01/14/1994
~' "', , "'11 " "",
~/;~';j: t. /, ~L.: t.;-\ J ~>
'\~tJi\.tt' . ," '. "",'.'
~'" '...' ;" ... r
b..'1 : f'; " ~. ~ . . '
~':~ ~.: j;' > ..~.' '. I
,1.1" ,.. I ,
, "'. ., <
I'"
I"
. ~ J~
"I, ..
.: "'"
.: '.
'1' "
"
'f.' I
, ~'. \ ;~ I
~~;~\..~ >; ,,':
'f.! q" ,
lil'fl;,~. , ":, .',
!,2"~~!,\) :'. ': :;.-
?'
t' . , . '.t . l,
Y'/'.'.J:'/~ :~
~;.I ,t
"
.- "
.~.. ..~ ;T'
'.' 'e"
'j
'f ~ . i; I
r""
J"
"
,
!
',<
"
~ I .
J'
. ".
,
,,.
I,
\ ,
, i
~ ,', . I
, "
:,
,
, ,
"'J-
:;.~. '. -:.'.
~ L.'
. ~.
....
_ t :.c', 1.
" J
~;.I.'.S~~,'.l.~.~.'~1" :
" ,
" '
,
. ,.... .. ~
U ,+
COMM'ISSION/SCHOOL BD.
." '. . .'
, "
CITY.'COMMISSION/SCHOOL BOARD -IT. MTGII
DATE~J4J 9~
'-:kJLO-MLR- '
)~\os-
"
"
,/
"
"
"
, ,
'.
t;f\Y~:''.i>'':~',,':' ,.,
" .
.. '+ '. ',. <~
. . ~ . ~
, ,',: ': ':' J',
.~:~ " : . .
~,~"~~.'",.,, :'/
: 't'
, .
, 'I
.,
I "
I.
!.
. .. ~ ' , '
".' Ie. > '\ .
.;' .<{-
c, f
\ 1 '. ~;
"
'.
, '
~" . .
lit::N:~:Xi :;;;,(L::.:;~:~;,;!:,. i;,', "
, "
. , ~ .
'JOINT MEETING
, ,
CITY, COMMISSION & P1NElLAS COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD
~
\'10;/,';-'
January 14, 1994
The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met with the, PineHas County School Board,
Friday, January 14, 1994, at 2:00 p.m. at the School Board Administration Building, 301 Fourth
St. SW, Largo.
City Commission members present:
Rita Garvey
Arthur X. Deegan, II
Richard Fitzgerald
Sue A: Berfield
Fred A. Thomas
Mayor {Commissioner
Vice-Mayor ICommissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
School Board members present:
John Sanguinett
Andrea Thacl<er
'Susan Latvala
Linda Lerner
Chairperson (At-Large)
Vice-Chairman (At-Large)
(District 3)
(District 2)
School Board members absent:
(,.,
."')
~;l.-;:'
Barbara Crockett
Lee Benjamin
Corinne Freeman
(District 5)'
(District 1)
(District 4)
Also p~esent:
Elizabeth M. Deptula
Kathy S. Rice
William C. Baker
J. Howard Hinesley
Bruce Taylor
MiJ~on A. Galbraith, Jr.
'Michael Quillen
Scott Shuford
Cynthia E. Ooud,eau
Interim City Manager
Deputy City Manager
Actihg Assistant City Manager
School Board Superintendent
School Board Attorney
, City Attorney
Water Resource Engineer ,
Central Permitting Director
City Clerk
The meeting was called to order at 2:06 p.m. for the purpose of discussing issues
regarding tree preservation and other Land Development Code requirements affecting school
construction projects, '
Chairman' Sanguinett opened the meeting and welcomed the Clearwater representatives.
He apologized that Mrs. Freeman, Mrs. Crockett and Mr. Benjamin would be unable to attend.
