B. Staff recommends to authorize the City Attorney to accept a $7,500.00 settlement offer from Attorney Clint Burton, on behalf of the owner's management company , in exchange for the Release of a Code Enforcement Board Lien (DCEB 18-757), on the property located at 1618 Amberglen Drive.
Epic Goal(s): N/A
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. DCEB Settlement offer re 1618 Amberglen Drive.pdf,
224 Background: See Exhibit A.
225 T R THOMAS J. TRASK, B.C.S. * A S K JAY DAIGNEAULT DAIGNEAULT RANDY MORA ---LLP--- ERICA F. AUGELLO DAVID E. PLATTE ATTORNEYS PATRICK E. PEREZ ROBERT M. ESCHENFELDER, B.C.S. *
• Board Certified by the Florida Bar in City. County and Local Government Law
MEMORANDUM ......
DATE: July 17, 2019
TO: Mayor Julie Ward Bujalski Vice Mayor Maureen "Moe" Freaney Commissioner Heather Gracy Commissioner Deborah Kynes Commissioner Jeff Gow Jennifer K. Bramley, City Manager
FROM: Thomas J. Trask, City Attorney;jfi,V
RE: Code Enforcement Lien at 161 /fmberglen Drive, Dunedin DCEB Case No. 18-757 (Carlsbad Funding Mtg Trust)
The purpose of this memorandum is to obtain your authorization to accept a $7,500.00 settlement offer from Atty. Clint Burton, on behalf of the owner's management company, in exchange for the Release of a Code Enforcement Board Lien (DCEB 18-757), on the property located at 1618 Amberglen Drive. ·
BACKGROUND
In July 2018, the Code Enforcement Board found the subject property in violation of FBC.1 05.1 Building Permit Required. A fine of $250.00 per day was assessed, beginning on October 6, 2018 . The property was brought into compliance on November 15, 2018. A demand letter was sent to the owner on March 5, 2019 to the address listed on the Pinellas County Property Appraiser (PCPAO) website. Both demand letters (regular and certified mail) were received, but we received no response. A search of the PCPAO website revealed other properties owned by the owner and on April 30, 2019 a second demand letter was sent stating that the above lien also attaches to those properties. In May I began settlement negotiations with the owner's attorney and thereafter began speaking with Atty. Clint Burton who proposed a settlement offer in the amount of $7,500.00. The total due the City as of June 30, 2019 was $10,653.40.
226
1001 South Fort Harrison Avenue, Suite 201 • Clearwater, Florida 33756 E-Mail [email protected] Telephone 727-733-0494 Fax 727-733-2991 A Limited Liability Partnership July 17, 2019 Page2
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the facts of this case, it is my recommendation that the City Commission accepts this settlement offer of $7,500.00 in exchange for a Release of the lien against the property at 1618 Amberglen Drive.
Respectfully submitted.
T JT/kt cc: Greg Rice, Director of Planning & Development Tom Colbert, Enforcement Inspector Joan McHale, Code Enforcement Administrator Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
227
Trask Daigneault LLP Agenda Item: 3.g
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-05-23
From: Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
Subject: The proposed agenda for the August 20, 2019 Work Session
Presenter(s): Denise M. Kirkpatrick, City Clerk
Recommend: Staff recommends to approve the proposed agenda for August 20, 2019 Work Session
Epic Goal(s): N/A
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. 19-08-20 CCWS Proposed Agenda.pdf,
Background: N/A
228 DU N~D I N Home of Honey,moon Island
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION
City Hall, 542 Main Street
AUGUST 20, 2019
9:00AM
AGENDA
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
1. PRESENTATIONS
1.a. The Advantage Pinellas Plan Appearance: Whit Blanton, FAICP, Executive Director AI Bartolotta, Planning Division Manager Chelsea Favero, AICP , Planning Manager TBD
CITIZEN INPUT
2. CONSENT AGENDA
2.a. Approve the minutes for: A. May 14, 2019 Work Session B. May 16, 2019 Regular Meeting
Staff recommends to approve the minutes.
2.b. Board and Committee Appointments/Reappointments
Staff recommends approval of all reappointments.
229 1 2.c. Special Event Road Closures for 2019-2020
Staff recommends to approve the Special Event Road Closures for 2019-2020.
2.d. Fire Protection Services Agreement Between City of Dunedin and Pinellas County
Staff recommends approval of agreement
2.e. Emergency Medical Services ALS First Responder Agreement between City of Dunedin and Pinellas County
Staff recommends approval of the agreement
3. ACTION ITEMS
3.a. Resolution 19-30, which approves financing for Schedule of Property #3 of the Master Lease Agreement with Bank of America, National Association to borrow $191,583.96 to finance the purchase of one Solid Waste vehicle .
Staff recommends: A. To place this item on the Agenda. B. To adopt Resolution 19-30.
3.b. Relocation of staff during demolition of MSB!TSB and building new City Hall Complex
Staff recommends to approve the plan.
3.c. Dunedin Fish Market, LLC Lease Agreement
Staff recommends to approve the Dunedin Fish Market, LLC Lease Agreement
3.d. The proposed agenda for the September 3, 2019 Work Session
Staff recommends to approve the proposed agenda for September 3, 2019 Work Session
3.e. City Clerk's Update City Clerk's Update
2 230 4. WORKSHOP ITEMS
4.a. Dunedin Commons Post-Construction Traffic Study Report with Presentation
Staff recommends the Commission to review, discuss and provide direction.
4.b. Multi-Family Zoning (around the CRA)
Staff recommends to discuss this item and provide direction to staff.
S. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
S.a. Commission Discussion The Commission share topics of concerns or future issues they wish to address.
S.b. City Clerk's Update City Clerk's Update
S.c. City Manager's Written Report Review and discuss "City Manager's Update" covering July, 2019
S.d. City Attorney's Update City Attorney's Update
S.e. Commission Comments The Commission shares events attended, announcements, liaison updates, etc.
ADJOURN MEETING
COPIES OF THIS AND ALL COMMISSION AGENDAS ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, 7SO MILWAUKEE AVENUE, ON THE MONDAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING DATE. COPIES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, S42 MAIN STREET AND THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT WWW.DUNEDINGOV.COM.
3 231 Agenda Item: 4.a
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-14
From: Jennifer Bramley, City Manager
Subject: Supplemental Height Amendments
Presenter(s): Greg Rice, Director of Planning and Development
Recommend: Staff recommends the City Commission review, discuss and provide direction on the proposed code changes.
Epic Goal(s): Create a visual sense of place throughout Dunedin.
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: This workshop is a requested follow-up to the Building Height Workshop held on June 4, 2019.
Next Action: Create ordinances for the proposed code changes to the City's supplemental height regulations.
Attachments: A._Building Height Workshop_Background II.docx, B. Building Height Workshop Presentation 2.pptx, C. Recommend Building Height Code Changes.doc,
Background: Please see Exhibit "A".
232 BACKGROUND Following the Building Height workshop on June 4, 2019, the City Commission had the following two concerns after the staff presentation.
1. Would reducing height to from 40 ft. to 36 ft. discourage quality architecture? 2. Should the height of a multi-family, mixed-use or commercial building in flood hazard zone be measured from grade or from the design flood elevation (BFE + freeboard)?
The City staff reconvened and has three simple recommended code changes to address the concerns above. In addition to the narrative below please see also Attachment A – Recommended Building Height Code Changes and the specific slides in Attachment B – Building Height Workshop Presentation 2.
CONCERN 1 The staff recommendation is make two code changes to keep the maximum height at 36 feet while providing the additional height for quality architectural features.
The first code change is to allow the building designer the flexibility to distribute the 36 foot height allowance over three floors at their discretion. No recent project has warranted or desired a 16 foot first floor. This code change removes the City from regulating first floor height. Please see the highlighted areas below.
103-40.4 - Downtown CRA Street Types In keeping with the design based approach to limiting heights within the Downtown CRA district, three distinct street types, listed herein as "A" streets, "B" streets and "C" streets, are established to help perpetuate consistent height-to-width relationships for all new development or redevelopment. As such, new construction and/or redevelopment of all parcels located within the CRA district Boundary, as identified in Exhibit C-1 and designated DC, DR, MF-15 and MF 7.5 shall conform to the additional criteria as listed in § 103-40.4.1 through § 103-40.4.3
103-40.4.1 - "A" Streets "A" streets - New construction shall be built along a mandatory build•to line that is set back a minimum of zero feet to a maximum of twelve feet from the fronting street or edge of public right-of-way. One passageway between buildings (seven-foot maximum width) shall be provided mid•point per block. Passageway construction may be waived at the discretion of the zoning administrator if no demonstrated public benefit is achieved by the provisions of such passageway. Maximum building height shall be limited to three stories, or 36 feet, whichever is less. First floor minimum height shall be 16 feet and remaining floors shall be a minimum height of ten feet. Minimum floor heights may be varied at the discretion of the city commission. Application to the city commission, through the local planning agency (LPA) shall be made by an applicant for the city to determine if a proposed floor height reduction meets the intent of the zoning district and the applicable standards. For multiple story buildings, a ten-foot minimum step back behind the primary facade of the building shall be required for stories above the second story for portions of a building facing or bordering a public right-of•way or the Pinellas Trail. Step back area 233 may be utilized as a balcony, gallery, or similar purpose. At the discretion of the City Commission, the ten-foot step back may be waived if other architectural features are able to eliminate the "canyon effect" caused by multi-storied buildings with flat, non- dimensional frontage. Portions of roadways and/or right-of-way areas designated as "A" streets within the CRA district are referenced in Exhibit C-1.
103-40.4.2 - "B" Streets "B" streets - New construction shall be built along a mandatory build•to line that is set back a minimum of zero feet to a maximum of twelve feet from the fronting street or edge of public right-of-way. One passageway between buildings (seven-foot maximum width) shall be provided midpoint per block. Passageway construction may be waived at the discretion of the zoning administrator if no demonstrated public benefit is achieved by the provisions of such passageway. Maximum building height shall be limited to three stories, or 36 feet, whichever is less. For all mixed-use (two or more vertically integrated retail, commercial office or residential development uses within each project) buildings, the first-floor minimum height shall be 16 feet and remaining floors shall be a minimum height of ten feet. Minimum floor heights may be varied at the discretion of the city commIssIon. Application to the city commission, through the local planning agency (LPA) shall be made by an applicant for the city to determine if a proposed floor height reduction meets the intent of the zoning district and the applicable standards. For multiple story buildings, a ten-foot minimum step back behind the primary facade of the building shall be required for stories above the second story for portions of a building facing or bordering a public right-of-way or the Pinellas Trail. Step back area may be utilized as a balcony, gallery, or similar purpose. At the discretion of the City Commission, the ten-foot step back may be waived if other architectural features are able to eliminate the "canyon effect" caused by multi-storied buildings with flat, non- dimensional frontage. Portions of roadways and/or right-of-way areas designated as "B" streets within the CRA district are referenced in Exhibit C-1.
103-40.4.3 - "C" Streets "C" streets - New construction shall be built along a mandatory build•to line that is set back a minimum of zero feet to a maximum of twelve feet from the fronting street or edge of public right-of-way. One passageway between buildings (seven-foot maximum width) shall be provided mid•point per block. Passageway construction shall be waived at the discretion of the zoning administrator if no demonstrated public benefit is achieved by the provisions of such passageway. Maximum building height shall be limited to three stories, or 36 feet, whichever is less. A fourth story with a maximum height of 46 feet is possible with City Commission Design Review approval. For all mixed use (two or more vertically integrated retail, commercial office or residential development uses within each project) buildings, the first-floor minimum height shall be 16 feet and remaining floors shall be a minimum height of ten feet. Minimum floor heights may be varied at the discretion of the city commIssIon. Application to the city commission, through the local planning agency (LPA) shall be made by an applicant for the city to determine if a proposed floor height reduction meets the intent of the zoning district and the applicable standards. For multiple story buildings, a ten-foot minimum step back behind the primary facade of the building shall be required for stories above the second story for portions of a building facing or bordering a public right-of-way or the Pinellas Trail. Step back area may be utilized as a balcony, gallery, or similar purpose. At the discretion of the City Commission, the ten-foot step back may be waived if other architectural features are able to eliminate the "canyon effect" caused by multi-storied buildings with flat, non-dimensional frontage. Portions of roadways and/or right-of-way 234 areas designated as "C" streets within the CRA district are referenced in Exhibit C-1. The second code change adds architectural features to the portions of structures that may exceed permitted height by a maximum of 20 percent. This will allow decorative features, used to add interest to the architectural style, above the third floor ceiling height. Please see the highlighted areas below and slide 3 of Attachment B.
103-40.11 - Modification of Maximum Height The following portions of structures may exceed the height requirements by a maximum of 20 percent of the permitted height as set forth in § 103-40.2 Maximum Height without additional setback, but with the written permission of the zoning administrator, or designee: (A) Belfries and spires. (B) Chimneys and smoke stacks. (C) Cooling towers, water towers and tanks, and fire towers. (D) Elevator and/or stairwell bulkheads. (E) Flagpoles, ornamental towers, statuary, and monuments. (F) Radio, television, and telephone transmission towers. (G) Solar panels. (H) Wind turbines. (I) Architectural features designed to add quality to the design.
CONCERN 2 The staff recommendation is to only allow additional height in residential single-family zoning districts in special flood hazard zones. This section shows the FEMA Flood Hazard Zones within the City and the CRA and how only single-family homes will receive additional height allowance from elevating the structure. Please see the highlighted areas below and slides 5, 6, and 7 of Attachment B.
103-40.3 - Variances to Building Heights in Special Flood Hazard Zones Due to construction variations within federally mandated flood prone areas of the city, building heights, as indicated in § 103-40.2 Maximum Height of this chapter, may be varied by the zoning administrator to the specific amount necessary to elevate the building above existing grade to achieve the minimum federal emergency management administration (FEMA) base flood elevation (BFE) requirement of the parcel.
Within special flood hazard areas, building height for the zoning districts listed below shall be measured from the required design flood elevation line to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs. AR R-300 R-200 R-150 235 R-100 R-90 R-75 R-60
In the special flood hazard areas of any other zoning district not listed above, maximum height shall be measured from grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs.
236 Building Height Workshop II July 23, 2019
237 First Workshop Concern: Would reducing height to from 40 ft. to 36 ft. discourage quality architecture?
2
238 “DC” Zoning CURRENT PROPOSED 239 3 First Workshop Concern: Should the height of Mixed-Use buildings in flood hazard zones be measured from grade or from the design flood elevation (BFE + freeboard)?
4
240 Dunedin FEMA Flood Hazard Map
5
241 Downtown FEMA Flood Hazard Map
6
242 Flood Elevated Structures R-100, R-90, R-75,R-100, andR-60 Allowed in AR, R-300,R-200, R-150, . 243 7 Question, Comments, & Direction
8
244 CONCERN 1
103-40.4 - Downtown CRA Street Types
In keeping with the design based approach to limiting heights within the Downtown CRA district, three distinct street types, listed herein as "A" streets, "B" streets and "C" streets, are established to help perpetuate consistent height-to-width relationships for all new development or redevelopment. As such, new construction and/or redevelopment of all parcels located within the CRA district Boundary, as identified in Exhibit C-1 and designated DC, DR, MF-15 and MF 7.5 shall conform to the additional criteria as listed in § 103-40.4.1 through § 103-40.4.3
103-40.4.1 - "A" Streets "A" streets - New construction shall be built along a mandatory build•to line that is set back a minimum of zero feet to a maximum of twelve feet from the fronting street or edge of public right-of-way. One passageway between buildings (seven-foot maximum width) shall be provided mid•point per block. Passageway construction may be waived at the discretion of the zoning administrator if no demonstrated public benefit is achieved by the provisions of such passageway. Maximum building height shall be limited to three stories, or 36 feet, whichever is less. First floor minimum height shall be 16 feet and remaining floors shall be a minimum height of ten feet. Minimum floor heights may be varied at the discretion of the city commission. Application to the city commission, through the local planning agency (LPA) shall be made by an applicant for the city to determine if a proposed floor height reduction meets the intent of the zoning district and the applicable standards. For multiple story buildings, a ten-foot minimum step back behind the primary facade of the building shall be required for stories above the second story for portions of a building facing or bordering a public right-of•way or the Pinellas Trail. Step back area may be utilized as a balcony, gallery, or similar purpose. At the discretion of the City Commission, the ten-foot step back may be waived if other architectural features are able to eliminate the "canyon effect" caused by multi-storied buildings with flat, non- dimensional frontage. Portions of roadways and/or right-of-way areas designated as "A" streets within the CRA district are referenced in Exhibit C-1.
