Loading...
12/04/1989 CITY COMMISSION WORK SESSION December 4, 1989 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall, with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Don Winner Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Lee Regulski Commissioner William Nunamaker Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner Also present were: Ron H. Rabun City Manager M. A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk The Mayor called the meeting at to order at 9:29 a.m. and the following items were discussed. Two Service Pins were awarded. Natural Gas Utility - Request for Expression of Information Synopsis and Policy Guidance for an RFP Requests for expression of interest regarding possible purchase of the City of Clearwater's gas division were mailed to 201 various entities and 31 responses were received. Staff now proposes to narrowly define, through a request for proposal, those conditions which the City will accept in considering offers to buy the system and is requesting Commission direction regarding the preparation of the RFP. Charles Hunsicker, Assistant City Manager, stated that we need to be as clear as possible to the bidders in the RFP and staff would like to structure a RFP that provides indicators of the measure of importance of four different areas. 1) Minimum acceptable standards for operational experiences in other natural gas and/or utility systems 2) Employee benefit package 3) Rates and Franchise Fees and 4) overall purchase price. It was indicated that staff will be ranking the responses to the RFPs and bringing them to the City Commission for final decision. In response to a question regarding why we are considering selling the gas system, the City Manager responded that this was brought up at a City Commission Goal Setting meeting and the only way to determine whether or not it would be to the City's advantage to sell the system is to " Go out and see" what the market is for the system. A question was raised regarding how much natural gas the City of Clearwater uses and how this would impact our budget should we sell our system. Staff will respond. In discussing operational experiences, it was indicated that while it is important, it should not be required 100% as it is possible to buy the necessary experience. It was stated that if this experience is important, people will indicate whether or not they can obtain it. A question was raised regarding the possibility of employees buying the systems with "junk bonds"; whether or not this would conflict with any Ordinances and if it should be considered as an option. Mr. Hunsicker indicated that as far as the employee benefit package is concerned, staff would like to assure that the bid, as much as possible, duplicates City benefits. Ted Szymankiewicz of R.W. Beck and Associates, the City's consultant, indicated the emphasis placed on employee benefits will have an impact on the price. When the requests for expression of interest were distributed a question was included regarding whether or not the companies would hold the current customer rates for one year. All responding agreed to do so. It was indicated that any changes in rates would have to go through the Public Service Commission (PSC) and this would be a security check for customers. In response to a question, Mr. Szymankiewicz indicated if a Florida company were to buy the system, they would have to file with the Public Service Commission in order to operate it. If an out of state company were to obtain the system, they would have the file with the PSC prior to the sale and would have to go through a rate setting proceeding. In response to a question regarding the impact of the number of industrial and commercial customers, Mr. Szymankiewicz indicated this would impact rates. The up front purchase price will be important at the same time franchise fees and other revenue sources will also be considered in evaluating the request for proposals. It was indicated that franchise fees would be balanced with the purchase price. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not there would be any property taxes from gas lines and other buildings and properties and it was indicated some of these would be taxed while some may not. Some companies may not need to have a great deal of land and building in the City of Clearwater. A concern was expressed that monies from the sale, should the decision be made to sell the gas system, not be placed in the General Fund but that as much as possible be set aside in a separate account to off set any loss in revenue as a result of that sale. In response to a question it was indicated that the City's gas system, when compared to other municipalities, is large, however over all in the state, is in the medium range. Mr. Hunsicker indicated that the City of Clearwater's system does serve other parts of the County and that the over all price to be offered is a best guess. He said the future value of the system is hard to quantify as we are poised to go into Pasco County. He stated that at any point the City Commission can place this on hold, slow down the process or even discontinue. In response to a question regarding an estimated time frame, it was indicated that it would take at least thirty days to refine the RFP and that respondents should be given at least sixty days to submit their proposals. Selection of a consultant for the