Loading...
08/16/1993 CITY COMMISSION MEETING August 16, 1993 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in regular session at City Hall, Monday, August 16, 1993 at 9:00 a.m., with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Arthur X. Deegan, II Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner Sue A. Berfield Commissioner Fred A. Thomas Commissioner Also present: Michael J. Wright City Manager M.A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney William C. Baker Public Works Director James Polatty, Jr. Planning and Development Director Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk The Mayor called the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. In order to provide continuity for research, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. ITEM #1 - Service Awards Five service awards were presented to City employees. ITEM #2 - Approval of Minutes - None. ITEM #3 - Rowe & Associates re: City Hall project Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager, stated the City Commission has, over the last year, looked at several sites for a consolidated city hall. Rowe Architects along with Donnell Consultants Inc. have been asked to provide several cost summaries for building the city hall on the current site. Discussions were held with the Calvary Baptist Church leaders who were very interested in a parking garage, and have a piece of land adjoining city property across Pierce Street from the current City Hall. Requests were made for additional cost estimates for such add-ons as upgrading to institutional quality, making the garage more attractive, and renovations to the current City Hall building. Three concepts have been presented, all of which show the building on Pierce Street with the parking garage in front of City Hall facing Osceola, where the fountain is currently. Stewart Donnell, of Donnell Consultants, reviewed the new feasibility study with the Commission. He stated the initial presentation of June 28 included preliminary costs for three and four story buildings both with 80,000 gross square feet and a 400 car parking garage. Said construction costs were estimated at $7,220,000 and $7,280,000 respectively, for commercial grade construction. The updated study now addresses two new variations to Concept "B" as previously presented plus a third variation for a six-story concept. Other premiums requested by the City Commission are also included. The three new Concept Bs are: Concept B-1: four-story, 70,300 square feet, projecting over Pierce Street, estimated cost of $6,295,000; Concept B-2: four-story, 69,200 square feet, sited further south, estimated $5,380,000; and Concept B-3: six-story high rise, 77,300 square feet, estimated $6,496,000. The 400 car parking garage will add $1,680,000 to each concept. All three concepts recognize the utilization of the area in the existing City Hall, reducing the square footage need for the new building from 80,000 to 70,000 +/-. Upgrading from commercial to institutional quality will increase the costs as follows: B-1, +$1,240,000; B-2, +$1,220,000; B-3, +$1,280,000; and garage, +$400,000. Also, construction of a new Council Meeting Chamber is incorporated into these new concepts, with cost at $160,000 for B-1 and $115,000 for B-2 and B-3. Also requested was an approximate cost to add 200 cars to the 400 car parking garage currently planned. This would add approximately $900,000 to the construction cost of the 400 car garage, and a height variance would be needed. Renovation costs for the existing building are estimated at $275,000 for minor renovations, which are essentially cosmetic, and $1,245,000 for major renovations which would be to gut and replace interior architectural, mechanical, and electrical systems. Mr. Stewart stated all furniture, fittings and equipment, landscaping, and professional design and project management fees and expenses are excluded from the preliminary figures, and all costs are stated in current 1993 competitive dollars. The plan concepts and computer modeled three dimensional views are concepts only to assist in understanding of the process, and do not represent "architecture." They are accurate to scale and represent mass relationships fairly accurately. Mr. Rowe stated all concepts assume the closing of Pierce Street in order to gain the additional building width as required in the code. B-1 requires an additional variance of 38 feet regrading the view corridor, unless the water view remaining under the building projection can be counted. Compared to the original concept, the building would be close to the Baptist Church classroom building. Pierce Street would need to be lowered to accommodate the building overpass. Commission Chambers and the main entrance would be on the second level of the new building. On the ground level would be public utilities with a drive-up window, and other such functions. Once the building is built, traffic could still use Pierce Street. The slope on the hill would start sooner than it does. In response to a question raised by Mayor Garvey regarding reference to the closing of Pierce Street and using it for traffic, the City Manager stated closing relates to ownership purposes, but open for traffic. Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager, stated once the City owns the street, it can be kept open to traffic. Mr. Rowe stated doing that will cost more money. The most cost effective way is to build on the street with a footprint of 104 x 184. He stated this site is a very urban part of the city, which also impacts how to proceed. A standard core including three elevators (part of the upgrade), two fire stairs, mechanical needs, etc. was used as a standard for all three concepts. Commission Chamber is planned to be a sloped floor chamber dropping three to four feet from the back with seating of 150-160 and standing room (approx. 3500 sq. ft.) In response to a question raised by Ms. Rice regarding the existing building, it was stated major renovations would include the second floor being filled in. Concepts B-2 and B-3 allow Pierce Street to remain open, preserves the water view, but separates the new building from the existing building and the garage. The entrance to the new building in both concepts is blocked from view from Osceola. The Commission Chamber's sloped floor takes advantage of site topography. B-2 is the most cost effective of all concepts, but crowds the site the most. B-3 is the most costly. B-3 is 7,000 +/- square feet larger than the other concepts. It is felt this could be decreased by 4,000 +/- square feet. B-3 would need a variance of 26 feet +/- for building height. A six story rather than four story building would not be as efficient in arranging people, so it was oversized by approximately 3,800 square feet. Mr. Rowe reported the plans for the minor renovations to the existing building assumes relocating departments and some new partitions, but reusing where possible. The Commission Chambers are moved from the third floor. Most of the administrative functions, including commission and city manager offices, are relocated to the new building, putting other departments in their place. By moving the chambers from the third floor, we can probably come very close to meeting the exit needs of the building. The existing stairs may be satisfactory once the chambers is relocated, thereby reducing the load. In response to a question raised by Mayor Garvey regarding why removal of the chambers would make a difference, Ms. Rice stated it has to do with 150 people in an assembly area and getting them out fast. The fire code requires a direct exit to the outside. Commissioner Berfield questioned whether having the assembly area on the first floor of the existing building would meet code. Mr. Rowe stated it would not because it would not have a large enough space due to columns needed on the first floor. Mr. Rowe stated the stairs still may have to be modified to exit directly outside, even with the removal of the chambers. The balance of the report gets into a typical parking garage floor plan that has 82 cars per level. The appendix contains both the structural engineer and mechanical/ electrical/plumbing engineer statements about cost, as well as the paybacks expected if industrial quality is desired. Commissioner Berfield questioned whether the Commission Chambers in the new building could be positioned north/south rather than east/west. Mr. Rowe stated the setup of the chambers requires a minimum depth of 60 feet. If it were to be positioned north/south, it would begin to conflict with the utility pay window. Also, it would probably require moving the core to the corner of the building which would change the configurement of the upper floors. Responding to Commissioner Deegan's questions regarding parking, Mr. Rowe stated all of the site plans anticipate leaving the same parking outside that currently exists. To remove 50-100 parking spaces from the parking garage would deduct $4200 per space from the cost. Commissioner Deegan cited removal of some of the parking spaces in addition to eliminating institutional upgrades regarding interior doors, hardware, finishes and perhaps even mechanical or electrical as ways to save money while still meeting the needs. Commissioner Deegan questioned whether minor renovation of the existing building would satisfy fire code requirements. Mr. Rowe stated the cost of satisfying fire concerns regarding the exit is minimal. Regarding minor renovations, Mr. Stewart stated the largest single cost is the interior finishes including refurbishing all the ceilings, wall and floor finishes. The minor renovation does not include adding 800 sq. ft on the second floor, but it does include redoing the chambers. Commissioner Thomas questioned what it would cost to construct a one story building with the same square footage and comparable design. Mr. Stewart stated it would cost less, but he could not give an accurate estimate right now without a study. Discussion ensued regarding the FDOT building, stating it is campus style consisting of 50-70,000 square feet. Commissioner Thomas questioned the additional cost of upgrading to institutional. Mr. Stewart stated the estimated $15 per square foot could be more or less depending on which upgrades are selected. Commissioner Thomas questioned the grade of the FDOT