103-40.4.2 - "B" Streets "B" streets - New construction shall be built along a mandatory build•to line that is set back a minimum of zero feet to a maximum of twelve feet from the fronting street or edge of public right-of-way. One passageway between buildings (seven-foot maximum width) shall be provided midpoint per block. Passageway construction may be waived at the discretion of the zoning administrator if no demonstrated public benefit is achieved by the provisions of such passageway. Maximum building height shall be limited to three stories, or 36 feet, whichever is less. For all mixed-use (two or more vertically integrated retail, commercial office or residential development uses within each project) buildings, the first-floor minimum height shall be 16 feet and remaining floors shall be a minimum height of ten feet. Minimum floor heights may be varied at the discretion of the city commIssIon. Application to the city commission, through the local planning agency (LPA) shall be made by an applicant for the city to determine if a proposed floor height 245 reduction meets the intent of the zoning district and the applicable standards. For multiple story buildings, a ten-foot minimum step back behind the primary facade of the building shall be required for stories above the second story for portions of a building facing or bordering a public right-of-way or the Pinellas Trail. Step back area may be utilized as a balcony, gallery, or similar purpose. At the discretion of the City Commission, the ten-foot step back may be waived if other architectural features are able to eliminate the "canyon effect" caused by multi-storied buildings with flat, non- dimensional frontage. Portions of roadways and/or right-of-way areas designated as "B" streets within the CRA district are referenced in Exhibit C-1.
103-40.4.3 - "C" Streets "C" streets - New construction shall be built along a mandatory build•to line that is set back a minimum of zero feet to a maximum of twelve feet from the fronting street or edge of public right-of-way. One passageway between buildings (seven-foot maximum width) shall be provided mid•point per block. Passageway construction shall be waived at the discretion of the zoning administrator if no demonstrated public benefit is achieved by the provisions of such passageway. Maximum building height shall be limited to three stories, or 36 feet, whichever is less. A fourth story with a maximum height of 46 feet is possible with City Commission Design Review approval. For all mixed use (two or more vertically integrated retail, commercial office or residential development uses within each project) buildings, the first-floor minimum height shall be 16 feet and remaining floors shall be a minimum height of ten feet. Minimum floor heights may be varied at the discretion of the city commIssIon. Application to the city commission, through the local planning agency (LPA) shall be made by an applicant for the city to determine if a proposed floor height reduction meets the intent of the zoning district and the applicable standards. For multiple story buildings, a ten-foot minimum step back behind the primary facade of the building shall be required for stories above the second story for portions of a building facing or bordering a public right-of-way or the Pinellas Trail. Step back area may be utilized as a balcony, gallery, or similar purpose. At the discretion of the City Commission, the ten-foot step back may be waived if other architectural features are able to eliminate the "canyon effect" caused by multi-storied buildings with flat, non-dimensional frontage. Portions of roadways and/or right-of-way areas designated as "C" streets within the CRA district are referenced in Exhibit C-1.
103-40.11 - Modification of Maximum Height The following portions of structures may exceed the height requirements by a maximum of 20 percent of the permitted height as set forth in § 103-40.2 Maximum Height without additional setback, but with the written permission of the zoning administrator, or designee: (A) Belfries and spires. (B) Chimneys and smoke stacks. (C) Cooling towers, water towers and tanks, and fire towers. (D) Elevator and/or stairwell bulkheads.
246 (E) Flagpoles, ornamental towers, statuary, and monuments. (F) Radio, television, and telephone transmission towers. (G) Solar panels. (H) Wind turbines. (I) Architectural features designed to add quality to the design.
CONCERN 2
103-40.3 - Variances to Building Heights in Special Flood Hazard Zones Due to construction variations within federally mandated flood prone areas of the city, building heights, as indicated in § 103-40.2 Maximum Height of this chapter, may be varied by the zoning administrator to the specific amount necessary to elevate the building above existing grade to achieve the minimum federal emergency management administration (FEMA) base flood elevation (BFE) requirement of the parcel.
Within special flood hazard areas, building height for the zoning districts listed below shall be measured from the required design flood elevation line to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs. AR R-300 R-200 R-150 R-100 R-90 R-75 R-60
In the special flood hazard areas of any other zoning district not listed above, maximum height shall be measured from grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs.
247 248 Agenda Item: 4.b
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-07-16
From: Jorge Quintas, Public Works & Utilities Director/Engineer
Subject: Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance
Presenter(s): Whitney Marsh, Stormwater Program Coordinator and Jorge Quintas, Director of Public Works & Utilities/City Engineer
Recommend: Following the Staff presentation, Staff would like to solicit comments from the Commission, address questions, and receive consensus direction concerning the draft Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance.
Epic Goal(s): Promote Dunedin as the Premier Coastal Community, protecting and improving our natural resources for the enjoyment of all; Be the statewide model for environmental stewardship.
Boards & Committees: Committee on Environmental Quality Stormwater Advisory Committee
Budget Impact: None
Past Action: None
Next Action: Proceed with finalizing the proposed Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance, hold Public Hearings, and recommend adoption by the Commission.
Attachments: A. Draft_ARTICLE_IX.___STORMWATER_MANAGEMENT.pdf, B. Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance Presentation.pdf, 249 Background: The City of Dunedin is an environmentally forward thinking community, and the Stormwater Program is at the forefront of planning initiatives, educational outreach, and scientific studies. The one area where improvement is needed is in the area of enforcement. The current stormwater ordinance does not provide a clearly defined violation structure nor mechanism for enforcement. The consequence results in waterway pollution.
In Fiscal Year 2017, it was proposed that the City of Dunedin would enter into an interlocal agreement with Pinellas County to allow for enforcement of the Pinellas County Environmental Enforcement Ordinance (Sec. 58-26 - Sec. 58-34). The City of Dunedin intended to cost share with other municipalities that would agree to enter the interlocal agreement to cover the cost of enforcement personnel and equipment. Upon further legal review, it was determined that Pinellas County could not enforce outside of their unincorporated jurisdiction. Therefore, the Pinellas County Stormwater Enforcement initiative with the City of Dunedin ended.
Staff subsequently decided to proceed with the creation of a Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance to provide a clearly defined violation matrix based on a tiered structure and extent of a violation. Staff also proposes the creation of an Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund to collect the monies from Stormwater Enforcement, and allow for the mitigation of damages, as well as future planning for sea level rise.
Upon research of various jurisdictions within Pinellas County and the State of Florida, a fine matrix, trust fund, and aid from Code Enforcement provide the greatest chance of success for a stormwater enforcement program. These proposed changes to the Stormwater Ordinance will provide a much needed enhancement for the environmental health of the City of Dunedin.
250 ARTICLE IX. - STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Sec. 78-451. - Standards, regulations and procedures.
(a) The standards, regulations and procedures are set forth in this article to control: (1) The alteration of land and topography; (2) The removal and placement of certain vegetation; (3) The erosion, sedimentation and pollution within drainage systems; (4) The permissible surface runoff rates of proposed land developments; and (5) The performance of the drainage systems for the purpose of stormwater management within the city. (b) The standards, regulations and procedures set forth in this article represent the present stormwater management practices of the city. This article shall not be construed as a guarantee against all stormwater damage, but as a means to minimize the extent of apparent stormwater hazards to the public as well as a means to help prevent degradation of the water quality of receiving waters. These are minimum standards only and do not relieve the developer or his engineer of record from their designated responsibility to meet the intent of this chapter, and to protect the rights of surrounding property owners and the public interest, in accordance with good engineering practices.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-452. - Application of standards.
The following standards shall apply in this article: (1) Lakes and watercourses shall be preserved. (2) Property damage as a result of stormwater shall be minimized by having the lowest portion of all structural members supporting the lowest floor be elevated to or above the base flood elevation plus 1 foot, according to Chapter 105-21.2. (3) All development projects shall minimize the adverse effects of land clearance, alteration of topography, exposure of bare earth to precipitation and shall include such detailed hydrological analysis, calculations of flood routing, critical flows, energy dissipation, backwater curves, hydrographs, detention requirements, detailed drawings or other relevant information as determined by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-453. - Definitions and interpretations.
(a) For the purposes of this article, the following interpretations shall apply: (1) Words used in the singular shall include the plural and the singular; words used in the present tense shall include the future tense. (2) The words "shall" and "will" are mandatory. 251 (3) The words "may" and "should" are permissive. (4) The phrase "used for" shall include the phrases "arranged for," "designed for," "intended for," "maintained for" and "occupied for." (5) Words not defined in this section shall be construed to have the meaning given by the common contemporary dictionary definition. (b) For the purposes of this article, the following definitions shall apply: Authorized official means any employee or agent of the city authorized by the city manager to administer or enforce the provisions of this article. Construction means any alteration of land for the purpose of achieving its development or changed use, including particularly the preparation for, building of, or erection of a structure. Detention refers to holding the surface water runoff for a short period of time and then releasing it to a watercourse or waterway where it returns to the hydrological cycle. Developer means any person who acts in his own behalf or as an agent of an owner of property and engages in alteration of land or vegetation. Development means any action which results in alteration of land. Discharge means any direct or indirect introduction of any solid, liquid or gaseous matter. Floodway means the channel of a watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a specified amount. Illicit discharge means any discharge to the municipal separate storm sewer system that is not composed entirely of stormwater except: (1) Discharges pursuant to a NPDES permit; and (2) Discharges resulting from the following: a. Flows from firefighting; b. Water line flushing and other contributions from potable water sources; c. Landscape irrigation and lawn watering; d. Irrigation water; e. Diverted stream flows; f. Rising groundwater; g. Direct infiltration to the municipal separate storm sewer system; h. Sediment and pollutant filtered uncontaminated pumped groundwater; i. Foundation and footing drains; j. Water from crawl space pumps; k. Air conditioning condensation; l. Springs; m. Individual residential car washings; 252 n. Flows from riparian habitats and wetlands; and o. Swimming pools (not including pool filter backwash water). i). Swimming pools must be drained to vegetated land and cannot be discharged directly onto impervious surface that connects directly with the MS4 system. Municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) means the system of conveyances and facilities owned by the city used for collecting, storing, and transporting stormwater but not including any facilities intended to be used in accordance with applicable law for collecting and transporting sanitary or other wastewater. NOV means Notice of Violation.
NPDES means the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Retention refers to facilities whereby water is held for a considerable length of time for aesthetic, agricultural, consumptive or other purposes. This water is not designed to be discharged to a watercourse or storm sewer system, but may be consumed by plants, evaporation, or infiltration into the ground. Site of industrial activity means any area or facility used for manufacturing, processing or raw materials storage, as defined under 40 CFR 122.26(b) (14) of regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as amended. Storm sewer refers to a pipe (or other conduit) and appurtenances enclosing the path or route of flow of collected surface waters and are manmade structures, usually below ground, to transport runoff or surface water from a given area to an outfall or receiving point. Stormwater means any water runoff resulting from rainfall. Watercourse/waterway means the terms are interchangeable and refer to the location of the defined open path or open route of the flow of surface water as established by topography and the force of gravity, regardless of the frequency or quantity of water being conveyed.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-454. - Unlawful discharges.
(a) It shall be unlawful to discharge the following to any outlet or to the municipal separate storm sewer system within the city, or in any area under the jurisdiction of the city: (1) Any sanitary sewage, industrial waste or other waste materials or a discharge containing any materials in violation of municipal, state or federal administrative agencies, water management district, or other laws, rules, regulations, orders or permits; (2) Any organic or inorganic matter which causes the water quality of the receiving water to fall below the standards as set forth in Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 62-302; (3) Any discharge that is not composed entirely of stormwater; or (4) Any illicit discharge as defined in § 78-453. (5) In no case shall grass clippings, vegetative material, and/or vegetative debris either intentionally or accidentally, be washed, swept or blown off into stormwater drains, ditches, drainage conveyances, surface waters, or roadways. 253 Exceptions to the above prohibitions are those set forth in the definition of illicit discharge in § 78-453.
(b) No person may maintain, use, or establish any direct or indirect connection to the municipal separate storm sewer system that results in any discharge in violation of this article. This prohibition applies to connections made in the past, regardless of whether made under a permit, or other authorization, or whether permissible under laws or practices applicable or prevailing at the time the connection was made.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-455. - Exceptions to drainage and detention plan requirement.
Development projects for any parcel less than one-half acre in size will not require the presentation of a detailed drainage and detention plan, but will require a lot drainage plan, that shall include: (1) The proposed lot grading indicating the direction of overland storm runoff. (2) The finished floor elevations of all existing and proposed permanent structures in relation to the centerline elevation of the abutting roadway at mid-lot. (3) Any other features deemed pertinent by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. (4) An affirmative statement, signed and sealed by the project engineer of record, that the development project will not increase the site runoff onto adjacent properties.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-456. - Drainage plan requirement.
All proposals for development, except those proposals for development referred to in § 78-455, shall include detailed drainage and detention plans, including temporary erosion and sedimentation controls, to be submitted for the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, except as may be waived in accordance with the exceptions in § 78-455. The drainage plan shall illustrate the means by which compliance with the intent of the policies of this article will be achieved. The drainage plans shall be certified by a registered professional engineer of the state, and shall conform to current requirements of applicable regulatory agencies, including those requirements specified in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit granted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-457. - Drainage plan content.
(a) Detailed drainage plans for stormwater management for land to be developed shall be submitted for approval prior to the start of site preparation work and shall include: (1) Where practical, detailed drainage plans shall be based on the use of regional treatment facilities and/or on the use of low impact development features and "green" technologies. (2) The existing and proposed topographical contours in intervals not more than one foot, with the elevations based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD) or the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD), on the property to be developed and extended onto 254 abutting properties a distance not less than 50 feet from the property lines. The selected datum must be clearly noted on the plans. The plans will also show the existing and proposed shorelines of lakes and ponds and their depths of water, the delineation of swamps, depth of muck in areas of proposed roadways and infrastructures locations, the waterways, channels and ditches within the development, and other features required by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. (3) The basic hydraulic calculations of the proposed drainage system shall be based on the Manning Equation and/or Bernoulli's Equation as applicable for pipe and open channels. Calculations used for the determination of runoff shall be based on generally accepted design methods subject to approval by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. For small parcels of two acres or less, the rational formula (Q equals CIA) for runoff may be used where: Q equals rate of runoff (in CFS)
C equals coefficient of runoff
I equals average intensity of rainfall (in inches per hour) as shown on the duration/intensity curves for the county.
A equals area of drainage basin (in acres) and velocity curves and tabulations published by the state department of transportation relative to overland flows and velocity limits for soil types. Coefficients of runoff in rational formula shall be used based on land use as follows for a 25-year storm or less. Twenty percent shall be added to the runoff coefficient for storms in excess of 25 years.