~ ,I
"'-I'
Mayor Garvey thanked the School Board for the meeting and the facility.
minsp01 a.94
1/14/94
1
"
,;
"
r"
Tony Rivas, with the School Boord, indicated a new process has been established since
the Plumb Elementary Addition was designed and construction started. He stated, from this point
on, School Board construction projects would go before the Development Review Committee
(ORC), submitting plans as early as possible, indicating what is planned at a particular site. City
'staff will provide comments to the School Board and the School Board will attempt to
rJccommodate City staff comments. He stated the projects that will be lmdor this process are
, Kings Highway Elementary, Skycrest Elementary, Clearwater Discovery, and Belleair Elementary
schools. He felt a nicer and smoother relationship would result in the future.
Mrs. Thacker questioned if Mr. Shuford would stay on top of all changes made. It was
indicated all plans will go through the Central Permitting Director.
Mr. Shuford indicated what will be happening is a courtesy review of the Development
Review Committee of the City of Clearwater, and this review will be expedited when appropriate.
He stated the review will be in terms of City Code requirements. Excellent cooperation has been
exhibited since the new process has been implemented.
Commissioner Thomas questioned if the School Board intended to meet the rules of the
City outside of the footprint of the building. Mrs., Lerner indicated there are things beyond the
, footprint, such as security measures, which the School Board must address differently. This will
have to be considered.
, Commissioner Thomas expressed concerns that this process is not legally binding. Mayor
Garvey pointed out other considerations needed by the School Board may not - fit into the
Clearwater Code.
(;'.
Dr. Hinesley indicated what the School Board is saying is they will present the plans for
City staff to look at. City staff is to tell thl'l School Board what is to be done to comply with City
codes. If there is a disagreement, that disagreement will be worked out. He stated the School
Board does not want the City to have the denial authority regarding School Board property as
they will receive pressures from neighborhoods to do so, He stated this is' an attempt to
coordinate and cooperate among the two agencies.
Commissioner Thomas again expressed concerns that this is a gray area that he is trying
to get rid of. He stated Clearwater has its sovereignty and home rule~. He expressed concerns
that the School Board had violated those rules at the Plumb School. He stated he wished to
settle this among the two agencies without legal action.
Mr. Taylor indicated the position of the School Board had been stated accurately by Dr.
Hinesley. He stated State Statutes exempts the footprint and the ancillary plants of School Board
buildings. There is a requirement the School Board submit plans to other local governments 90
days in advance of a bid. He stated this may not have been done in the Plumb Elementary case.
He stated the recommendations from the local government will be acted upon in concert with the
School Board's own sovereignty.
Mr. Rivas indicated the ORe process was not in place when the Plumb Elementary School
expansion was developed. He stuted what is being addressed in the ORC review is what's
outside the footprint of tho building.
c,
Commissioner Thomas stated the law is clear that the local government can have no say
over the footprint of a school board facility. He questioned the City's ability to regulate
everything else. He felt there needs to be a formal methodology established.
mlnsp010.94
2
1/14/94
, ('l'~
"
Mayor Garvey indicoted the procoss outlined was not temporary and It Is t6 be usod from
here on. Mr. Rivas indicated this was correct. Ho indicated that, because of the Plumb School
incident, this process had been formalizod.
Commissioner Thomas questioned the City Attorney's response to the School Board
Attorney's statements.
Mr. Galbraith stated he did not agree that the statutes were as clear as Mr. Tavlor had
indicated. He stated the schools are, not required to comply with local building codes, but it is
not clear that would exempt them from such things as the tree ordinance. He stated this is not
unique to Pinellas County, and the same thing is going on in Palm Beach County. The City
Attorney stated the purpose ot today's meeting is to talk about the problem and work out a
common understanding regarding the next incident. .
Commissioner Deegan felt it is more tllan just the tree ordinance that should be address;ed;
such things as the sign code, paving of impervious areas, etc. also need to be discussed.
,
Dr. Hinesley pointed out, regarding paving areas,. there is a parking lot across from
Clearwater High School that the School Board had determined not to pave. He stated it could be
shut down, but that would cause other problems regarding the parking of cars.