preparation of request for proposals for the Sale of the Gas System As part of the negotiation award contract to R.W. Beck & Associates for analysis of the gas system the scope of services included the preparation of the system appraisal. At the time of the contract execution, it was indicated that the system appraisal evaluation was not required at that time. Since that time, Commission has directed staff to move forward with the detailed study and analysis necessary to prepare a recommendation for the potential sale of the utility. It is believed that R.W. Beck can complete this analysis in a highly responsible manner. The contract is structured with a series of phases, each phase to be initiated upon authorization from the City Manager. Each phase corresponds with work products to be delivered as the City advances along the decision path leading to a decision of whether or not to sell the gas system. Phase One provides assistance to the City in developing a detailed request for proposal from potential purchasers to purchase the gas utility. Phase Two provides assistance to the City in evaluating and ranking the requests for proposals. Phase Three provides assistance to the City in initial negotiations with the preferred bidder. Phase Four provides assistance to the City in determining the value of the natural gas system to the City. Phase Five provides assistance to the City in determining the potential net benefits of selling the natural gas system. It is the recommendation that this be approved as a continuation of the bid awarded in 1986. Ted Szymankiewicz of R.W. Beck & Associates stated that this scope of service to be provided includes items that were agreed to in the previous agreement. He stated if the project is terminated costs cease at that time. It was indicated that the $65,000.00 is a estimate and not a ceiling. Questions were raised regarding the rate schedule shown for various employees and it was indicated that this is not hourly wage rate but rather a service rate which includes various overheads. A question was raised regarding whether or not Phase Four should be done earlier and it was indicated that the contract is structured this way in order to allow the Commission to cease the project at any time with the least amount of expenditures made. Consulting Engineering Services - Clearwater Pass Bridge Replacement Project In February of 1989 the City entered into a contract with David Volkert & Associates to perform a project development and environmental study for a not to exceed fee of $356,293.00 and Phase Two, preparation of construction plans and specifications for a not to exceed fee of $456,367.00. The estimated time for completion of both phases was 27 months. The scope of engineering work included the submission of the project details and report of information to numerous regulatory agencies. At the time of the original negotiations, it was fully known that at least one or two agencies would review the PD&E study and call for additional work to provide them with further data. The engineer has now met with the permitting agencies and has identified their additional requirements. To conduct a hydrographic survey of the pass bottom, a qualitative analysis of the benthic fauna in the existing and proposed navigational channels and a sediment analysis of the material in the proposed channel. Therefore, it has been requested that we approve a supplemental agreement to the original contract to accomplish the work. The proposed total is a sum of the cost of work by three technical subconsultants as well as work by David Volkert & Associates. In response to a question regarding whether or not this would complete the studies needed, Bill Baker, Public Works Director, indicated there is no guarantee that additional data will not be requested. Discussion ensued regarding the need to relocate the channel if a 65' high fixed span bridge is not approved and the Public Works Director indicated that there may be benefits to relocating the pass even if a bascule bridge is constructed. In response to questions regarding the old bridge, it was stated that part of it may be retained as a fishing pier but that the construction contract for the new bridge would include the demolition of the center span of the old bridge. Clearwater Beach Recreation Center Asbestos Abatement The ceiling material at the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center is deteriorating and a survey confirmed that the material contained friable asbestos. As this material deteriorates further the fine particles pose a health threat. The contract recommended consists of the removal, handling and disposal of asbestos containing and asbestos contaminated materials and subsequent cleaning of contaminated areas. A full containment abatement facility is required including airlocked decontamination unit, bag out facility and filtration devices. The contractor is required to conform to all EPA and OSHA Notification and Removal Guidelines for this project. It was indicated that the bid being recommended for award is lower than had been budgeted. Concerns were expressed regarding whether or not we are confident that the project can be done for this price and it was indicated that staff is comfortable with the bid. Utility Policy on Refunding Deposits - Request for Clarification A request for refund of utility deposits on hand has been