Runoff Land Use Coefficient
Undeveloped vegetated ..... 0.20
Agricultural acreage ..... 0.25
Residential, 30,000 square feet, lot ..... 0.34
Residential, 20,000 square feet, lot ..... 0.40
Residential, 10,000 square feet, lot ..... 0.49
Residential, 7,500 square feet, lot ..... 0.53
Residential, 6,000 square feet, lot ..... 0.56
Impervious ..... 0.90
255 Water surface ..... 1.00
(4) The detention of cumulative stormwater runoff in excess of existing or predevelopment release rates shall be provided for by construction of facilities having sufficient storage and conveyance capacity either on the property to be developed or off-site. The use of off-site storage facilities shall be subject to deed restrictions on the project site(s) subject to City Attorney approval. The design storage capacity shall be based on not less than a 25-year storm of one hour duration, and intensity of 3.2 inches per hour. Detention storage capacity may be provided by properly designed facilities on roofs, surface or ground level reservoirs, percolation structures, low impact development features or any combination of these. The use of percolation structures or low impact development features will be subject to approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Design of retention basins with no outflow or outlet if permitted by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be based on the 100- year storm recurrence interval and a rainfall of 24-hour duration which is equal to 10.35 inches. Design high-water elevation shall be established in consideration of adjacent properties and facilities. (5) Ground level reservoirs specifically designed for the temporary storage of stormwater to control runoff rates or meet water quality requirements shall: a. Be identified as a drainage and utility easement on the final plat of a subdivision, or duly recorded as such in the official records of Pinellas County prior to the issuance of any building or construction permits relating to the subject project in other developments. b. Be shown as a part of abutting lots within the subdivision by extending side or rear lot lines to a right-of-way, side or rear lot line, or to a common point where multiple lots are platted or other distribution acceptable to the city. c. Be constructed normally to have dry bottom elevations above the groundwater table at the end of the rainy season (September) with the bottom graded to drain all detained water to the controlling outlet structure, and such bottom shall be sodded or seeded and mulched. Wet bottom ponds are described under subsection (4)i of this section. d. Have bank slope grades not in excess of 33 percent, i.e., one vertical to three horizontal which shall be sodded, with the exception that the areas over side drains shall be seeded and mulched or covered with a minimum four-inch thick blanket of crushed stone or equivalent material. e. Include an outlet structure sized or designed to convey the specified release rate or allowable predevelopment runoff rate from the contributing area, which outlet also shall provide for the retention or detention with filtration of the first half inch of runoff (or, as an option, the runoff from the first one inch of rainfall) for not more than 72 hours for water quality purposes. Elevation three feet is the minimum downstream boundary conditions allowed for design of head available for outfall into tidal waters. All other downstream boundary conditions will reflect 25-year stream flows or groundwater elevations.
256 f. Be constructed to provide at least 12 inches of freeboard between the 25-year flood storage level and the low bank elevation surrounding the detention area (not including the overflow spillway). g. Include an overflow spillway or other structure acceptably protected from erosion with the invert above the design high water level and at least six inches below the top of bank, of sufficient capacity to accommodate excess flows resulting from a 100-year storm of 24- hour duration. h. Have the discharges of the controlling outlet and the overflow structure to an abutting drainage easement or public right-of-way to convey stormwater runoff away from the property being developed. The developer will pay all costs relative to the execution of the necessary instruments and related costs to convey the necessary rights of easement to the city. Such rights shall be conveyed to the city prior to site preparation or other construction operations on the property. Necessary off-site construction work to safely convey stormwater from the development to a waterway shall be performed by the developer at no cost to the city, excepting costs which may be negotiated for additional improvements benefitting others as requested by the city. Where necessary, the city will assist the developer to convey the rights of easements to the city through lawful process as may be required. i. Where ponds, lakes, or other existing surface water impoundments, having wet-bottom elevations below the seasonal high groundwater elevations, are to be used for or constructed for the detention/retention of stormwater to control runoff release rates and quality of runoff from the property to be developed, the developer may store additional runoff in the impoundment in the proportionate share of his property to the total abutting shoreline properties assuming the abutting shoreline properties to be fully developed as zoned, with the following conditions: The 100-year floodplain of the impoundment will not be increased above the lowest floor elevation of any existing habitable structure in the contributing area, proper safeguards are provided to protect public health and safety, acceptable pollution control devices are provided to protect the quality of water in the impoundment, and a 20-foot buffer strip surrounding the impoundment measured from the design high water level, identified as a drainage easement, with such easement connected to a public right-of-way by a 20-foot drainage easement, is provided. All construction or necessary alteration of such stormwater impoundment facility shall be in accordance with the requirements of the applicable regulatory agencies and in accordance with good engineering practices. Proposals to lower existing water levels shall require approval by the applicable regulatory agencies and the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Except for berm failures and structural repairs, maintenance of the 20-foot easement shall be the responsibility of the property owner. (6) Open channels, other than shallow swales, are acceptable only to convey stormwater quantities in excess of 60 cubic feet per second, and shall be constructed with side slopes not steeper than 3:1 (33 percent) to accommodate 25-year storm flows with one foot of freeboard without damage or channel erosion. Culverts or other structures installed at roadway crossings shall be designed to accommodate 25-year storm flows without creating additional backwater as a minimum. Roadway crossings will also be designed to pass the 100-year storm event, provide in-bank storage or overflow the road with no damage to the road or flooding of adjacent structures during a 100-year flood event. 257 (b In coastal areas, where discharge from the required detention area is directly into a tidal zone, and, where it can be shown that such discharge would not have any significant adverse effects, the Director of Public Works/City Engineer may waive the detention requirement as defined in subsection (a)(3) of this section. The retention (or detention with filtration) required for water quality purposes, as defined in subsection (a) (5)e of this section will in no case be waived.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-458. - Flood routing; 100-year storm.
(a) The open areas and roadways within the proposed development shall be designed to convey safely, via routes acceptable to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, the 100-year storm runoff from within the development to a designated floodway or area within a designated 100-year floodplain. (b) The drainage system of the proposed development shall be designed to pass 100-year storm runoff through the development from all off-site upstream areas without damaging effects. Alternatively, where capacity of downstream facilities is less than such 100-year flood quantity, an area designed to accommodate the surplus flows shall be delineated on the proposed development as a 100-year floodplain subject to all restrictions, reservations and requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-459. - Floodways.
(a) The floodways conveying runoff from a 100-year storm through the proposed development shall be within designated easements or public rights-of-way which will accommodate mechanical maintenance equipment. The width of the designated easement or right-of-way which may include an abutting roadway, shall have: (1) Twenty additional feet of width, where the top-of-bank width is 20 feet or less, for maintenance purposes. (2) Twenty-five additional feet of width where top-of-bank width is 20 to 40 feet. (3) Twenty-five additional feet of width on both sides of the floodway where the top-of-bank width is greater than 40 feet, for maintenance purposes. The bottom width of floodways within easements or rights-of-way, not protected by erosion prevention devices, such as retaining walls, lined or paved bottoms or other artificial means, shall be established by quantity of water, with side slopes not in excess of 33 percent (i.e., 3:1) which shall be sodded, with the permissible flow velocities for the bottom conditions not in excess of the following:
Type of Soil Allowable Velocity (feet per second)
Fine sand ..... 1.5
Sandy loam ..... 1.8
258 Silt loam ..... 2.0
Firm loam ..... 2.5
Fine gravel ..... 2.5
Stiff clay ..... 2.8
Coarse gravel ..... 4.0
Hardpan ..... 6.0
Where erosion protection structures are constructed in floodway banks and bottoms, the bottom width shall be designed on maximum velocities of ten feet per second, with energy dissipation structures at flow discharges to unprotected floodways. Check dams designed to control velocities in open channels shall be detailed on the drainage plan of the proposed development to provide acceptable erosion protection.
(b) Underground utility crossings of all floodways, open channels and ditches shall be clearly labeled on-site with suitable markers or permanent signs.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-460. - Storm sewer catch basin spacing.
(a) The size, type and location of storm sewer inlets, gratings or other openings into the closed roadway collector piping system of the proposed development shall be based on the post- development time-of-concentration of flows of a ten-year storm and shall provide sufficient capacity to: (1) Limit the quantity of stormwater flowing in the streets to a depth of one inch below the crown or centerline of residential streets and to a depth of two inches below the crown or centerline of a local designated street at 75 percent of peak design flows and in no case exceed ten feet per second velocity in any gutter section of the roadway, nor exceed 400 feet from inlet ridgeline to inlet. (2) Prevent design flows across street intersections without standard valley gutters. Curb inlets in corner arcs are not acceptable, due to maintenance costs to the city. (b) Inlet gratings in roadways shall be in accordance with the specifications of the state department of transportation. Cast iron covers to access structures of the storm sewers will require the word "storm" cast into the cover not less than two inches in height. Walls of inlet or access structures shall be at least eight inches thick when constructed of brick or block. Pipe terminating in access
259 structures or inlets shall not project beyond the wall of the structure, and except for open bottom structures as pollution control devices, the outlet pipe should drain the structure dry.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-461. - Piping.
(a) The piping and appurtenances used in the stormwater collection system shall be designed to convey the runoff of a ten-year storm, but in no case be less than 15 inches in diameter. The maximum length of pipe to be installed between access structures shall be 450 feet. The minimum time of concentration used to compute pipe sizing shall be not less than 15 minutes. The standard hydraulic gradient shall be one foot below gutter elevation. (b) Headwalls shall be provided at all inlet or outlet pipes receiving water from or discharging water to an open channel. The headwalls shall be bagged sand cement, concrete block filled with concrete, poured concrete, acceptably reinforced or other approved structures placed in accordance with the specifications of the state department of transportation. Where flow velocities from piping discharging to open channels exceed permissible velocities for the soil conditions in the receiving channels, suitable energy dissipating structures shall be installed to prevent erosion. All piping shall be of reinforced concrete unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Culverts or collector piping under roadways shall have a minimum rating of class III (ASTM 6-76- 72A) or AASHTO (M-170-74). Precast or poured-in-place box culverts shall be constructed in accordance with the specifications of the state department of transportation.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-462. - Finished grade.
(a) The finished grade elevations of the individual lots shall be shown on the drainage plan, these elevations will normally drain the lot from the rear property line to the street, along the common property lines. Where topography or other features make impractical such lot drainage, an alternate lot drainage plan will be submitted for the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. (b) The drainage plan shall include the finished minimum floor elevations of all structures which may be constructed. The minimum finished floor elevation should be at least 18 inches above the centerline of the abutting roadway. Proposed finished floor elevations of structures shall ensure adequate fall of the building's sanitary sewer line, and ensure that surface water flows will not cause damage nor enter any portion of the structure on the lot or abutting properties unless drainage easements are provided. (c) In no case shall finished floor elevations be specified below the 100-year floodplain.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-463. - Temporary erosion/sedimentation controls.
260 (a) As part of a proposed site plan, the engineer of record shall submit the detailed construction sequence, including earthwork operations, and confer with the Director of Public Works/City Engineer for approval of the same. (b) Interim or temporary control measures shall be designed, constructed and maintained during the construction period in accordance with the current state department of transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction and Road Design Standards and the current recommendations of the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service. Where conflicts exist between the state department of transportation and the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service, the more restrictive will govern, relative to construction sequences, limitations of exposed erodible earth, clearing, grubbing, sodding, grassing, mulching, matting, sandbagging, slope drains, sediment basins, berms, dikes, diversions, terracing, retaining devices such as baled hay or straw, or other structures, gabions, soil binders, dust controls and other interim measures to preclude off-site flooding, erosion, sedimentation or pollution to receiving waters or on abutting properties during the construction period. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer may waive the requirement for detailed plans to be submitted for formal approval of the interim or temporary erosion/sedimentation or pollution control measures to be implemented during the construction period. (c) Construction site controls for stormwater runoff may include, but not be limited to, the following: Construction Site Controls
Large Slope Waterway Surface Enclosed Borrow Adjacent Control Type Flat Protection Protection Drainage Drainage Areas Properties Areas
Nonstructural (cover) X X X X X temporary seeding
Mulching and X X X matting
Plastic covering X X X
Retain natural X X X X X X vegetation
Buffer zones X X X X X X
Seeding and X X X X planting
Sodding X X X X
261 Structural-erosion X X control
Gravel/entry/truck
wash
Road stabilization X
Dust control
Pipe slope drains X X X
Subsurface drains X
Surface roughening X X
Gradient terraces X X
Bioengineered X slopes
Level spreader X X X
Interceptor X X dike/swales
Check dams X
Outlet protection X X
Riprap X X X
Vegetative streambank X stabilization
Bioengineered streambank X stabilization
262 Structural streambank X stabilization
Structural-sediment
retention
Filter fences X X
Gravel filter berm X X X
Storm drain inlet X X protection
Sediment trap or X X X X X sump
Sediment pond or X X X X X X basin
The Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall review all proposed site control measures for their appropriateness and applicability. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer may require additional measures to ensure water quality.
(d) Upon completion of all permanent structures to control stormwater, all interim or temporary structures will be removed, permanent collection piping and roadways will be cleared of all sediment and/or debris, erodible areas will be stabilized with acceptable ground cover to prevent erosion within 7 days, and detention areas will be cleared of accumulations of construction sediment to provide design storage capacity prior to the formal acceptance of the development. (e) When projects are planned to be constructed in separate increments, the submittal of a construction sequence of the entire development is required to ensure such incremental plans are compatible with proper stormwater management until the entire project is completed.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-464. - Waterway obstructions.
(a) It shall be unlawful to obstruct the free flow of stormwater in a waterway, channel, ditch or in any part of the drainage system or drainage way. This applies to overland surface flow unless such flow is being collected for subsequent discharge. Where trash, garbage, construction by-projects, debris, sediment, vegetation growth, or other obstructions interfere with the free flow of stormwater or 263 creates a hazard to public health, welfare and safety, the city manager shall notify the owner of record of the property, by registered mail at the owner's address as shown in the latest county tax roll, of such violation and that such violation must be corrected and the property brought into compliance with the Code of Ordinances of the city within 20 days of the date of the notice. Additionally, building permits, if any, for improvements to property on which the obstruction occurs shall be immediately revoked and a stop work order issued, and such permits shall not be reissued until such time as the obstruction is removed and any costs associated with this removal as stated in subsection (b) of this section are paid to the city. The owners, custodians or persons in possession may present their objections to the city manager's determination in writing to the city manager within the 20-day compliance period. If the city manager does not respond to the owners', custodians', or persons' in possession objections within such period of time to their satisfaction, such owners, custodians or persons in possession may appeal to the city commission, which shall promptly consider the appeal at the next regularly scheduled commission meeting for which such appeal can be placed on the commission's agenda. (b) If the property owner shall fail to comply with the conditions of the notification to correct the violation or shall not otherwise have filed a written notice of appeal with the city manager, the city manager shall have the obstructions or public hazards removed from such property and shall assess the cost of such removal against the property, including the costs of postage, administrative expense, and any other costs incident thereto, which assessment shall be a lien against such property, and the city clerk shall file in the public records of the county a lien reflecting such amounts, which lien shall be collected as other taxes or assessments and may be foreclosed in accordance with the provisions of law. (c) If any tract or parcel of land within the city shall be in violation of subsection (a) of this section, and shall require more than one notification of violation during any calendar year provided for in this section, the city shall impose a penalty in an amount as determined by resolution of the city commission for each notification subsequent to the first notification during a calendar year. (d) The Director of Public Works/City Engineer may authorize a temporary restriction to be placed in a waterway or channel provided such restriction is removed by the installer upon the occurrence of hazards to upstream properties, to the public health, or upon notification from the city.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-465. - Facilities located in rights-of-way.
Storm sewers, watercourses, and retention/detention facilities which pass runoff from off-site upstream areas shall be located in rights-of-way or easements dedicated to the city. All pipes and appurtenances and all other items of personal property relating to drainage shall be conveyed to the city by bill of sale with warranties.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-466. - Rights of inspection and emergency measures.
The Director of Public Works/City Engineer and his designees may inspect any storm drainage system within or outside of existing easements or rights-of-way. All storm drainage facilities located on private property shall be accessible at all times for the purpose of determining compliance with drainage plan 264 requirements or compliance with the ordinances of the city. The city may order and/or perform emergency maintenance operations on any private land or any drainage system, where in its judgment a condition exists that could be potentially injurious to life or property. Such emergency operations shall not be construed as a continuing maintenance obligation on the part of the city.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-467. - Approvals required.
The following shall require the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and other applicable regulatory agencies: (1) All alterations of existing natural or manmade streams, waterways, floodways, channels, ditches, or drainage structures; (2) The removal or placement of trees, shrubbery or vegetation within a floodway or drainage easement; and (3) The installation of permanent structures, restrictions, barriers, fences or other obstructions within such a drainage system.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-468. - Inspections, violations and penalties.
(a) The city shall inspect all developments during construction to ensure not only that proper stormwater management practices are being followed but to ensure that all applicable building codes are being executed. For stormwater management, the following frequency of inspection shall be adhered to: (1) For less than a 5,000 gross square foot development, not less than one inspection every six weeks. (2) For a 5,000 to 10,000 gross square foot development, not less than one inspection every four weeks. (3) For over a 10,000 gross square foot development, not less than one inspection every two weeks. (b) All inspectors shall have at a minimum a FDEP erosion and sediment inspector certification. (c) At any time during the ground disturbing activities, the inspectors can call for additional reasonable controls to ensure water quality. (d) The city has the authority, before, during and after ground disturbing activities, to perform inspections, surveillance and monitoring procedures necessary to determine compliance with the NPDES permit conditions, including the prohibition on illicit discharge. (e) Whenever the city determines that activity on a property does not comply with the approved drainage plans, including those control measures which were specified to be utilized during construction activity, or that a drainage system is unlawfully obstructed, the city may cause the issuance of a stop work order or notice of violation to the responsible owner or his agent. Such order or notice shall: 265 (1) Be in writing. (2) List the specific provisions of this article which have been violated. (3) State that if repairs, corrections, alterations or reconstructions are not acceptably completed and approved within a reasonable period of time, specified by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, the violation will be subject to penalty in accordance with section 1-15 of the Code of Ordinances of the city.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-469. - Appeals.