Commissioner Deegan stated the question is "Will the School Board make the decision',
or will the City be able to give formal variance approval?"
Dr. Hinesley -indicated tho ~rea referenced has not been declared a parking lot.
("
Commissioner Thomas questioned whether or not it should be, and the Commission grant
a variance with the requirement that it be paved. '
Dr. Hinesley referred to a circum!;tance where the site for a school had been chosen and
everybody thought it was the proper location. When the School Board went through a formal
process due to neighborhood pressures. approval was denied. He stated the School Board is
willing to work with the City staff to address these issues. He stated most of the work that was
done on Plumb Elementary was done for drainage required by the City and County. He stated he
assumed the plans had all gone to other departments. He sated there are too many political
pressures in each municipality for the School Board to have to get approval from each.
Mr. Rivas indicated the trees that were removed would have had to come out due to
drainage considerations. He stated the drawings have been modified as a result of this issue, and
the School Board has found a way to save more trees. He stated they will meet the City's
ordinance regarding landscaping, and they are going to be putting' in a great deal more than they
have in the past. Mr. Rivas stated the School Board does have a commitment to the community
and the environment. He stated they will not be bringing in tiny trees, but three inch live' oaks.
c.
Mr. Baker indicated he is assuming the concern did not go back to whether a school should
be a particular site, but the concern was with the development process and that there should be
agreements regarding trees, etc. Mr. Baker indicated when City staff brings up a concern, 99.9%
of the time the problems are resolved. He stated when the plans are reviewed, if trees are to be
taken out, City staff might ask that a building be moved. If the School Board is able to show that
this cannot happen, he stated they will find tl1e City a willing partner in working out the concerns.
minsp010.94
3
1/14/94
, ,t:J':,
t.; ..
j,
, ,
. "
, . ~ ,"
, .
',. .., .
',",,', I'
./ C " ./'.
r\
Dr. Hinesley stated, if need be, he wlll get involved in the process in order to work it out.
He state~ he does not want to open the door for site plan approval of each municipality.
,
, Chairman San'guinett indicated the City Commission hiJS the commitment of the School
Board.
Mr. Baker reiterated both staffs are saying the School Board will do what it can to abide
by the rules, and both staffs will cooperatively work out any problems. He stated there will be
referees, if needed.
Dr. Hinesley indicated a checklist will go along with each project to make sure it gets all
the reviews indicated, with the date of the review noted.
Mr. Shuford felt there would be something in the file for the record if the cities' codes
cannot be met. He stated there will be a way to work out all the issues at staff level.
Commissioner Thomas asked that what was being done be formally agreed to.
, ,
Mr. Taylor indicated he and Mr. Galbraith could work up an agreement that would provide
for a process of submitting plans and working out disputes. He indicated the State Statute
encourages interlocal agreements. Mr. Galbraith agreed an agreement could be developed.
Mrs. Latvala asked that a paragraph in the agreement clearly describe what to do should
there be a disagreement between staffs. '
, Commissioner Thomas stated he understood if there'was a disagreement with staff, it was
, {~.::l to be brought to the City Commission and the School Board; if there was stlll disagreement, that
would go to court.
Mrs. Thacker recommended mediation instead.
The consensus was to agree with the mediation.
The agreement is to be developed by the two attorneys.
Dr. Hinesley expressed his appreciation for the School Resource Officer program, and felt
Clearwater had one of the best in the County. He stated the officers are a part of the school
environment. He also referenced the joint use agreements between the School Board and the
'City, and stated he felt the two agencies had a good relationship. He thanked the City
Commission for the support they give the schools through these afld other programs. Dr.
Hinesley stated when the Plumb renovation and landscaping is complete, the City will be proud
of the school.' ,
The meeting adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
Mayor' Garvey thanked the school system for working with the City. She thanked the
School Board members for their time.
(_..
ATTESl':~~. l. A~,o,,"._'__
City Clerk '
minsp01 a.94 4
, 1/14/94