received from Religious Community Services. Religious Community Services is a 501 C3 non profit corporation providing a variety of community housing assistance and social services placement functions with 14 active accounts. Utility deposits on hand with the City amount to $3,630.00. Administrative policy, adopted by the Commission in August of 1984, states that refunds on deposits may be granted upon five consecutive years of good payment history although not specifically stipulated in the administrative policy, deposit refunds have been applied only to residential accounts to minimize potentially large commercial account losses. This practice was not codified by change in the City Code. Requests for commercial deposit refunds have been denied. The current write-off, attributable to bad debt and insufficient deposits, is three tenths of one percent of our utility revenue, due in large part to the consistent application of this policy. Staff recommends that the Commission approve the continuation of conditional refund of deposits for residential classes of customers and broaden the eligible classes of customers to include those other service providers which provide unique housing related, income related assistance. It is also recommended this policy be included in the Code of Ordinances. Concern was expressed that the agenda item indicates that those service organizations to be considered are exempt from transportation impact fees and there are no entities exempt from this fee. The item will be corrected. A question was raised regarding whether or not staff was comfortable with not refunding commercial deposits and the City Attorney indicated this is a position that can be defended. Commissioner Nunamaker requested discussion regarding the Bridge Fund. He questioned whether or not the funds for the Volkert Contract previously discussed, would come out of the revenues collected from tolls. It was indicated that this is the source of the funds. Discussion then ensued regarding pursuing moving forward on construction of the bridge. Assistant City Manager Hunsicker indicated that we have now been advised that a change in state law will allow the City to begin construction of the bridge at an earlier date if the City is able to front the entire construction cost. The state would then reimburse the City in the year in which it has included funding for the bridge. In response to a question regarding whether or not unused federal funds were available without state approval, it was indicated that federal funds are tied to the state package. Mr. Hunsicker indicated that staff will be meeting with representatives of the state to discuss various options for accelerating the construction schedule of the bridge and that results will be reported to the Commission. Emergency Purchase of Sludge Thickening Equipment and Sludge Hauling for East Wastewater Treatment Plant Construction Project On November 5, 1989, Danis/Shook Construction Company advised the City that it must shut down the floatation thickener at the East Plant immediately to make way for new construction on the site. Because of the small size of the East Plant, the majority of the existing plant must be demolished in order to construct the new advanced wastewater treatment plant. In the order of new site plan construction, the floatation thickener will not be installed for approximately eight months. In order to provide a temporary means for sludge thickening, it was initially decided to relocate the floatation thickener on top of the existing aeration tank structure. The initial proposal included an estimated cost for relocation of $40,000.00 plus an estimated sludge hauling cost of $45,000.00. After further study, it was determined that a far better alternative would be the purchase and installation of a Carter Sludge Reactor/Thickener similar to the thickening unit at the Marshall Street Pollution Control Facility at a cost of $24,800.00. The reactor/thickener unit was available for immediate delivery and the installation cost to mount the equipment on the aeration tanks would be much less than that for the floatation unit. As a result, the maximum cost of sludge hauling would be $20,000.00 or less or a maximum estimated total of $44,800.00. Two emergency requisitions have been approved by the City Manager. The first, to Ralph B. Carter Company for a Carter Sludge Reactor/Thickener, the second, to Davis Chemical for $20,000.00 for sludge hauling. The sludge reactor/thickener was delivered to the East Plant on November 13. The unit was placed on the existing aeration tanks and the reactor/thickener was placed in operation on November 16. The additional sludge hauling cost was only $1,492.26 due to the small amount of sludge that was hauled. It was decided to cancel the purchase order for $20,000.00 to Davis Chemical and use the 1989-90 code that was budgeted for our regular sludge hauling. Commission complimented staff on designing and reducing the cost of this project. Mr. Hunsicker, Assistant City Manager, indicated that sludge disposal will have to be addressed throughout the County within the next five years and stated the City of Clearwater is in a better position than some communities. Supervisory, Administrative, Managerial and Professional Pay Plans Schedule Adjustment In August 87, the City of Clearwater adopted and implemented a supervisory, administrative, managerial