(a) Whenever a developer under this article or his representative is aggrieved by the decision of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer relative to the administration of any portion of this article, or whenever the Director of Public Works/City Engineer has rejected or refused to approve the design or method of construction proposed, or materials to be used in the construction of drainage facilities, or when it is claimed that the provisions of this article do not apply, or that an equally good or more desirable form of construction can be employed in any specific case, or when it is claimed that the true intent and meaning of this article or any of the criteria under this article have been misconstrued or wrongly interpreted, the engineer of record, developer or his duly authorized agent may appeal the decision of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to the building board of adjustment and appeal. Notice of appeal shall be in writing and filed with the city clerk within 30 days after the decision has been rendered by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. (b) In case of a structure which, in the opinion of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, is unsafe or dangerous, the Director of Public Works/City Engineer may, in his order, limit the time for such appeal to a shorter period appropriate to the degree and nature of such modified appeal. A copy of such order shall be mailed to the appellant or his representative. (c) Appeals under this section shall be on forms provided by the city clerk. (1) Public notice and public hearings. Upon an appeal to the building board of adjustment and appeal being filed: a. The city clerk shall cause to be published public notice of the public hearing on such appeal at least 14 days prior to the scheduled public hearing. The applicant shall notify neighboring property owners by regular mail at least 14 days prior to such hearing of the time, date, location and substance of the public hearing in a manner identical to other hearings before the board of adjustment and appeal. b. At the public hearing, the appellant or other person having interest in the matter advertised shall be heard by the building board of adjustment and appeal. The chairman will direct all proceedings of the public hearing and the board shall establish procedures under which all matters are to be heard or presented. (2) Variations and modifications. a. The building board of adjustment and appeal, upon consideration of the appeal being submitted under this section, may vary the application of this article to any particular case when, in its opinion, the literal enforcement thereof would do manifest injustice and would be contrary to the intent and purpose of this article or public interest, or when, in
266 its opinion, the interpretation of this article by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer should be modified or reserved. b. The decision of the building board of adjustment and appeal to vary the application of any provision of this article or to modify an order of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be specific as to what variance is to be permitted and the board may impose such conditions on the variance as it deems appropriate to protect the public welfare and conform to the intent of this article. (3) Decisions. a. Every decision of the building board of adjustment and appeal under this section shall be final, subject, however, to such remedy as any aggrieved party might have at law or in equity. It shall be in writing, and shall indicate the vote upon the decision. Every decision shall be promptly filed in the office of the city clerk and shall be open to public inspection. A copy shall be sent by mail to the appellant. b. The building board of adjustment and appeal shall, in every case under this section, reach a decision without unreasonable or unnecessary delay.
(Ord. No. 10-20, § 1, 12-16-2010)
Sec. 78-470—78-500. - Reserved.
Sec. 78-470. – Stormwater Enforcement.
(a) Evidence of an illicit discharge shall be inspected by any authorized representative of the city qualified to perform an illicit discharge inspection. Should evidence be present of an illicit discharge, a Notice of Violation shall be issued.
(b) The process for violation and civil penalty issuance shall follow normal code enforcement procedures.
(c) Each violation will be assessed a civil penalty, per day or until the maximum accrued violation amount is reached, until the violation is corrected and the area of concern is returned to original, pre-illicit discharge, condition according to the following matrix:
EXTENT OF VIOLATION VIOLATION MINOR MODERATE MAJOR RESIDENTIAL 1st Offense Warning/Education $250 2nd Offense $50 $500 $1,000 - $5,000 3 or More $100 $750 Max Accrued Violation $500 $3,750 No Maximum COMMERCIAL 1st Offense Warning/Education $400 2nd Offense $200 $800 $5,000 - $10,000
VIOLATOR 3 or More $400 $1,200 Max Accrued Violation $2,000 $6,000 No Maximum ACTIVE 1st Offense NOV/Stop Work Order $800 $5,000 - $10,000 CONSTRUCTION 2nd Offense $300 $1,600 267 3 or More $500 $2,400 Max Accrued Violation $2,500 $12,000 No Maximum
(1) Violator
a. Residential violators shall be considered but not limited to: homeowners, renters, visitors, homeowners performing construction or maintenance on their real property without the assistance of a licensed contractor, and persons not working in a commercial or business capacity.
b. Commercial violators shall be considered but not limited to: businesses, employees performing tasks related to a commercial entity or business, persons working in a commercial or work-related capacity, landscapers with or without BMP certification.
c. Active Construction violators shall be considered but not limited to: active construction site contractors and active construction site employees on residential and commercial properties.
(2) Extent of Violation
a. Minor violation shall be a release or discharge of non-toxic materials such as, but not limited to: yard debris, sand, gravel, or sediment from construction activities. A minor violation shall be a discharge or release that can be repaired, removed, or cleaned to original condition without the involvement of a certified remediation specialist. A minor violation cannot be a direct discharge into the MS4 or a direct discharge to surface waters. If a violation of a minor material is purposefully discharged directly into the MS4 or to surface waters, it automatically constitutes a moderate violation.
b. Moderate violation shall be a release or discharge of potentially harmful materials such as, but not limited to: concrete, masonry products, or uncontaminated drilling mud. A moderate violation shall be a discharge or release that may require the assistance of a certified remediation specialist, or other trained professional, but does not cause structural damage or impair the function of the drainage system. A moderate violation cannot be a direct discharge into the MS4 or a direct discharge to surface waters. If a violation of a moderate material is purposefully discharged directly into the MS4 or to surface waters, it automatically constitutes a major violation.
c. Major violation shall be a release or discharge of toxic or health-threatening materials such as, but not limited to: sewage, paint, chemicals, or petroleum products. A major violation shall be a discharge or release that may require the assistance of a certified remediation specialist, or other trained professional. A major violation may significantly impair drainage or structures, may require removal of soil due to contamination, or replacement of pavement or structures. Willful discharges of any substance referenced in Sec. 78-454 directly into the MS4 or a
268 direct discharge to surface waters shall constitute a major violation based on the negligent manner of the violation.
The fine assessed for a major violation shall be determined by the Code Enforcement Board based on evidence presented at the Code Enforcement Board hearing concerning the violation and a recommendation by the City Manager or the Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
(3) Additional Assessment Fees
In addition to the fine assessed based on the extent of the violation and the violator, the city is entitled to recover the following:
a. Clean-Up Costs: actual costs incurred by the city for remediation shall be added onto the penalty cost.
b. Laboratory / Analyses Costs: any laboratory costs incurred by the city in the course of the investigation of the violation and the clean-up process shall be added onto the penalty cost.
c. Administrative Costs: an administrative fee will be added to the penalty cost for investigative costs incurred by the city. A log will be kept to accurately track the total number of hours spent on a violation by city staff.
(d) Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund created; purpose; maintenance; source; and disposition of moneys.
(1) The City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund is hereby created for the purpose of:
a. Mitigating the impact of damage resulting from violations of ordinances, rules, and regulations adopted by the city pertaining to the regulation of air, water, soil, natural resources, and animal and plant life of the city.
b. Acquiring, protecting, restoring, and maintaining land in the city for the purpose of enhancing surface waterways or protecting vulnerable areas from sea level rise.
c. Convert aging infrastructure to green infrastructure with the sole intention of improved water quality and/or conversion of infrastructure to green infrastructure with the intention of reducing sea level rise impacts.
d. Making other expenditures that advance the purposes set forth in this article.
(2) The City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund must be kept, maintained, and identified by the Commission solely for the purposes set forth in this article. The Finance Director of the city is authorized to establish the City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund and to receive and disburse moneys from the fund in accordance with the provisions of this article. 269
(3) The City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund consists of the following moneys:
a. All moneys recovered in any action against, or settlement or consent order with, any person who has polluted or engaged in an activity in violation of any ordinance, rule, or regulation adopted by the Commission pertaining to the regulation of the air, water, soil, natural resources, or animal or plant life of the city or in an activity tending to pollute the air, soil, or water of the city. However, any moneys specified in this paragraph which are required to be deposited in alternative funds or trusts pursuant to federal, state, or local law may not be deposited in the City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund.
b. All moneys offered to and accepted by the city for the City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund in the form of federal, state, or other governmental grants, allocations, or appropriations, as well as foundation or private grants and donations.
(4) Unless otherwise restricted by the terms and conditions of a particular grant, gift, appropriation, or allocation, all interest earned on the investment of moneys of the City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund accrue to that fund and may be disbursed only for projects authorized consistent with this article. The moneys in the City of Dunedin Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund may be invested only in accordance with the laws pertaining to the investment of city funds.
270
271 What is an Illicit Discharge?
• Any discharge to the MS4 (municipal separate storm sewer system) that is not composed entirely of stormwater except: – Flows from firefighting – Water line flushing – Landscape irrigation – Rising groundwater – Air conditioning condensation – Springs – Flows from riparian habitats and wetlands 272 Examples of an Illicit Discharge
• Unlawful Discharges include: – Sewage – Industrial waste – Paint – Concrete – Petroleum Products – Organic Matter – Inorganic Matter – Grass Clippings – Vegetative Material 273 Examples of an Illicit Discharge
274 Examples of an Illicit Discharge
275 Why do we consider these unlawful?
• All drains lead to St. Joseph Sound Gill: All drains lead to the ocean, kid. Nemo: Wow.
276 Why do we consider these unlawful?
• Contaminants introduce harmful chemicals and bacteria • What’s so bad about grass clippings? – Many contain excess nutrients such as Phosphorus and Nitrogen • Excess nutrients can cause harmful algae blooms
– Decomposing vegetative material can spike
fecal coliform levels 277 A Small History Lesson
• Pinellas County Stormwater Enforcement – FY2017 • Proposed interlocal agreement to allow Pinellas County Staff to enforce the Pinellas County Environmental Enforcement Act • Cost share with other municipalities – That’s a legal “NOPE” • County legal review determined that Pinellas County could not enforce outside of unincorporated Pinellas County jurisdiction 278 How do we currently enforce?
• Residential – Letter to homeowner • Indicating that a violation has occurred • Asking for a cease and desist of actions • Commercial – Letter to business • Indicating that a violation has occurred • Asking for a cease and desist of actions • Possible involvement of outside agencies 279 How do we currently enforce?
• Active Construction – Notice of Violation (NOV)or Stop Work Order • Stop all work, return area to pre-construction site conditions – Fine Letter & Issuance • Must come from the City Engineer • Fine is processed through Finance
• Cumbersome process 280
Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• Proposed Fine Matrix – Violators • Residential – Homeowners, renters, visitors, singular persons not working in a commercial or business capacity • Commercial – Businesses, employees, singular persons working in a commercial or work-related capacity, landscapers • Active Construction – Active construction site contractors and active construction site employees on residential and commercial properties 281
Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• Proposed Fine Matrix – Extent of Violation • Minor – Non-toxic materials » Yard debris, sand, gravel – Can be addressed without assistance from a certified remediation specialist • Moderate – Potentially harmful materials » Concrete, masonry products – May require remediation assistance, but does not cause structural harm 282
Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• Proposed Fine Matrix – Extent of Violation • Major – Toxic or health-threatening materials » Sewage, paint, chemicals, petroleum products – May require remediation assistance – May impair drainage or structures – May require removal of soil due to contamination • Level “bumps” – Purposeful discharge from a lesser tier moves up to the next extent of violation tier 283
Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• Proposed Fine Matrix – First Offense on Minor Violations • Warning with Education – Goal is to change behavior – Clean-up is required • NOV and Stop Work Order – City approved construction plans require site operators to be trained prior to the start of construction
284 Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• Fine Matrix EXTENT OF VIOLATION VIOLATION MINOR MODERATE MAJOR RESIDENTIAL 1st Offense Warning/Education $250 $1,000 - 2nd Offense $50 $500 $5,000 3 or More $100 $750 Max Accrued $500 $3,750 No Maximum Violation COMMERCIAL 1st Offense Warning/Education $400
$5,000 - 2nd Offense $200 $800 $10,000 3 or More $400 $1,200 Max Accrued $2,000 $6,000 No Maximum
VIOLATOR Violation ACTIVE 1st Offense NOV/Stop Work $800 CONSTRUCTION Order $5,000 - 2nd Offense $300 $1,600 $10,000 3 or More $500 $2,400 Max Accrued $2,500 $12,000 No Maximum Violation 285
Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• How will it work? – Follow normal code enforcement procedures. • Provide Staff with good case records for repeat offenders.
286 Draft Stormwater Enforcement
• Environmental Enforcement Recovery Fund – Three Main Purposes: 1. Mitigating the impacts of damage resulting from violations 2. Acquiring, protecting, restoring, and maintaining land for the purpose of: – Enhancing surface waterways – Protecting vulnerable areas from sea level rise 3. Convert aging infrastructure to green infrastructure – Sole intention of improved water quality and/or reducing the impacts of sea level rise
287
Questions?
288 Agenda Item: 5.c
Meeting Date: July 23, 2019
MEMORANDUM
To: City Commission
Date: 2019-05-23
From: Jennifer Bramley, City Manager
Subject: City Manager's Written Report
Presenter(s): Jennifer K. Bramley, City Manager
Recommend: Review and discuss "City Manager's Written Report" covering June, 2019
Epic Goal(s): #5 - Embrace community and employee relationship strategies that strengthen inclusiveness, respect, transparency and collaborative engagement.
Boards & Committees: N/A
Budget Impact: N/A
Past Action: N/A
Next Action: N/A
Attachments: A. City Manager's Update-July 2019.pdf,
Background: See attached report
289 City Manager's Up date
July 15, 2019
This Update will refer to the events since the date of the last Update of June 10th , 2019.
DUNEDIN PUBLIC LIBRARY • Presented 22 tech sessions with an attendance of 33 people • Notary Service at Library -14 stamps • Delivered 77 items to 16 users of our Homebound Delivery Service • Dunedin Youth Volunteers donated 388.25 hours of their time • Adult Volunteers donated 203 hours of their time • 354 patrons utilized the study rooms • 236 seeds packets "checked out" • E-books checked out - 2302 • E-audiobooks checked out - 945 • 1 Exam proctored • lnter1ibrary loan books obtained for Dunedin Patrons - 55 books • Webinars: Fortnite in the Library, How to Build A Value Workspace Culture, the Drama Triangle, Google Forms, Weeding 101 , Keeping Genres in Shape, Managing Employees, Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace, Creating Videos, Getting to Know the Needs of Gen X • Staff attended the following meetings: Commission Meeting, Weekly City Department Head Meeting, weekly Library Management Team meetings, Cataloging Special Interest Group, Integrated Library System Special Interest Group, Youth Services Interest Group, Budget Workshop, ReferencefTechnical Services Department Meeting, I pad meeting • Partnership with Dunedin Fine Art Center on their library collection • Director worked on FY20 Budget and attended budget review meetings • 2 staff members attended the American Library Association Conference sponsored by the Friends of the Library • Attended groundbreaking at City Water Plant • Met with Friends of the Library to plan pop up book sale in September • Numerous staff members completed the Homeless Library Training Program • Presentations on library products by Kanopy, Hoopla, Ignite Software • Director meetings with each area of the library, asked all employees for 3 ideas to change/streamline in Library
STATISTICS Door Count 24,081 Total Transactions 83,659 Average Circulation Per Hour 143.53 Adult and Youth Programs 128 Program Attendance 2248 Internet Usage (Adult & Youth) 2504 Wireless Usage 1423 290
I IP a g c Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Building Division • June 2019 FBmns Total Permits Issued 427 Total Permit Fees Collected $108,044.00 Total Vah..etion of ConsDu::tion $5~2.,856 .00
Pennits by Groi.n: NlMBER VALUATION Buldirg Pennit 228 $4,548,751.00 Electrical Penni t 27 $200,417.00 Fence Permit 31 $119,143.00 Gas Permit 3 $7 473.00 Mecharical Pennit 86 $549,811 .00 Pll.mbira Pennit I 40 $108,606.00 SignPennit I 9 $20,600.00 TentPennit : 3 $1 ,300.00 I New ConsDu::tion bv Buldina T-: NlMBER VALUATION New Sinale Famitv Residences 2 $730.610.00 New T'NO-'Famitv Residences 1 $263.000.00 New Min~arntv Residel1ial Buldirgs 0 $0.00 New Mobile Homes 1 $128,354.00 New Commercial Bu lclirgs 0 $0.00 New ~ Bulclirgs (Comnen:ial & Resideriial) 0 $0.00 -=w ~ER 1,135
UICa•I TAl-W• NlMBER TAXES New Business Tax Receipts 14 $1,358.50 Renewed 81Siness Tax Receipts 3 $725.63
Code Enforcement Division • Code enforcement staff performed 120 inspections, responded to 8 public records requests, opened 58 new cases and closed 23 existing cases in June. • June 4, 2019 Code Enforcement Board Meeting Actions: o Old Business Cases Heard: 10 o New Business Cases Heard: 11 o Affidavits of Compliance Accepted: 10 o Reconsideration of Fine Requests: None • The Code Enforcement Board collected $1 ,251 .44 in unpaid fines and fees in June. • The City Commission approved the following actions regarding existing code enforcement cases: o 6/4/2019 - Authorized the City Attorney to accept a $12,000 settlement offer submitted by Attorney Andrew Mongelluzzi, on behalf of the owner, Dunedin Academy & Day School in exchange for the Release of a Code Enforcement Board Lien (DCEB 18-777) on the property located at 1408 CR 1.
291
21 1' .1 0 \,; Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 Planning Division • Staff presented the following items to the City Commission for comments, questions and direction: o 6/4/2019 - Land Development Code Supplemental Height Regulations for the CRA. o 6/18/2019 - Draft Comprehensive Plan Update of the Housing Element.
• June 20, 2019 City Commission meeting actions: o Postponed First Reading of Ordinance 19-01 to July 25, 2019 - Rezoning request for 1341 Bayshore Boulevard from Planned Residential Development (PRO) to Multi-Family Residential 15 (MF-15). o Tabled First Reading of Application 19-14 - Sea Palms Twin Villas Design Review for the property located at 2624 Paula Drive North. o Approved First Reading of Application 19-15 - Beyond the Wall Design Review for the property located at 520 Skinner Boulevard. • June 12, 2019 Local Planning Agency meeting actions: o Provided comments and direction on the Draft Comprehensive Plan Update of the Housing Element presented by staff. o Recommended approval of the following ordinances for the property located at 1 Eagle Lane: , • Ordinance 19-16 - Annexation. • Ordinance 19-17 - Land Use Plan designation of Residential Suburban (RS). • Ordinance 19-18 - Zoning designation of Single Family Residential (R-200). o Recommended approval of Ordinance 19-19 - City Policy on Green Building Certification Standards. o Recommended approval of Ordinance 19-20 - Amending Section 104-26 of the Land Development Code. • June 17, 2019 Board of Adjustment & Appeal meeting actions: o Approved Conditional Use Permit Application 19-19C - Allow the construction of single family residence in the Tourist Facility (TF) zoning district for property located at 1530 Bayshore Boulevard.
CRA/ECONOMIC & HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Mease Manor • Staff has been working with Mease Manor on their major improvement project. Patricia Corridor • Staff has been working with the newly formed Patricia Merchants Association (PMA) on identifying areas of need. DEEP Project • City Hall - Staff has been working to identify potential spaces for relocating City staff during the construction of City Hall. • Gateway - Appraisals have been completed and discussions are underway for a unified e site development. Affordable/Workforce Housing • Staff presented the Affordable Housing Assessment study and recommendations at the June 18, 2019 Commission Work session. The Action Plan is under review and due in the Fall. • Staff has been working with Planning on updating the Housing Elements of the Comp Plan 292
3 1P ag~ Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Staff continues to work to assemble the resources and partners for an affordable/workforce housing project. • Staff is currently reviewing the feasibility of a potential Senior Affordable housing project. Skinner Blvd Road Project • Staff is working to assemble an RFQ for the Design Phase on this project and will put out to bid in September. CRA/CRAAC/ Downtown Projects • Staff met with the newly formed Pinellas County CRA workgroup to discuss the implementation of the recent legislative outcomes and Pinellas County new requirements. • Staff continues working on repairs and enhancements including, benches, pavers, parking lot upgrades as well as renewal of parking lot leases. • Staff has issued the Purchase Order for the enhancements to the Box Car, expected date of completion in late summer 2019. • Eleven Commercial Fa9 PARKS & RECREATION Parks & Recreation Administration: • Met with the City Arborist, Permitting staff and the City Attorney to discuss the implications of the new State legislation approved by the Governor restricting local oversight of tree removals and trimming on certain residential properties. • Presented to the Local Planning Agency and received their support of the revised Land Dedication Ordinance for parkland impact fees and credits. 293 4 1Pagc Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Completed review and design for the new shade structures for the Sindoon Stage at the Dunedin Community Center and the Weaver Park playground. The contract will be presented to the City Commission for approval on July 9, 2019. We are also receiving quotes to remove two of the unneeded columns on the stage and reduce the height of the others. • Met with Finance and prepared estimates for the LOO funds over the next 5 years. • Presented the various options for the use of the Dunedin Stirling Links property to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Committee. • Began design of the replacement playground for Elizabeth Skinner Jackson Park playground. • Re-advertised the Harbormaster position. • Toured various marina facilities throughout Pinellas County with the Marina staff to explore best practices and facility design and maintenance. • Continued work with Engineering to plan and finalize the scope for the Marina dredge and Dock A renovations. • Assisted with the Request for Proposals for the Employee Benefit Brokerage and Consulting Services contract. • Finalized and submitted the Management Plan for the Florida Communities Trust (FCT} grant award for the purchase of the Hammock Park property. • Compiled the survey results for the new aquatic complex and began drafting the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the design services for the replacement Aquatic Complex. • Met with County, several cities and University of Florida representative in regards to a unified approach of the use of glyphosate. Marketing: • The Aquatic Complex Design survey was open May 3 and closed May 31 . A total of 594 responses were received, results were reviewed and shared with staff. • Prepared first draft of the next Parks & Recreation Magazjne (Fall edition, Sept-Dec). • Assisted staff with coordinating and promoting the Dunedin Parks & Recreation Department and Youth Advisory Committee's "Bag Drive" to help children in foster care. The Bag Drive is being held throughout the month of July during National Parks & Recreation Month. Marketing materials and promotion included posters, postcards, news story, e-notifications and announcements on social media and City website. A promotional video and presentation was also created and will be presented during the City Commission meeting on July 9th. • Continued taking 360-photos and footage of City parks and recreational facilities to be promoted online. Also organizing a multitude of digital photos and creating easy access to Department shared multimedia library. • Designed various types of marketing materials including posters, postcards and flyers for upcoming Department events and programs. • Continued to create, promote and monitor Department events and announcements on social media. • Continued maintenance of Department webpages including populating with new information, updating and reviewing content, digital photo editing, creating news stories, e-notifications and troubleshooting. Special Events: • Salty Soul Cleanup on the Causeway on June 22. Recreation: • Community Center: o The Community Center had a total of 8 rentals with 400 guests total in private parties and Teen Leadership Training. 294 SI Page Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 o Summer Camp was in full swing in June with three out of the four weeks for the month of Kid 's Camp at max capacity. Also, all specialty camps i.e. Pre-K, Theater, Archery, Afternoon Adventures, Bagpipe and Little Art Masters at or near capacity. o A Public Meeting was held to update the public about the renovation of the Fitness Room. There were a total of 25 members who came to hear about the changes. o Staff continued with registration of camps, programs and rentals. • Fitness Center: o Fitness Center visits and group exercise attendance totaled 2,608 for the month of June. o Fitness/GEX class drop-in attendance: 41 • Athletics: o Twenty four (24) athletic rentals were held in June. o Athletic Summer Camp Enrollments: o Multi Sports • Week 1-6/3-6n - 26 participants • Week 2-6/10-6/14 - 26 participants • Week 3-6/17-6121 - 25 participants (Baseball Camp) • Week 4-6/24-6128 - 25 participants o Tennis Camp , • Week 3 - 6/17-6121 - 25 participants • Week 4 - 6/24-6128 - 25 participants • Martin Luther King, Jr. Recreation CenterNouth Services: o Summer Camp programming continued with Teen Camp, Hammock Day Camp, Nature Camp, Skate and Paddling Camps providing youth with fun, safe summer time experience. o Campers brought in food/household donations for Dunedin Cares food drive. o Building rentals including cooking camp, basketball camp, AAU practices, parkour classes and private parties continued as a revenue source. o Staff and Youth Advisory Committee members filmed promotional video to be presented at upcoming Commission meeting to inform City officials and the public on "It's In the Bag" program in celebration of Florida Parks and Recreation Month. The department is expanding on the "Buddy Bag" program which collected personal items for children in foster care by setting a goal of collecting 200 bags to place collected items. o Staff prepared for Before and After School Programs for 2019-20 school year, including program planning, organization and staffing. o Staff in renewal process for 2019-20 school year contract with JWB and Pinellas County School Board to continue Promise Time initiative at Dunedin Elementary School and at San Jose Elementary School. o Staff working with Pinellas County School Board to provide snack service for upcoming school year. • Hale Activity Center: o Held 48 adult classes and programs for a total participation of 1,932. o 'Puttin on the Ritz' Luncheon had a participation of 35 and was sponsored by Palms of Largo. o Held 4 meetings with an attendance of 32. o Held 3 rentals with an attendance of 370. o Total attendance for the month of June was 2,369. o Staff continued with marketing, planning and preparing for upcoming special events. • Highlander Pool o Successfully completed two sessions of Sailing Camp. 295 61 Pagc Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 o Successfully completed one session of Kayak Camp. o Hired a new lifeguard, Lafayette Renfroe. o Staff continued work on the beginning stages for the design of the new aquatic center. o Total pool admissions for the month of June was 5,599 with revenues of $23,346. Parks: • Cut out, removed and replaced 43,500 square feet of damaged Bermuda sod at Jerry Lake fields 1 and 3, top dressed all 4 fields and replaced 15 garbage can holders. • Completed multiple irrigation repairs on athletic fields (with the assistance of our irrigation techs). • Cleared out the storm retention areas on Harvard and Ed Eckert to allow the rain water to drain. • Knocked down and re-built the pitching mound on field 3 at Fisher, added clay and levelled fields 1,2 & 4. • Replaced 3,500 square feet of sod around the batting cages between fields 5 & 6 and outside Little League's main office on Harvard. • Hired a contractor to inject Curfew into all 11 fields between Jerry Lake and Fisher to treat for Nematodes. • Hosted over 15 games. • Began initial preparations for All Star and State Tournaments for Little League Baseball and Softball. • Re-shelled Good Shepherd parking lot, Harvard parking lot at Fisher, Harris Property, Jerry Lake, New Youth Guild, Causeway, and Weaver parking lots on both sides of Alt. 19. • Removed pole from the golf course. • Delivered and installed parking stops at the Harris property. • Prepped the Nature Center for summer camp and removed parking curbs from the parking area. • Built cabinet for Jones Building. • Sprayed Arboretum, Fisher, Causeway Islands, Highlander Parking, and old firehouse. • Created a Special Events inventory list. • Removed 2 crape myrtles from San Jose Park, 2 dead palms from Palm Blvd. and 6 palms from the guardrail on the Dunedin Causeway. • Removed graffiti from palms on the Causeway. • Trimmed tree at Fleet. • Installed parking bumpers at VFW playground and dug out and installed new shell path at VFW playground. • Removed and trimmed south hedge at Marina boat ramp. • Finished installing parking blocks in Highlander Park. • Removed hedges at Hale Center around the A/C unit. • Prep area for Water Treatment Plant Grand Opening (trimmed branches and delivered coolers). • Provided logistical support for a variety of events and rentals, including Summer Camp, Arts & Crafts Festival, Water Treatment Plant Grand Opening, and the Downtown Market. • Completed monthly safety checks of parks, playgrounds, and parking lots. • Pete McNeave transferred from the Water Division to a Parks Crew Leader. 296 7 1P agc Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 Marina: • Marina's boat ramp users for June: Resident Daily Ramp Users: 73 Daily Non-Resident Ramp Users: 53 Annual Resident Decals: 1 Non-Resident Decals: 1 Transient "visiting" Boaters: 19 Annual Parking Passes: 11 FINANCE • Completed and submitted 2018 Florida's Annual Financial reporting requirement. • Work continued on resolving Munis implementation problems. Department demanded and · was able to obtain an additional 3 days of on-site assistance from an implementation specialist despite being scheduled to have migrated to the generic phone/internet customer service protocol. • Found a qualified candidate for the open Accounting Manager position & made an offer. That offer was accepted. Initiated the hiring process. Expected start will be mid July. • Complete the recording of all March financial transaction into Munis. March is expected to be closed in early July. Still on track to get caught back up and return to normal process of booking transactions as they occur by the end of August. CURRENT BID & RFP STATUS UST RECENTLY AWARDED • Bid #19-1126 is titted "ldlewild Drive Ditch Conversion to Culvert with Shallow Swale." Awarded at .the June 4 City Commission meeting. SCHEDULED FOR CITY COMMISSION DISCUSSION • RFP #19-1127 is titled "Furnish & Install Shade Structures at Two City Locations." The item is scheduled for discussion at the July 9 City Commission meeting. • RFQ #19-1128 is titled "Architectural Design Services for a Building Repurposing." The item is scheduled for discussion at the July 9 City Commission meeting. • Bid # 19-1130 is titled "Lift Station #3 Sanitary Sewer Force Main Replacement." Bids were accepted until 2:00 pm Tuesday, June 25, 2019. Staff anticipates placing this on the July 23 City Commission agenda. UNDER EVALUATION • RFQ #19-1123 is titled "Engineering Design Services for the WWTP Electrical System Upgrades." Submittals were accepted until 2:00 pm Tuesday, April 2. Staff is negotiating with the top ranked Consultant. • RFQ #19-1124 is titled "Engineering Design Services for SR-580 Pipeline Rerouting and County Interconnection. Submittals were accepted until 10:00 am Friday, April 12. Staff is negotiating with the top ranked Consultant. • RFP #1 9-1125 is titled "Employee Benefits Brokerage & Consulting Services." Submittals were accepted until 10:00 am Friday, April, 26. Staff is finalizing details of the agreement with the selected Consultant. • RFQ #19-1133 is titled "Lift Station #20 and #32 Rehabilitation." The evaluation process has begun. 297 81 Pagc Cityoommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 ACTIVE ON THE STREET • RFP #19-11 31 is titled "Dunedin Marina Retail Space Lease." Proposals are due at 2:00 pm Wednesday, July 10, 2019. • RFP #19-1132 is titled "Auditing Services." Proposals are due at 2:30 pm Wednesday, July 10, 2019. • Bid #19-1135 is titled "WNrP Aeration Basin Rehabilitation." Bids are due at 2:00 pm Tuesday July 30, 2019. UNDER DEVELOPMENT City of Dunedin Fire Station '1160 Restroom Renovations City Attorney Services Hammock Park Fem Trail Boardwalk Construction of a Cart Barn & Pro Shop at the Dunedin Country Club BUDGET • Continued to fine tune 2020 proposed budget, Budget workshop #2 will be on July 15th. • Answered FEMA policy compliance requests and satisfied their additional requests for detailed documentation of submitted expenses. June 2019 CRF (estimated): Early CRF payoffs: 3 totaling $4,500 New CRF loans: 6 totaling $36,000 CRF paid at install: None CRF reaching full amortization: 15 PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES DEPARTMENT: Engineering Division: Utilities Section • WWTP Denitrification Filter Building Repair & Rehabilitation - o This project consists of the removal and replacement of twenty (20) valves and actuators for the denitrification filters, removal and replacement of two pumps and check valves, and repair of damaged concrete portions of the filter building. To perform the work, insertion of eight (8) line stops are required to isolate portions of existing piping and valves. In addition, all piping corresponding to replaced valves will be painted. o SGS Contracting Services was awarded the contract in the amount of $697 ,400 on April 19, 2018; due to long lead times for the valves and actuators, the "NTP" was issued for August 20, 2018; with project completion anticipated on or before June 12, 2019. o The project is complete and operational at this time. The City is awaiting final closeout documents from the contractor. 