and professional, "SAMP" pay plan. This plan combined three previously existing plans into a single plan. After two years, it is now time to update that plan to maintain internal equity and to keep us current and competitive with other cities. Since the SAMP plan was established in 1987 pay schedules of union groups have increased five percent per year in October 1988 and October 1989. In order to prevent salary compression, adjustment to the SAMP pay schedule is appropriate. Adjustment to the schedule will not result in a pay increase for any SAMP plan employee unless the adjusted minimum rate exceeds an employee's existing rate. Failure to adjust periodically the SAMP pay schedule consistent with pay schedule adjustments of the regular pay plan will result in compression and ultimately impact upward mobility of the employees from regular positions to SAMP positions. The level of morale of SAMP employees and the retention of good employees within the SAMP plan. H. M. Laursen, Personnel Director, explained that two factors were taken into consideration in making this recommendation. One, comparing the SAMP plan to the regular pay plans as well as a salary survey of other communities. He indicated that 26 employees will receive increases due to being below the new minimum and that there will be minor adjustments within the ranges in order to maintain equity. In response to a question as to why this would be effective October 1, 1989, Mr. Laursen indicated that was the effective date of the last union contract. He indicated that he should be bringing the SAMP plan before the Commission every year. The meeting recessed from 11:13 a.m. to 11:21 a.m. Receipt and Referral of Land Use Plan Amendment to Public-Semi-Public and PSP Zoning for a parcel located on the west side of McMullen Booth Rd. south of Curlew Rd. and opposite Mease Drive The Holy Trinity Episcopal Church, which is located south of the subject property, has a contract to purchase this parcel for a proposed new Church Sanctuary. Commissioner Winner stated this item points out the need to address churches separately from PSP zones. He indicated that by approving a PSP zone, that should the church relocate or give up the property for some other reason, other PSP organizations such as fraternal lodges, etc. could move in and activities that would not be desirable in residential neighborhoods could take place. It was the consensus of the Commission to address this concern in the future. Preliminary Site Plan and Preliminary Subdivision Plat for Belcher Coachman Professional Center located at the SE corner of Belcher Rd. and NE Coachman Rd. The applicant is proposing to develop an office complex consisting of seven offices in two buildings. The site is being split from the Trinity Baptist Church property. A unity of title will be required as a condition of the plat in order to allow separate ownership of the land under each office with joint ownership of the remaining common areas. Access is proposed at one point off NE Coachman Rd. and one off Sharkey Rd. Additional right-of-way will be required for Belcher Rd. and NE Coachman to meet future needs and the plat will be required to indicate the requisite future right-of-way lines. A question was raised regarding from where the information regarding widening of Belcher Rd. had come. The Planning and Development Director will clarify. Preliminary Subdivision Plat for Oak Leaf located on the south side of C.R. 193 west of Landmark Dr. extension In September of 1989, the Commission approved a ten lot single family subdivision on this property. The developer has submitted an amended plat for 22 single family lots. There are two existing structures on the property which are proposed to be removed prior to development of the subdivision. The lots will be accessible from C.R. 193 via one proposed public street which will end in a cul-de-sac within the subdivision. The 840 foot length of the street ending in the cul-de-sac will require an approval by DRC as the maximum length should be 600 feet according to the land development code. The Public Works Director has determined that the retention pond can occupy the future right-of-way easement for Landmark Drive and the applicant has agreed to pay for future relocation of the retention pond if the City ever needs to use the right-of-way easement for Landmark Drive. Concerns were expressed regarding locating the retention pond in the easement if it would need to relocate in the future. It was questioned how we can guarantee payment for that relocation and where the retention pond would be placed. Concerns were also expressed regarding the increase in the number of units from 10 to 22. Preliminary Subdivision Plat for Loehman's Plaza Replat located at the NW corner of US 19 and NE Coachman Rd. The property was annexed in 1985 and plated in April of 1986, as it exists today, into two lots. At the time of application for this subdivision, the property was zoned CP, Parkway Business District with each of the two platted lots conforming to that district lot size requirements. Lot 2 is now non-conforming according to current code. The applicant is now requesting approval of a redivision of the two lot subdivision into four lots. Lot 1, the existing shopping center, Lot 2, the existing Jiffy Lube, Lot 3, the existing commercial structure which was last used as a vehicle