298 91 I I ' _, Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Water Treatment Plant - Design Build - o The Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Refurbishment Project will rehabilitate I replace the existing 9.5 MGD treatment plant and ensure the ongoing production of high quality potable water to the City of Dunedin's residents and customers. This is a Progressive Design-Build project which consists of two phases. Phase I, included pilot testing as well as detailed design to 90% (already completed) in order to establish a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for construction. Phase II , includes completing the detailed design, construction, commissioning and turnover to the City. o In June, 2019, the City received the agreement from FDEP for a low-interest State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan for construction. o A Groundbreaking Ceremony at the WTP was held on Thursday June 27th, at 10:00 am. o The contractor has mobilized a construction trailer, installed temporary power and data, and has started demolition activities. o Substantial completion of construction is scheduled for December 2020. • Lift Station 8 & 15 Emergency Diesel Pumps - o These Emergency Diesel Pumps will automatically tum on in the event of a power outage, thus minimizing the need for wastewater staff to physically access the stations to respond to emergency power outages. In addition, the back-up pumps are designed to handle above normal flows to the stations during inclement weather, in an effort to minimize SSO's (Sanrtary Sewer Overflows). o This project was awarded to Danus Utilities, Inc., on March 5th, in the amount of $476,245. A pre-construction meeting occurred on April 2ih. A Notice to Proceed' (NTP) has been issued for July 15th. Shop Drawings/Submrttals have been reviewed and approved. It is anticipated the contractor will mobilize in the next several weeks. • Wastewater Treatment Plant SCADA System Upgrades - o The City intends to upgrade rts existing PLC's and 'lnTouch' application in the Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility (AVWVTF) and Collections system. The scope of work includes: materials, installation, testing, and commissioning of existing Local and Remote Telemetry Unrts, PLC's, network equipment, power supplies, terminal blocks, wire, wire ways, surge suppression, cellular communication modems, mounting hardware, and computers. o Final design and completion of panel construction drawings and specification compilation was awarded to McKim & Creed. The design portion began in January and is 100% complete. The project is currently on hold for potential planning of a state revolving loan to fund the project. • Wastewater Lift Station #3 Force Main Replacement - o The City intends to replace the aged force main from Lift Station #3, and make some modifications to the wet well of Lift Station #3. The existing force main is cast iron and was originally installed in the 1960's. Failure of the aged pipeline (either by a pipe break or leak) would result in an unauthorized raw sewage discharge and present a public health hazard. The replacement force main will be HOPE and/or PVC pipe. o Ardurra (fonnerly King Engineering) completed design, the project was bid, and an opening was held on June 25th_ G.A. Nichols was the low bidder for the project. o The project is scheduled to go to Commission for award on July 23rd for $281 ,815.60. • Wastewater Treatment Plant - Electrical System Upgrades o The City intends to replace the Motor Control Centers (MCC's), switchgears, breakers, add localized generators and related electrical equipment at its Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), and the electrical equipment, starters, etc., at the City's 44 Lift Stations. 299 IO I P age Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 The electrical equipment at the VWVTP and lift stations have reached the end of useful life and maintenance has become difficult to perform, with parts a challenge to acquire. Installation of this new equipment increases safety measures for operational and maintenance staff. o The City has completed negotiations with the highest rated firm, Engineering Design Technologies (EDT). o The contract for design and technical construction services with EDT is scheduled to go to Commission on July 23rd for award. • Wastewater Treatment Plant - Aeration Basin Rehabilitation o The City intends to replace the fine bubble diffusion system, all related piping, gaskets, valves, instruments, etc., required for the proper operation of the aeration basins at the City's VWVTP. The fine bubble aeration systems at the VWVTP have reached the end of useful life and require replacement. Installation of this new equipment increases reliability and operability of the system. o The City completed design and bid package preparation in house. The bid package was advertised and bids are scheduled to be received on July 30, 2019. Roadway Section • Fenway Crosswalk - This Edgewater Drive crossing has been approved by the FOOT and expected to be constructed this quarter. • Milling & Overlay - The 2019 annual paving contract is in final design and will be bid this quarter. • Crack Seal, Micro Surface and Full Depth Reclamation - This project was awarded to Asphalt Paving Systems, Inc (APS) on February 5th ($552,678.10). A Notice to Proceed (NTP) was issued on June 3rd (contract time of 90 days). Construction has commenced; specific locations of work can be found on the City's website. Drainage I Interdepartmental Support • Dunedin Pines - This drainage and sidewalk project is in the final stages of design and will be constructed with City forces. Curb and sidewalk will be added to portions of the neighborhood. • Marina Sediment Removal Project - Phases 1 and 2 (regulatory approvals) are complete. The City received an FDEP Exemption Verification to dredge the channel and marina basin to the previously approved (2003) bottom elevations. The ACOE has approved their permit; a condition of the FDEP exemption is that sediment material must be hauled to a landfill, as it exceeded residential threshold limits for disposal. Staff is developing a scope of services with Wood , Inc. (consultant for Phases 1 & 2) to provide construction plan, bidding, and construction phase services. Preliminary sediment dewatering testing was completed in June. • Marina Boat Ramp Replacement - The former western concrete boat ramp to the Sound had been damaged by loss of beach and wave erosion undermining the ramp, resulting in the need for replacement. Staff submitted and received an Exemption Verification from the FDEP that allowed for removal and replacement with a ramp of similar size and location without permitting. Demolition of the existing ramp was completed by staff from the Public Services Division in mid-January. Bids were received on June 14, 2019. Parks is working to transfer funds as the low bid amount was above the budgeted amount. The project is scheduled to go to Commission at the July 23rd meeting for award. • ldlewild Ditch Project - This project will address erosion and sediment issues affecting adjacent properties, and the City maintained ditch system. The SWFWMD (regulatory agency) permit application was approved in February. The Timm Group Building & General Contractors was awarded the construction contract ($240, 115) at the June 4th Commission meeting. The NTP was issued for construction to begin on September 2 nd. 300 11 I Pagc Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 Development • Site Infrastructure I Development Review Participation: Projects discussed I researched as part of DRC meetings - (0) Site I Infrastructure plan sets reviewed - (2) Public Services Division: Streets Section • Continued new installations and re air of concrete sidewalks (l ,371 SF). • Removed/replaced military and event banners. • Staff continues right-of-way tree trimming in Dunedin Isles and Lakewood Estates subdivisions. o Trimmed and hauled tree canopies for roadway clearance Citywide o Trimmed hardwood trees and palms (31 .5 tons hauled). • Continued Traffic Sign & Post maintenance Citywide: o Manufactured (80) new signs, and replaced (26). • Repaired utility cuts for the Water and Wastewater Divisions (12 Repairs). • Continued hauling concrete and asphalt to recycling plant, as needed (93.2 tons hauled). • Installed traffic counters throughout City for annual counts • Installed traffic counters in the 1400 block of Bass Blvd and Patricia Ave, Countrywoods Ln ., Cedarwood Ave. • Installed temporary speed feedback on New York Avenue I Union Street • Installed traffic counters on Solon, St Andrews, and Ohio Ave • Supported lane shift for survey crew on Bayshore Blvd. • Set up road closure for Wastewater sewer repair on Ranchwood Drive East. • Provided Special Event support - Arts and Crafts Stormwater Section • Cleaned 13,042 linear feet of stormwater piping • Continued slope ditch mowing • Continued ROW mowing • Continued residential street sweeping activities: o Hauled 13.8 tons I 15 cubic yards of street sweeping debris to the County landfill. o Hauled 7.8 tons I 9 cubic yards of catch basin debris to the County landfill. • Continued catch basin repairs Citywide (4). • Repaired Cedar Creek Channel A weir washout. 301 12 I p l ( t: Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Constructed ditch improvements on Indian Creek Court I Brady Drive • Continued ditch maintenance Citywide. • Continued stormwater pipe maintenance and repairs Citywide. Stonnwater Program Coordinator • Attended the Florida Stormwater Association (FSA) Annual Conference • Participated in the FSA Conference Committee duties and meetings. • Participated in the FSA Board of Directors duties and meetings. • Received reappointment to the FSA Board of Directors for another 2-year term. • Submitted to FDEP the required COD Water Quality Assessment Program report, end of June. • Worked with Staff on the SWFWMD certified facilities owned by the City of Dunedin, a master list for inspection tracking, and roles of each staff member in the recertification process. • Attended the June CEQ meeting and presented on the upcoming Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance Workshop that will be corning to the City Commission in July. • Attended the July quarterly SAC meeting and presented on the upcoming Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance Workshop mentioned above. • Attended Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Quarterly MS4 Webinar. • Attended Curlew Creek & Smith Bayou Watershed Management Plan progress/BMP meeting. • Mangrove trimming for the City of Dunedin was completed at the end of June. • Reviewed 3 projects for DRC concerning stormwater permitting through FDEP and the SWFWMD. Provided information to developers regarding proper BMP's during construction. • Reviewed 1 project for Infrastructure Review to notify the developer of potential site contamination, permit requirements through FDEP and/or the SWFWMD, and proper BMP's. Facilities Section • Performed FDEP Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) diesel tank inspections Citywide. • Continued addressing Code I Safety Inspections Citywide. • Replaced approximately 400 HVAC filters Citywide in City facilities on a monthly cycle. • Completed installation for temporary golf cart stora e at Golf Club 302 Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Repaired automatic entry doors at Library • Removed broken decorative street lighting poles on Broadway • Repaired hand dryers in Marina Park restrooms • Replaced fuel gauges on diesel tanks Citywide • Repaired hot water plumbing pipes in Water Administration breakroom • Repaired leaking faucet in kitchen at MSB • Replaced ceiling in pantry area at Gott Club • Repaired lighting in Fisher Little League concession area • Repaired chilled water valve for Fitness Area at Community Center. - ~ I • Installed electric for new ice machine at the Jones Building • Repaired shore power connection for slip on Commercial Dock at Marina • Repaired leaking toilet in restroom upstairs at Historical Museum • Repaired doors to Edinburgh Hall at the Community Center • Repaired electrical out1et for welder at Fleet garage • Installed electric service for new E-vehicle at Public Services • Repaired gymnasium A/C unit at the MLK Recreation Center • Repaired leaking roof drain at the Library • Replaced exhaust fan motor in Art Center Jewelry Studio • Repaired hot water circulation pump in kitchen at the Golf Club 303 14 I ) ,, g I.: Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Continued HVAC apprenticeship and internship programs with Pinellas Technical College • Responded to maintenance requests Citywide, as needed. Solid Waste & Recycling Division: • Staff celebrated Garbage Man Week to give thanks to all of the hardworking garbage men who work rain or shine to keep Dunedin looking Delightful! • Staff submitted the City's Florida Green Building Coalition (FGBC) application with supporting documentation to renew the City's FGBC Platinum designation. The recertification packet was sent April 1otti, a few weeks prior to the May deadline; and the application is still under review. • Staff attended the May Committee on Environmental Quality (CEQ) meeting. City Staff and CEQ discussed the Comprehensive Plan update, the Fleet Budget, and the Stormwater Enforcement Ordinance. • The Solid Waste & Fleet Divisions took part in a brief training session when the new claw truck was delivered July 1 st. This truck incorporates a stand-up-right-hand-drive chassis and a side loading hopper to quickly pick up small piles of debris by hand or use its mechanical arm for the oversized larger/heavier items. 304 15 I Pa'.! I.! Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Staff coordinated four (4) site visits with the Contractor and NovaCHARGE to work out the installation details for all the charging stations which the City is receiving from the Duke Park & Plug Program. The Notice of Commencement form has been submitted for the Monroe St Parking Garage station, which is currently still under review by the City's Building Department. • The planning process for the City's Ready for 100 Renewable Energy commitment has begun. Staff is currently working on a timeline that will incorporate several listening sessions, planning meetings, and various workshops in the months to come. • Staff provided a Sustainability Update to the Dunedin Causeway and Coastal Waterway Committee to discuss the various initiatives the City has in place. • Commercial & Multi-Family recycling: o Staff continues to assist multi-family and commercial customers who are contracted with Private Haulers to resolve service concerns, and assist in program implementation. • Outreach Events: o Residential Solar - Saturday, July 13th from 1 Oam - 11 :30am at the Dunedin Library. o Reduce, Reuse, Recycle - Monday, August 19th from 6pm - 7pm at the Dunedin Library. Wastewater Division: Plant Summary r • Wastewater Treatment flows: o Influent Average Daily Flow: 4.700 Million Gallons o Influent Monthly Total Flow: 140.995 Million Gallons o Reclaimed Water Average Daily Flow: 3.350 Million Gallons o Reclaimed Water Monthly Total Flow: 100.513 Million Gallons o Final Effluent Average Daily Flow: 1.199 Million Gallons o Final Effluent Monthly Total Flow: 35.977 Million Gallons • Maintenance and Repairs: o Contractor - TSC/Jacobs completed installation of five new 200HP Gardner Denver Blowers at Facility #13. o Contractor - SGS Contracting Services completed installation of twenty (20) new valves and actuators at Facility #8 (Filter Building). o Maintenance staff completed annual preventative maintenance (PIM) on all Wastewater Treatment Plant equipment, oil changes, filters, and belts. o Maintenance staff installed a rebuilt 125 HP motor at the master reclaim pump station pump #2, at Facility #16. o Contractor - Warner Tree Service trimmed trees at the San Christopher VWVTP property grounds. o Maintenance staff installed a new de-foamer pump/tank feed system at the re-aeration tank at Facility #10. o Maintenance staff installed a new fresh air intake fan assembly on top of Facility #7 (Sludge Building). o Contractor - Water Treatment and Controls performed annual PM (preventative maintenance) on all chlorine analyzers in Facility #16 (Master Reuse Station). o Contractor - Smith Fencing installed new fencing and swing gate at the San Christopher VWVTP property grounds. • Compliance: o May 2019 Discharge Monitoring report submitted to FDEP via EZDMR; [No Issues]. o The annual Discharge Monitoring Report-Quality Assurance (DMRQA) Study (#39) through EPA is underway with outside contracted laboratories (Advanced 305 16 1P age Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 Environmental Laboratories [AEL] and Marinco). This is an EPA requirement/study to evaluate the analytical ability of the contracted laboratories that we use to perform our environmental analyses, per our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Collections Summary • Scheduled repairs: • Assisted on main line blockage at the Blue Jays Player Development Field - broken lateral allowed sand to wash in and block off main. • Lateral repairs (6) - 533 Main Street, Bayshore Boulevard, Santa Anna Drive, Scotland Street, Paloma Lane, and Ni els Drive. • Under the direction of Engineering - worked with Public Services (Traffic Control) and Surveyors to access manholes to obtain invert elevations on Bayshore Blvd (Alt. 19). • Follow-up mini-scout inspections (13). • PM right-of-way clean-out installed (5) - Michigan Dr.E. , Briarwood St, & Pinewood Dr. • Lateral liner installed (3)- 2nd Avenue, Michigan Boulevard, and Ranchwood Drive S. • Responded to citizen blockage calls (26); daily utility field locates of sewer I fiber optics. • Root control (laterals) - Keene Road and Harvard Avenue • Manhole repairs - Summit Way • Responded to citizen blockage calls (18); & daily utility field locates of sewer/fiber optics • Vac I Cleaner Truck: • Continued cleaning mains in LS #32 area (Greenbrier Area - mostly rear easements). • Clean-out of the backwash basin sludge at the Water Plant. • Cleaned wet wells at LS #12A, #34 and #19. 