display and sales area and also a restaurant and Lot 4, a proposed auto center. The applicant has submitted an application for related variances which are scheduled for review by the Development Code Adjustment Board (DCAB) on December 14, 1989. The proposed subdivision involves 18 variances to the current zoning regulations and therefore, is not in accordance with the subdivision regulations. The request is tantamount to rezoning this commercial center zoned property. Approval of this proposed subdivision into four lots will permit additional signage which is not in keeping with the purpose and intent of the City sign ordinance. Concurrency review on the newly created lot will occur at the time of site plan approval. The site is currently accessible by two driveways off NE Coachman Road, two driveways off US 19 and three driveways off Stag Run Blvd. The preliminary supplementary drawing proposes one additional driveway off NE Coachman Road. Any additional driveways are certainly not recommended. The City subdivision regulations require the City Commission to review the preliminary plat and authorize the Development Review Committee (DRC) to review and act upon the preliminary plat. Matters of development policy or design may be identified to which the DRC shall address particular action. The DRC shall then approve with conditions or deny the preliminary plat. If the 18 variances are approved by the DCAB, allowing this plat to go forward to DRC, it is recommended that any approval be subject to the applicant obtaining a rezoning to the substandard CC lots which will require City Commission approval. Ordinance 4912-89 - Revisions to section 146. of the Clearwater Code relating to Flood Protection The changes are recommended as a result of input obtained at a public hearing held August 1988, in response to the stipulations made in settlement of the lawsuit initiated by Fred Thomas and to reflect changes in federal regulations relating to manufactured homes. The changes, which could have major impact upon the City or the public, are: 1), amending the definition of substantial improvement and dealing with the time period for counting cost, 2), revising requirements for when the County's appraisal is used to determine the value of the existing building, 3), setting up requirements on submitting construction costs both at permitting time and before doing final inspections and 4), adding specific requirements on when a manufactured home "Mobile Home" must be elevated upon base flood level. Other items include adding definitions, requirements for elevation certificates, requirements for structural stability certification, allowing certain electrical connections below base flood elevation, clarifying variance procedures and editorial changes. Vic Chodora, Building Official, stated these amendments are based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency workshop held with the City Commission. He indicated that only on Clearwater Beach and Sand Key would life of the structure be used in determining substantial improvement. The rest of the City would have a one year time frame. He stated the decision regarding mobile homes is that if a park has no history of flooding, they must be a minimum of three feet above grade or at flood elevations. If a mobile home park has a history of flooding, they will have to be at flood level. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not the ordinance addresses the questions previously raised by the Commission and others. Concerns were expressed that the ordinance still allows a great deal of interpretation by the building official. Consensus of the Commission was to remove this item from the agenda with staff working to amend the proposed ordinance to provide additional requirements that are not subject to individual interpretation. Review of Building Plan, Site Plan, Changes of Use and Analysis of Associated Traffic Impacts Eight proposals for developments within a 1/4 mile of roadways having a level of service of E or worse have been submitted and are now being presented for Commission review. The first proposal entails a change of use from a bank to a medical office in the Northwood Plaza. The new use will generate an average of 41 daily trips and 4 peak hour trips. Approval of the use change will result in the net increase of 9.4 daily trips and .8 peak hour trips. The second proposal is a request to amend the LaBelle Plaza Site Plan to decrease the floor area. This development will significantly effect the capacity of both Belleair Road and Highland Avenue however, the previously approved plan had additional square footage. The new plan also proposes an additional access point to Highland Avenue. The third proposal is an addition to the Sunset Point 19 Shopping Center to add a block buster video store. The store will generate an average of 377 daily trips and 67 peak hour trips. The fourth proposal is to develop a Checker's Fast Food Restaurant which will generate 1,382 daily trips and 73 hour peak trips. The fifth proposal is development of a Texaco Station with four gas pumps, a convenience store and a car wash. This facility will generate approximately 2,108 daily trips and 261 peak hour trips. The sixth proposal is the revalidation of a previously approved and certified Post Court Apartment Complex of 228 dwelling units. The property has direct access to Old Coachman Road although it is situated within 1/4 mile of back logged US 19. The development will generate 1,392 daily trips and 154 peak hour trips. The seventh proposal is an amendment to the previously approved certified Regency Oak Site Plan which is a 650 bed retirement center. The number of beds is not proposed to be changed however, the building configuration and site layout is proposed to be substantially modified. The development will generate 1,073 daily trips and 130 peak hour trips. The eighth proposal is an amendment to the previously approved and certified Clearwater Market Place. The amendment affects only the residential portion of the plan. The plan amendment proposes to decrease the number of dwelling units from 232 to 222. This will generate 1,300 daily trips and 125 peak hour trips. The City Commission has chosen to abstain from the Pinellas County's Interim Concurrency Management Program opting instead to enact a local program as outlined in Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan. Absent a local program being in place, it would be inappropriate to deny further processing of the eight development proposals. Concern was raised that if the Commission had little choice but to authorize continued review of these plans, why these items are coming to the Commission. It was indicated that this is acquainting the Commission with the procedures for concurrency management and that there have been few plans submitted that do not already have vested rights. Those that did not have vested rights have been of minimal impact. It was indicated that staff is preparing an ordinance that will require traffic impact studies for developments along these back logged roads and that this ordinance will include criteria for judging the impacts. It was also indicated that there needs to be a determination as to what developments are vested and which ones are not. Ordinances on both of these topics will be coming to the Commission shortly. Review of Previous Land Use Plan and Zoning Recommendation for Pinellas County Council Case #99-73 for the Babcock Company, part of M&B 33.03 Sec. 4-29-16 The City Commission had approved the zoning of limited office and a land use plan designation of residential office on the subject property. The Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) reviewed the request and recommended denial of the requested residential office expressing concerns that it could then be developed in a multi-family use in the medium density range and in the alternative recommended approval of an office land use category. The County Planning Authority (Board of County Commissioners) recommended denial of the original request and denial of the recommended alternate action of the PPC. Due to this going forward to the County Planning Authority as a denial, there is no appeal left to the applicant. It was the City Commission's clear intent that the property be developed as office. The property owner is seeking approval for office use to extend the existing offices of Hidden Oaks. The only reason the residential office land use category was requested was because it is the only designation under the Clearwater Plan which is consistent with the Limited Office Zoning Designation. It is understood that the PPC directed its staff to prepare rule amendments which would allow a city to consider a compromise land use designation offered by the PPC before the matter went to the county wide planning authority for its consideration. This process is important because it would allow a city to modify its position if it agreed with the PPC or to request an administrative hearing after the PPC determination. In either case, the city could make its final determination before the county wide planning authority considered the land use amendment. In light of the above proposed rule amendment, it was recommended the City approve the compromise recommendation and resubmit the request, for office use only, to the PPC. Accordingly, it is expected this matter will be brought back before the PPC with this clarification and that upon PPC approval, the application will once again be brought to the attention of the Board of County Commissioners with an unqualified recommendation of approval. Should the County Commission still deny this request, it would then allow for an administrative hearing. In response to a question about why the county commission turned down the request, it was felt they did not wish to expand commercial development in this area, however, that is unknown at this time. Approving this will merely provide a rehearing for the office use and an appeal process should it be denied again. Housing Issue Report The Commission expressed concern that this was an important issue and should be considered at a separate meeting. Consensus of the Commission was to set a special work session to discuss this topic for January 8, 1990 at 9:00 a.m. (This meeting was subsequently changed to 1:00 p.m. due to conflicts of schedule) Second Reading of Ordinances The City Attorney indicated he has received no contact regarding any additional settlement proposals for the Seville property. Commission will need to determine what action they wish to take regarding the annexation ordinance at Thursday night's meeting. Ordinance 4907-89 - regarding annexation of the Elysium Subdivision The Mayor questioned whether or not all owners had signed