306 171 1 .I g c Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Completed a few more time dated trouble spot cleanings. • Total cleaned: 9,749 LF of sewer mains. • TV Truck: • Continue to follow up on TV inspections of mainline root control list and working in generating follow up ROOTX work orders. • Installed sectional liners (5) - Citrus Avenue, (2) Patricia Avenue (2 - follow-up from main line blockage), and San Mateo Drive. • Cleaned out drying bed and hauled to landfill. • Total televised: 6,468 LF with 31 set ups. • Lift Stations: o Conducted Lift Station large and small Emergency Generator training for Collections Crew - hands on field trainin at several lift station sites. • LS #33 - installed new emergency pump-off connection. • LS #10 - performed troubleshooting of control panel and reset soft starts. • Responded to LS #7, 16, 4, 5, 11 , and 22 with generators, due to unplanned power outages on the morning of 6/3/19. • LS #27 - pulled both pumps due to rags (made a temp repair on cord). • LS #23 - Installed new battery charger. • LS #29 - lowered antennae and cleaned-up I redid all connections. Communications is now more reliable. • LS #17 - changed out transducer; due to on-going low level alarms. • LS# 14 - pulled pump and repaired pump-off connection. • E-One station (Causeway Bathrooms) - replaced blown fuses. 307 18 IP.i g e Citycommission.CMupdate.201 9.July2019 • Continued preventative maintenance: • Exercised valves; Cleaned out check valves and wet wells; Grounds keeping , etc. Water Division: Water Production • Production Numbers: o Average Daily Potable Water Production: 3.68 Million Gallons o Monthly Potable Water Production: 110.45 Million Gallons o Annual YTD Potable Water Production: 683.39 Million Gallons o Annual YTD Rainfall: 25.76 Inches o Monthly Rainfall Total: 12.23 Inches • Maintenance: o Operators continue nonnal PM program on plant equipment. o Operators have installed a temporary sludge holding tank to reduce arsenic levels in WW sludge. o Filter Building Thennoplastic Pol olefin PO roofing replaced by Done Rite Roofing. • Noteworthy Events: o The Water Treatment Plant Refurbishment Project mobilization has begun. Overland Contracting and Wharton Smith crews are onsite. Water Distribution • Maintenance and Repair - The annual backflow testing program is 67% complete, with approximately 5,600 backflows tested for the calendar year. The large meter program is 100% complete, with 98 large meters tested for the calendar year. This year, the Hydrant Program has installed 0 new hydrants, repaired 16, replaced 4, painted 184, and flow tested 150. During this time period, the Valve Program exercised 140 valves. For the year; the Valve Program has installed 1 new, replaced 1, repaired 5, and exercised 797 potable and reclaimed distribution valves. Wei/field • Monitoring Well (MW #62) was abandoned and replaced by MW #64 due to facility conflicts at the Toronto Blue Jays, Player Development Complex (PDC). Southeast Drilling, Inc, performed the drilling tasks. • Well #6 and Well #31 are out of operation due to faulty check valves. • Ardurra (fonnerly King Engineering) is in the process of designing a plan to renovate Well #1 with a new pump/motor, piping, and electrical features. • Wellhouse repairs due to water damage are being completed at Well #3. 308 Citycommlssion.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Southeast Drilling Service will redevelop Well #89; upon successful redevelopment, Southeast Drilling will install a new pump and motor at Well #89. COMMUNITY RELATIONS Community Relations Department continues to work with all City Departments in an effort to keep citizens engaged and informed via Web, Television, Social Media and Print: • City of Dunedin Facebook page grew to 22,502 followers in June 2019. • Managed Social and Digital Media (Facebook, Twitter, lnstagram, YouTube, Dunedin TV and DunedinGov.com) • YouTube - 1080 subscribers• 246,700 views • Your City @ Work June edition newsletter. • Budget planning and training on new Tyler system. • Coordinated and assisted with Channel 10 Brightside feature story on Dunedin. • PR outreach and media planning with Sachs Media. • Orange Festival outreach assistance. • Attended ribbon cutting for new Art Cave in coordination with Dunedin International Film Festival. • Water Plant Groundbreaking PR and coverage. • EOC training session. • DTV new programs in pre-production. • Light up the Park outreach assistance. • ADA research for City website. • Emergency prep outreach planning. • Closed Captioning research for Dunedin TVfWeb. • DTV technical updates and repairs with Tightrope Media. • DTV on-site work with WOW/Spectrum. • Citizens' Academy material development for Fall 2019. • SeeClickFix response coordination. • Social Media Archiving management. • Coordination of photography for City website and citywide requests. • Staff Liaison for Public Relations Action Advisory Committee & Visit Dunedin. • Community relations assistance with visitors to City Hall • City website follow-up and troubleshooting • Assistance and outreach to media & news outlets. Dunedin Television continues to promote all events and services City-wide some highlights are: • Produced all video content for Dunedin TV, City website, Facebook and YouTube. • June Spotlight on Dunedin: Orange Festival promo, Water Plant Groundbreaking, Honeymoon Island update, Dunedin Art Cave. • New show concept and development. • Upload and maintenance of Granicus (video on demand). • Coverage of City Commission meetings, Collective Agenda Reviews, Workshops and LPA meetings. • Audio for BAA/Code Enforcement meetings. • Dunedin TV Scheduling and Bulletin Board Maintenance. 309 20 I P ,l !! e Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Maintained DTV Broadcast systems/Chamber and edit suites. City Webmaster continues to support all departments Citywide: • Website review, editing and overall upkeep. • Assisted web editors with City website. • Continues to work with Granicus/IT to implement active directory for new City Intranet. • Hot Topics button/page coordination. • ADA WCAG 2.1 assistance. • Troubleshoot issues with splash page and ADA compatibility. • Created new images and graphics for web homepage. • Website overview and analysis. • Digital photo editing. • E-notification distribution and management. HUMAN RESOURCES Recruitment & Selection: • Total applications received: 233 • Ongoing Positions Posted: o Lifeguard I & II positions are seasonal and open until filled. o Recreation positions are seasonal and open until filled. o Firefighter Paramedic position is posted year round. • Vacant Positions in the Selection Phase o Accountant/Financial Analyst o Accounting Manager o Sr. Administrative Assistant: City Clerk o Harbormaster o Solid Waste Driver Loader o Risk Management Coordinator • NEW Positions Posted: o Parks Maintenance Worker I o Water Service Worker o Water Plant Operator o Wastewater Collection System Superintendent o Sr. Administrative Assistant: Parks & Recreation o Human Resources Specialist • Employees hired during June: o Library Assistant: Dianna Smith: 6/5/2019 o Librarian: Christina Butcher: 6/17/2019 o Lifeguard(s) I: • Georgia Burchman: 6/11/2019 • Lafayette Renfroe: 6/27/2019 o Recreation Leader(s): • Dominic Turowski: 6/4/2019 • Ciera Bennett: 6/11 /2019 • Tiffany Truss: 6/14/2019 • Michaela Mulligan: 6/17/2019 310 2 1 I Pag1.: Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 o Employee Promotions during June: • Parks Maintenance Crew Leader - Peter McNeave: 6/26/2019 • Sr. Water Distribution Technician - Daniel Gray: 6/5/2019 • Water Distribution Technician - James Ellison: 6/5/2019 o New Hire Orientations: • Facilitated on: 6/6/2019 • Employee Benefits: o Self-Insured Medical Claims Experience: Total Paid Medical & Pharmacy claims for June was $296,628.24, which was a 21% increase over May's totals. The average weekly claims for June were $35,216.22. o Humana G0365 Wellness Program: Number and % Status of Participants, with Blue as the Starter level and Platinum as Highest level: Humana Vital" Employee Count Participation Level % ---Platinum 70 24% Gold 43 15% Silver 47 16% Bronze 68 23% ~------4.------81 u e 64 22% -----+-~~~ Total Eligible 292 100% Employees • Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA): o Number of Employees with approved/pending FMLA: 14 - (Regular - 2, Intermittent - 12, Pending - 0). Number of new requests in June: 2 • Other (Non-WC, Modified Duty) o Number of employees currently working on a modified schedule (some restrictions) - 2 • Records Requests: Number of Records Requests processed: 2 • DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Program): o Number of Employees in DROP: 18 o Employees who entered DROP during June: 1 • Perfonnance Management: o Number of Disciplinary Actions: 2 • Employment Separations (Regular Full- and/or Part-Time): o Number of Separations from Employment: 3 • Risk Management o Workers' Compensation: • Number of new workers' compensation claims: 1 • Total current open workers' compensation claims (2019-2019): 3 • Employees on light duty: 2 • Employees out of work: 0 o Property/Liability/Motor Vehicle Claims: • New Property/Liability Claims: O; total open cases = 1 • New Moving Vehicle Accidents: O; total open cases = O o Cases Closed During the Month: • Worker's Compensation Claims: 3 311 22 I Page Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Property/Liability Claims: 3 • Moving Vehicle Accidents: 0. o Subrogation Recovery by The City: (the process by which the City collects money from the party at fault (or their insurance company) in order to recover funds that have already been paid) = $1000. • Safety: o 84 employees completed 109 on line safety training courses during the month of June. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT: IT Services Help Desk Requests for the Month of June, 2019: Monthly Ticket Counts Tickets by P1io1ity Tickets Created 201 Critical Tickets 1 Resolved Tickets 170 High Priority Tickets 32 Open Tickets 114 Low Priority Tickets 168 Malware Tickets 0 Proj ect Tickets 0 IT Services Help Desk Requests YTD for 2016-2019: 280 •... 240 • ~ 200 ~ .....~ 160 ...0 ~• 120 E z::::s 80 40 Month • During the month of June 2019, IT Services received 201 new on-line help desk support tickets. IT Services is averaging approximately 195 help desk tickets per month. On-Going IT Projects: • ERP (Enterprise Resource Program) - This capital improvement project will replace the current financial system and the existing HR payroll and time-keeping programs. In July of 2017 the City Commission approved the purchase of the new ERP solution from Tyler Technologies. This solution included their Munis financials/payroll packages, ExecuTime for time keeping and EnerGov for permitting, cashiering and a citizen self-service portal. The proposed time line for all phases of this thirty-three month project will be as follows: 312 23 11' d ..!. c Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 ERP MODULES IMPlfMEHTATON DE lN ICICIC OH LMDATE Phase 1 - MUNIS Financials, Procurement, Reports and Document Mit- November, 2017 April, 2019 Phase 2 • ExecuTime TI me & Attendance November, 2017 Aufust, 2018 Phase 3 . EnerGov (Permits/Buildin15/Citizen) and A/R & Collections May, 2018 December, 2019 Phase 4 . MUNIS Payroll/HR (Mifrate from HTt/NaviLine) January, 2019 January, 2020 Phase 5 - MUNIS Work orders, Fleet & Facilities Management January, 2020 December, 2020 Phase 6 ·MUNIS Utility Bi llin& Ja nuary, 2020 December, 2020 btimmd ERP Project Q)fnpldiou Date Janumy, 2021 Phase 1 of the ERP solution started in November of 2017. The City's Finance Department has completed the installation and conversion of this phase of the project. As of April 16, 2019 the City went live on the new financial system. Phase 2 of the ERP solution started in November of 2017 and went live in August 2018. Staff from various departments were involved in the test pilot group and simultaneously worked on both the new and old time keeping systems. New touch-screen time clocks with magnetic card readers were tested and will be installed in November. The new mag-cards will allow the employee to "swipe" their card for clocking-in and out during the day. Should the .City implement a mag-card reader system for door access throughout their facilities, the same employee mag-card can be used on the building doors. This will provide a means of security for the employee and the City to gain access into a building. Phase 3 of the ERP solution includes the community development and infrastructure system, referred to as EnerGov. This system will include the building, code enforcement, permitting, inspections and cit.izen self-service portal. The EnerGov module will be integrated with the county GIS mappings and Pinellas County property tax database. Data and process analysis are currently being implemented for this project to build the infrastructure. Phase 3 is planned for an 18 month implementation and is expected to go-live in mid-December of 2019. Phase 4 of the ERP solution includes the Human Resources, Payroll and Applicant Recruiting/Tracking modules. The official kick-off of this event was held on January 22, 2019. This module will incorporate an Employee Self-Service aspect that allows City staff to remotely access their personnel records, make changes to deductions, and update their personal information, as well as accessing and printing all pay statements and forms via the online portal. The Applicant Recruiting/Tracking module will allow candidates to apply online for City jobs and track their progress. The go live date for Phase 4 is scheduled for early January of 2020. • ERP Project Phases 5 and 6 - The IT Department is working on the pre-planning stages for the upcoming additional phases to its ERP project solution in 2020. The ERP Phases 5 includes the Global Works Orders, Fleet and Facilities Management modules and the ERP Phase 6 which includes the Utility Billing module, are both slated for an implementation start date of January of 2020. Both Phases 5 and 6 are anticipated to be completed by December of 202.. The implementation and training of each ERP Phase requires the cooperation and collaboration of staff from every City department. • Permit Data Transmittal to Pinellas County Appraiser Office - This on-going monthly project includes a transmittal of updated City permit data to the County's database. 