the settlement agreement regarding delaying this annexation for two years. The City Attorney indicated that if he does not receive all the signatures, he will request that this be tabled. Non-Commercial Parking Ordinance Ordinance 4905-89 has been brought up several times and staff is trying to make final revisions to address the Commission's concerns. A question was raised regarding paragraph C and whether or not the last sentence which reads "As used in this subparagraph adjoining means touching without separation by a right-of-way or otherwise" would prohibit separation by an alley. The City Attorney indicated that as written, it would prohibit such separation. It was the consensus of the commission that they wished to allow separation by alleys but no other right-of-way. Concern was also expressed that vehicles prohibited to be parked in parking lots on single-family zones did not include buses. It was the consensus of the Commission to add buses to the prohibited vehicles. A question was raised why a long term lease would be required for such parking if it is for overflow parking only. The City Attorney indicated he will be making amendments to the ordinance to address these concerns and bring the ordinance forward in the future. Verbal Reports The City Manager and Commissioner Fitzgerald reported on the National League of Cities Conference stating they felt it was very worthwhile and that a variety of important issues were discussed. The City Manager reported he will be speaking at a Homeowner's Association Meeting tonight. Marina Complaint of Ernie Barger Bill Held, Harbormaster, indicated he has met with Mr. Barger and tried to determine what action would satisfy Mr. Barger regarding the fish boxes and freezer which he claims blocks his exposure at the marina. He stated basically the conflict is between Mr. Barger and Captain Lewis who captains the boat on the adjacent slip. He stated he has offered to relocate Mr. Barger however, this offer has been declined. Commission consensus was to agree that all steps that can be taken have been taken and they would offer Mr. Barger an alternate slip with the understanding that staff has also made this offer. Mr. Held indicated that special privileges are not being offered to Captain Lewis and that the fish boxes and freezer have been by his dock for a number of years. Other Commission Action Mayor Garvey requested that the Bombers be requested to use good taste in the placement of signs along the outfield wall. She questioned what the City of Clearwater would be doing in order to assure a complete and accurate count during the 1990 census. The City Manager indicated this will be coordinated through the planning department. The mayor questioned a request for provision of security along the Pinellas Trails and the City Manager indicated a response is being formulated. Commissioner Winner requested discussion regarding the police officer's request for dark shirts. The city manager responded that dark shirts are not the whole of the question. He stated that providing dark shirts at this time would be an unbudgeted cost of approximately $27 to 39,000.00 with an additional 6-7 thousand dollar cost for emblems to be placed on the shirts. He stated that thus far, the safety factor which is said to have generated this request, has not been proven. He indicated that if it were a proven safety factor, he would lead the way to find these funds. He also reported that there was a $58,000.00 uniform budget for the police department in fiscal year 1989-90. He stated he is already attempting to locate funds for the purchase of holsters for the nine millimeter pistols and safety helmets which have been requested. The holsters will cost approximately $13,000.00 and the helmets, $19,200.00. He stated that he has requested information from the police union to prove that the color of the shirt is a definite safety issue. A concern was expressed that the perception was that management simply wanted to throw this into negotiations to use as a bargaining tool. It was stated that unless there is a definite reason for white, that perhaps we could consider replacing them with blue through the normal attrition process. Commissioner Regulski questioned whether or not the city provided emergency shelters for cold nights. The City Clerk indicated there was an administrative policy on this subject that she will copy to the commission. Mayor Garvey requested that we also check to see what churches and other agencies provide these shelters. Commissioner Regulski questioned the status of the ordinance that would provide a special zoning category for such developments as Isaiah's Inn. The Planning and Development Director indicated that it is in draft form and it will be brought forward shortly. Commissioner Nunamaker questioned the status of the Proclamation for the Alex Finch Family and it was indicated that this is being coordinated with the family. He expressed concerns that individuals, other than Michael Kenton, were involved in the Cooper's Point Issue, in particular, the Sembler family, received profits from the sale to the County and the City. He felt that if there was some possible way that they could be made to pay some restitution, it should be pursued. The City Attorney stated that he would look into this however, he was not optimistic that this was possible. The meeting adjourned at 1:29 p.m.