313 24 I ) "g" Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Software Licensing Compliancy - IT Services is continuing an internal review of all software applications installed on City-owned computers, laptops, tablets and mobile devices. The goal of this project is to have accountability of all software licenses purchased and to be in compliance with all applicable laws. • IT Hardware Equipment Replacements - The City has adopted a five year cyclical replacement for its desktop computers, laptops and network devices. The IT Services staff have been deploying the one hundred twenty (150) desktop computers, laptops, tablets and network switches that are all scheduled for replacement in 2019. • Intranet Website- In collaboration with various other departments, the IT Department is working on a secure Intranet website for employees to access outside of the City's network. An intranet is a private network accessible only to City staff. Generally a wide range of information and services from the City's internal IT systems are available that would not be available to the public from the Internet. This Intranet site will allow City staff to access employment-related information from any internet browser that is traditionally only available while logged into a City computer. There are 5 essential purposes of a City Intranet: 1. Deliver employee content 2. Be a key communication tool 3. Enable collaboration amongst City staff and departments 4. Support the culture of the City 5. Create efficiencies through supporting business activities • Font/Size and Signatures in City Email Accounts - The IT Department will be implementing a group policy where all City email accounts use the official character font of Arial and the font size of 12 in all email correspondence. In addition, all staff will be provided with instructions on how to create signature lines in their email accounts that follow a standard business practice. • Telephone System Upgrade - During earty May, the IT Services Department implemented an upgrade to the City's current telephone system. This project included an upgrade to the existing phone servers and services only, while retaining the telephone desk sets to save costs. New IT Projects: • Nissan Leaf - The IT Department received a new fully electric 2019 Nissan Leaf car to replace an aging gas powered SUV. Initial testing of the new electric Leaf shows that the IT department only needs to fully charge the vehicle one every two weeks. • Relocation of Staff - The IT Department is working on the pre-planning of moving and installation of data and telco communications for the staff located in the Municipal Services and Technical Services Buildings. Those staff will be relocated to other office space for the demolition of those buildings. • New PRI Telephone Circuits - The IT Department is working on the installation of new PRI telephone circuits to be located in the current Data Center in the Public Services Building. Those telco circuits will replace the existing circuits located in the Technical Services Building that will be demolished. • Fiber Cabling Project for Relocation of Staff - The IT Department is working on various scenarios for the installation and relocation of the City's fiber optics cabling for the upcoming demolition of the Municipal Services and Technical Services Buildings. 314 25 Ip d IC Citycommlssion.CMupdate.2019.July2019 • Fiber Cabling Project for Water Treatment Plant Upgrade - The IT Department is working in conjunction with the Public Works Department on the installation of new fiber optics cabling along the service road next to the Water Treatment Plant. This new fiber cabling is currently the main fiber line that feeds from the City's Data Center to the rest of the City. • Fiber Cabling Project for EOC Building - The IT Department working in conjunction with the Fire Administration and Public Works Department on the installation of new fiber optics cabling from the City's Data Center to the location of the new Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Building that will be constructed next to the Fire Station 1#62 on Belcher Road. This fiber cable project will include connectivity to several other City sites that include: the future Parks & Recreation Maintenance Building to be located in the Englebert Sports Complex site located off Solon Avenue, the Water Tanks on Belcher Road and connection to Fire Station 1#62 on Belcher Road. This cabling project will also allow for future fiber cable installations that will allow for redundant network connectivity to the City facilities around the Dunedin Community Center on Pinehurst Road and Fire Station 1#61 on Michigan Blvd. This project will also allow for a redundant network Connectivity for all of the City facilities located on Virginia Street that include the Water Tanks at Jerry Lake, the Fleet and Solid Waste Buildings as well as Fire Station 1#60 and the Fire Admin Building. • Fiber Cabling Project for New Government Center Building - The IT Department is working on various scenarios for the installation and relocation of the City's fiber optics cabling for the upcoming construction of the new City of Dunedin Government Center Building. This new building to be located on the existing site of the City's Municipal Services and Technical Services Buildings will house a secondary Data Center for redundancy purposes. The new building will allow for three points of entry for the City's fiber optics cabling as opposed to the single point of entry that now exists in the Technical Services Building. The three points of entry the City will provide 315 26 IPa~ c Citycommission.CMupdate.2019.July2019 Development Project Update 7-12-19 under % Current Pro[ ects - City Commission Review LPA CC 1st CC 2nd cons t comp Aberdeen Oaks 1441-14-01 Virginia St 20 single-family home subdivis .J .J Yes 70% Arcadia 265 Causeway Blvd 16 4-story condos on I/old - infras"t;u cture expi/ed Yes 5% Beyond the Wall B&B 520 Skinner Blve adding 3 add units 518/19 6/20/19 7/1 1/19 Chase Ct@ Douglas Chase Ct@ Douglas 3-story duplex (CC appv'l) nla 5/16/19 nla denied Chesapeake Apartments 2307 Cumberland Cir 44 apts (add. to existing) Comp. 100% Courtyard on Main-amended Main/Douglas/Monroe 18 condos; retail;pa.rking gar. "-1infrastruct1 "r e under re" ew No 0% Hampton Inn - Causeway 2621/2641 Michad Pl 90-room hotel with restaurant Comp. 100% Dunedin Commons 375 Patricia Ave mixed-use (retail, TH, apes); D " " " Yes 98% Dunedin Cove 93 Lexington Ave 20 single-family homes ".J " " Yes 65% Gramercy Ct Pb II Howard Ave 18 townhomes - phase II " " Yes 20% Grant StB&B 418 Grant St 22-unit vacation rentals " owner s~"ling dev. rig/I"ts No 0% Oak Bend Townhomes 801 Main St 32 townhomes infrastructure under rE:Jl"iew ; demo.peginning 942 No 0% Pura Vida (now Mira Vista) 1413 Baysbore Blvd 7 townhomes replacing bungal Yes 20% San Christopher Villas 1501 San Christopher D r 12 villas " " " Comp. 100% Sea Palms - amended 2624 Paula Dr N 9 townhomes 518119" 6120/19" f- tabled" Yes 15% under Current Projects - Staff Only Review Only Comments const comp" 630-643 Athens St 630-643 Athens St 4 single-family homes with shared drive vacation opp 5/2/19 Blue Jays training facility rennovations, etc infrastructure approved Yes 10% Carriage House 1040 Broadway convert to event venue permit voided No 0% Discovery Academy 1380 Pinehurst demo front building, replace with portable Yes 10% Faith United Church 1650 Pinehurst 1100 sf addition Yes 45% 227 & 229 H ancock St 227 & 229 fu.ncock St keep SF home and add duplex Yes 40% 962 Highland Ave 962 Highland Ave 4-uoit apt building/vacation rental permit under review No 0% James St. Cottages 603 Scotland SF property to 4 (G lencaim-style) cottages Yes 95% Marker One Marina 343 Causeway Blvd complete Phase II Comp. 100% i~{'!g(p"ure & permit app'd 3/11 Retail sttip center 1440 Main St demo bldg, replace w I retail izza & urge~t care) . No 0% . . germ1t undf[;rr v1ew San Ruffino TH 1340 Bayshore Blvd finish 7 townhomes previously approved, ut never t No 0% Whiskey Cartel 1600 Main St fully C.O.'ed, but not open Comp. 100% Potential Future Projects - City Commission Review Comments 469-491 Causeway/500 Paula Dr S 491 Causeway 127 room hotd 521 Howdl St 521 Howdl St 5 condos 424 James St 424 James St 3 townhomes: rezone to PRD, design review Union Street Townhomes 1180 Union St 36 (market price) townhome development Potential Future Projects - Staff Review Only Comments 2058 Bayshore Blvd 2058 Baysbore Blvd Nano-brewery in existing bldg; requires Cond. Use Permit from BAA Baywood Shores Clubhouse demo clubhouse and convert land to park (sdl parking lot) 929 Broadway 929 Broadway current HOB - condos; 4-story mixed use residential over commercial EOC Belcher EOC and future training The Foundry 351 Alben St 6 short-term (container) rental units 526 Frances St 526 Frances St demo existing home and build a ttiplex Funtastic Creamery 2602 Bays hore Blvd ice cream kiosk in Causeway Plaza, west of Sandbar Grill 971 Howard 971 Howard 4 residential units 316 Mera nova 458 Virginia Lane construct outdoor dining and HC restroom Soggy Bottom Brewery 662 Main St expand outdoor dining, create additional parking (BAA for cond. use) DU N~D I N Home of Honeymoon Island Fire Department Administration MEMORANDU M To: Jennifer Bramley, City Manager Thru: Doug Hutchens, Deputy City Manager From: Jeffrey Parks, Fire Chief Date: July 2, 2019 Re: Monthly Report for June 2019 Fire Prevention Division: In June Dunedin Fire Prevention staff partnered with Walmart Neighborhood Center to participate in the Walmart National Safety Month event which was held at the store. Fire Prevention staff had the opportunity to talk with Walmart guests about a range of topics from fall prevention to hurricane preparation. Projects completed: • No Major Projects Completed Current projects: • Artisan Lofts - 638 Douglas Ave - Commercial Units • Dunedin Commons Apt. - 375 Patricia - Commercial Units • Arcadia Luxury Condo - 265 Causeway Blvd • Gramercy Court Townhomes - Highland Ave • The Courtyard on Main - Main St - New mixed use project • Mira Vista Town homes - 1413 Bayshore Blvd • Dunedin House of Beer - 324 Monroe St- Interior Renovation • Dunedin Stadium - Douglas - Renovation • Kellys Chic-A-Boom - Outdoor Renovation - 319 Main St. • Dunedin EOC - New Construction • San Ruffino Building 3 & 5 - New Construction - 1340 Bayshore Blvd • Sonder Social - 966 Douglas Ave - Restaurant/bar build out 317 1 Fire Prevention Staff Activities: Inspections - 107 Fire Investigations - 4 Re-inspections - 5 Event Inspections - 1 Fire extinguisher training - 1 Fire Safety presentations - 2 Plans Reviewed - 33 Station Tours - 1 Construction Inspections - 1 Pub. Ed Contacts (Total) -200 Final lnspections/BTR - 17 Hurricane Awareness presentation - 0 Meetings I Consultations - 21 Home Safety Checks/Smoke Alarm Install - 1 Referrals I Complaints - 7 Training and Safety Division: • June monthly facility inspections reviewed and scanned into files. • Obtained repairs for FB60 - Steering, Power Poles, Fire Pump • Attended NCT group meeting to plan NCT drills. July training is joint operation on Active Assailant with PCSO and Sunstar. • Developed monthly training matrix and unit assignments • Developed Final Draft of SOP for Hood Swap on fire scene • Taught Hands Only CPR and Fire extinguisher training to local Veterinarian Office • Updated Target Solutions Bulletin board • Completed monthly CME • Working on Leadership presentation for Officer Meeting • Created Hands only CPR program for I-pad presentations • Transferred programs for Heart saver CPR to I-Pad presentations • Attended meetings for EOC • Met with Gear Reps from Lakeland Gear • Developing plans with Light Duty crews to renovate storage room • Updating Pre-Plans, Verifying all Pre-plans accuracy and information • Assigned pre plan reviews through Target Solutions • Completed training reports for all shifts for the month of June 2019. A Shift completed 562 hours B Shift completed 439 hours C Shift completed 405 hours Department total of hours 1406 318 2 Operations: Type of Incident Month of Jun Year to Date Erner ResQ bv Uni· Runs Mins Medical Incident Response 538 3211 EMS Rescue Incident Response 29 299 Station 60's kea Fire Alarm 43 230 E60 172 4:37 Fire Incident Response 13 72 E61 12 7:29 Structure Fire Response 23 110 E62 9 5:22 Special 0 44 E51 (CFD) 3 7:09 Cardiac krest Response 6 34 E48 (CFD) 6:20 Water Rescue Response 5 49 T60 0:30 Major Incident Response 5 26 R48 (CFD) 8:31 Support incident (Fire) 0 10 Station 61's kea Unconfirmed Structure Fire 7 26 E61 53 5:56 Fire Incident Response Special 8 42 E60 7 6:04 ~r TralSport Incident 2 8 E66 (Pt-FD) 5 5:07 Trauma Alert 2 36 E62 1 7:48 Support Incident (DC) 3 26 Station 62's kea Medical Incident Special 0 3 E62 84 5:09 Support Incident (Medical) 6 26 E50 (CFD) 11 6:31 MNeup - Coverage 2 8 E60 5 7:17 Special Event 0 1 E61 2 8:15 ~pit.al Landing ZOne 0 1 E65(PlfD) 2 6:05 ~Possible Extrication 0 4 R48(CFD) 1 6:57 Brush Fire Incident Response 0 E68 (PlfD) 5:49 Extrication 0 3 S65(Plf0) 7:07 Rescue Incident Special 1 4 ARE Extrication (Vehicle) 0 1 Station 60's kea f>Lrto Crash 0 T60 13 5:45 Support Incident (Truck) 1 E60 4 5:33 Rescue (1-igh Angle/Beb.Y) 0 E62 5:40 Totals 694 4278 E61 1 9:36 Station 61's kea E61 5 5:50 E66 (PHFD) 2 5:44 Station 62's kea E62 10 4:41 E50 (CFD) 2 5:54 E52 (SHFD) 7:24 36 (6.27%) of the 574 calls within the DFD District were handled by units other than DFD. 319 3 PINELLAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S O FFICE BOB G UALTIERI, SHERIFF STRATEGIC P LANNING BUREAU DUNEDIN MONTHLY ANALYSIS UCR Part I Crimes June 2019 Murder 0 0 Forcible Sex Offenses 0 Robbe 0 A 3 2 s s 33 29 3 35 33 30 25 20 15 10 May-19 5 5 •Jun-19 5 3 2 3 0 0 I 0 I 0 J 11 0 • I. ~t- f;.. ':!!'~ ~ -::.."'~"""'<:-4> ~ ~t.<:>" ..... ,(,,~ ~~ ~'<:)'r'.,4' ~ 0 l'repared bv t ascy l'aylor - I - Data "l.•ur1..c •\Cl<.,S: L'CR lll'fi.:nses with Occurred \ddress, Arrested ~ubjccts,Citation City Report 7 10 2019 ( '1\ I> l 'nmc Analysis\ icws, Crime '\nalysis lnl..idcnt History (D1spo- 7) 320 Arrests June 2019 There were a total of 47 people arrested in the City of Dunedin during the month of June resulting in the following charges: Grand Theft-Auto Grand Theft-Other Possession Of Controlled Substance 11 Tamper/Harass Witness-Victim 2 Violation Of Probation-Juvenile Violation Of Probation/Communitv Control-Adult 3 Misdemeanor 20 Batterv-Domestic Related 7 Criminal Mischief 2 Loiterina/Prowlin 2 Petit Theft-Shooliftin Possession Of Controlled Substance 2 Resist/Obstruct LEO Without Violence 2 Shelter Unmarried Minor Aid Runawa· Violation Oflniunction Protect Domestic 2 Wa rra nts 4 Failure To Aooear 2 Warrant Arrest 2 19 ed Driver's License Susoended/Revoked 2 Drivina Under The Influence II Leave Scene (With Damaae No Valid Driver's License Refusal Submit To Test-Intoxicated 2 Grand Total 65 *Information provided reflects the number of arrests (persons arrested) as well as the total charges associated with those arrests. Prepared by. <' ascy l'aylor - 2 - 1>a1a ~uun.:cAC IS\· lJCR Offense~with Occurred Address, Arrested Subjects. Citation City Report 7,'I 0.'201 'I CAD. Crime Analysis Views. Crime Analysis Incident I ltstor)' (D1spo- 7) 321 Deputy Activity There were a total of 3,192 events in the City of Dunedin during the month of June resulting in 5,007 units responding. The table below reflects the top twenty-five events to include both self-initiated and dispatched calls in the City of Dunedin for the month of June. *CAD data is filtered by problem type. June 2019 House Check Directed Patrol Special Detail Al1l1t Cltlz.en Alarm Information/Other Suspicious Person Vehicle Abandoned/llleaal!l'. Parked Traffic Violation 60 Su lement SS Ordinance Violation 54 Contact 41 44 I I 40 39 39 37 JS 34 Communi!l'. Contact I 21 27 24 Trans~rt 22 Noise I 22 l'repa-rcd ll\ C Dsey l'aylor - ~- Dat<1-;ou r,;.; •\(IS~:l ( R ( lffonscs with Occurred Address, \rrestcd \ub1c1:ts. ( 1tation City Report 7' 10.20J'} C1\I> l.'nmc •\nuly::-is \'Jl ' \\S , Crime Analysis Jn.;1dent J llstor} (D1spo- 7) 322 Crash & Citation Analysis There were a total of 26 crashes in the City of Dunedin during June 2019.•Crash data is filtered by disposition type and may include "accident and hit and run" problem types. Crashes by Day or the Week Cr11ltH by Tlmo of Day Main St/Belcher Rd 2 Sunc!Ay Main St/Overcash Drive Monc!Ay 1201 CR I Pinehurst Rd/Main St Tut'Sdav OO;OO.OB9 1265 Bavshore Blvd Wcdoe!idly • Ol:OO.l:':S9 CR I/Falcon Drive • 16:00.2J 59 Thursday 152 Macaloine Wa· Patricia Ave/Union St Friday 1625 Main St Sanarday Skinner Blvd/Douglas Ave There were a total of 1,000 citations and warnings issued in the City of Dunedin during June 2019. Citations and Warnings 62 Causewa Countv Road 1 & Palm Lake Ln Pinehurst Rd & Main St Belcher Rd & Ranchette Ln • Boating Bavshore Blvd & Curlew Rd • Parking Main St & Carnation Drive •Traffic Belcher Rd & Main St Boating Warning Broadway & Main St •\ Yarning State Road 580 & Enterorise Rd Causewav Blvd & Woodette Drive Prcr,ircJ by. l 'ascy Taylor - 4 - Dat,1 \uun:e ACISS L'CR l >ffcnsc:>with Occurred ~\ddress,,\rrcsted Subjects, Citation City Report 71102019 CAI>: t 'rime \nalysis \'ic\vs, Cnme Analysis Incident I hstory (Dispo- 7) 323 Approved by the City of Dunedin Commission to start on July 6th, 2018, Clearwater Ferry services Dunedin every Friday, Saturday and Sunday on its Blue Line. Trips depart from t he Dunedin Marina at the below times and go to Clearwater Beach Marina, then to Downtown Clearwater, then back to Dunedin. BEACH MARINA DOWNTOWN DUNEDIN ll:OOAM 11:1SAM ll:SOAM 12:25 PM 12:40 PM 1:15 PM l:SOPM 2:0SPM 2:40PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 4:05 PM 4:40PM 4:SSPM 5:30PM 6:05 PM 6:20 PM 6:55 PM 7:30 PM 7:45 PM 8:20PM 8:55 PM 9:10 PM 9:45 PM JUNE 2019 • Number of Days of Operation of Blue Line with service to Dunedin: 13 days • Total Ridership on Blue Line with service to Dunedin: 810 passengers • Average daily Ridership on Blue Line with service to Dunedin: over 62 guests • Passengers originating in Dunedin = 51% //Passengers originating in Clearwater = 49% PILOT PROGRAM TO DATE (7/6/18-present) dl~o©~© ®Jl @JM®~~~ di~~ ©@)1~ lPJCID~~@[ft)~@(f~ [Q)®~~W ~W@CF@~@ 324 Agenda Item: 5.d Meeting Date: July 23, 2019 MEMORANDUM To: City Commission Date: 2019-05-22 From: Denise Kirkpatrick, City Clerk Subject: City Attorney's Update Presenter(s): Thomas J. Trask, City Attorney Recommend: City Attorney's Update Epic Goal(s): #5 Embrace community and employee relationship strategies that strengthen inclusiveness, respect, transparency and collaborative engagement. Boards & Committees: N/A Budget Impact: N/A Past Action: N/A Next Action: N/A Attachments: Background: N/A 325