building, and the City Manager stated he thought it to be commercial. In comparing single story to multi story construction, the City Manager stated with single story there is no need of elevators, sprinklers, stairways, or elevated parking. Surface parking can be constructed at $1500 per space. You would have to add costs for exterior skin and roofing. Commissioner Thomas, questioned the $49 per square foot renovation cost of the existing City Hall, comparing it to new construction of a one story, 70,000 square foot, class A building at approximately $65 per square foot. He questioned what replacement costs would be rather than renovation. Commissioner Thomas expressed concern regarding the renovation costs being too high, citing the HVAC system. Mr. Stewart stated the preliminary estimate was based on information from the consulting engineers who determine the parameters. The heavier costs of renovation are in finishes, mechanical and electrical work. Also, there is $2 million for demolition. He stated the cost of an HVAC system would be less per square foot in a larger building. Adding "up to code" systems incorporates new requirements, some of which are increasing tonnage by 20-30% per building. He stated the cost is equivalent to that of concept B for the new building. Mayor Garvey expressed concern regarding the cost estimates being $1-2 million more than the $7 million goal. She suggested looking at a campus style facility with all the upgrades on a different site. Commissioner Deegan indicated the question was could a new City Hall be built for $7 million. The answer was yes, then the Commission asked for extras. He stated the majority vote was to build on the current City Hall site. Commissioner Thomas stated the additional costs came in when he asked for more efficient air conditioning and other aspects to make the building last longer without a maintenance factor. He questioned the $50 per square foot to remodel the interior of the existing building. He questioned what type of hurricane protection is included for the wraparound glass on the new building. He stated City Hall is the heart of the city during a disaster. He felt 150 mph wind load should be incorporated. Mr. Rowe stated all the glass is designed to take hurricane winds of 103 mph which is between a category 1 and 2 storm. It is wind blown debris that breaks glass. The glass is designed to take the wind force as long as something doesn't pierce it. If it is to be "missile" proof, shutters would be needed. Commissioner Thomas stated it is a critical issue at the current location and requested an estimate for shutters on a new City Hall be provided. His preference is for concept B-1 because it connects the two buildings and has a better appearance. Regarding the parking garage, he stated there is a real need for parking downtown and this anchors the west end of town. He felt the garage should not be charged to the city hall issue, however, because the parking needs are far greater than for City Hall. Commissioner Thomas also agreed to institutional grade internal amenities. Although it may cost more than originally stated, he feels the goal of anchoring the city to the west will be accomplished with this plan. Mayor Garvey agreed with concept B-1 and institutional grade stating it is more user friendly and its long term use. She does not agree with the location or cost, however, stating there seem to be less expensive alternatives. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated concept B-1 at institutional grade seems to be the most attractive of the choices presented. The cost is significant, but it is long term. He questioned the elevation issue and whether a referendum would be required. Mr. Rowe responded the elevation at top of the hill street level is 25 feet. The street would be lowered to 23 feet with the first floor at 29 feet. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated he is not in favor of this site, and feels a cost comparison with the Sun Bank building should be done. In response to Commissioner Berfield's question regarding the Calvary Baptist Church, Kathy Rice stated they were encouraged by the parking garage out front, and talked about using the site next to their building. Pastor Anderson reported use of an ice storage system for their air conditioning had reduced their cost by one third. He felt the entrance to the City Hall should be on the north side of the building. In response to questions regarding the church land, Pastor Anderson stated they would be willing to discuss donating the land in exchange for parking. He stated the church has existed for 125 years and is here to stay. Parking is a real need of the church, with as many as 1,000 spaces needed on the weekend and perhaps 100 during the week. He agreed 400 spaces would be a good trade for the land. Commissioner Deegan disagreed regarding who should pay for the parking, stating the greatest need is for those working at and visiting City Hall. Commissioner Deegan moved to direct the City Manager to work with consultants in finalizing necessary plans in order to construct concept B-1 at the institutional level including the 400 space parking garage. The motion was duly seconded. Commissioner Thomas requested providing for storm shutters be included in the motion, and questioned whether the minor or major renovation is included for the current City Hall building. Commissioner Deegan requested the storm shutters issue be researched later on. He stated further modifications and such additional nuances will come with progression of a real architectural rendering. He indicated his motion includes major renovation of the current building, which brings a total concept price tag of $10,816,000. Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield, Deegan and Thomas voted "aye." Mayor Garvey and Commissioner Fitzgerald voted "nay." Motion carried. The City Manager requested authorization to amend the FY 93/94 budget to include all costs associated with this project. Commissioner Thomas moved to authorize the City Manager to adjust the budget accordingly. The motion was duly seconded. Mayor Garvey questioned whether all costs would be incurred in the next year's budget. The City Manager responded it can be put in over a two year period but, before a construction project is begun, it should be identified from where the money will come. He stated he wants to incorporate all costs including construction fees, furniture, architect fees, etc. Mayor Garvey expressed concern that the project is adding up to close to $15 million. She stated the intent was to build one user friendly, consolidated City Hall but at an affordable cost. Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Mayor Garvey voted "aye." Commissioner Fitzgerald voted "nay." Motion carried. Ms. Rice questioned if the Commission still wished to pursue a design build process. Consensus was to do so. The City Commission recessed from 11:00 a.m. to 1:40 p.m. The City Attorney announced he needs to meet with the City Commission outside the sunshine to receive Commission advice regarding a lawsuit. This case currently under consideration is Marcus versus the City of Clearwater and some police officers, a case pending in Federal District Court. A special meeting has been noticed for this afternoon at 3:00 p.m. Mayor Garvey stated there are some people in the audience regarding Seville and questioned whether Seville is to be discussed today. Commissioner Berfield stated she believed they are here for the Environmental Advisory Committee recommendation regarding Bayside Arbors, which is on the agenda. The City Manager stated a request was received from the Environmental Advisory Committee for the City to consider buying the property. He requested additional direction. Commissioner Berfield requested this item be continued to Thursday stating Mr. Mazur, representing the developers, plans to have someone present to answer questions regarding the issue. Also, it may help the people from Seville who have been patiently waiting for the item to be addressed. The City Clerk clarified that said item is not a presentation, but discussion regarding the committee's recommendation. Commissioner Berfield moved to continue item #31 to Thursday night. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. City Manager Reports ITEM #4 - Computerization Long Range Plan - Discussion Only (AS) This City Manager expressed concern that there will not be enough time prior to the 3:00 p.m. closed meeting for this presentation if a lunch break is taken. This presentation is predicated upon an agenda item that is coming in two weeks. If the presentation needs to be delayed, he recommended moving it back two weeks along with the referenced related item. He stated the Commission has asked for the presentation prior to finishing the budget discussions. Discussion ensued with Commissioner Deegan agreeing with the City Manager's recommendation. Commissioner Thomas stated significant decisions regarding data processing need to be made in the budget process. He felt it would be best to have this presentation early in the day. Commissioner Deegan suggested the presentation be scheduled for Friday prior to the Budget work session. The City Clerk stated the Budget Advisory Committee is also scheduled to make their presentation at the beginning of the meeting. Mayor Garvey requested consideration of going back to having a consent agenda, with the option of pulling an item for discussion. Discussion ensued with it being felt that Commission discussion is needed regarding consent type items. Discussion ensued regarding the best option for rescheduling the CIS presentation with consensus to schedule for 10:00 a.m. Friday prior to beginning the budget session. ITEM #5 - Utility Billing Policies for backbilling and one time high bills (AS) In January, 1993 a work team was established to review utility billing and customer service issues. The first two policies discussed were how to deal with one time high bills and backbilling. The policies being recommended for these two issues are as follows: One Time High Bills - Utility customers are responsible for paying for all services delivered. If a problem is found in the customer's plumbing system that reasonably indicates the water did not flow into the sewer system, a credit for the sewage charge for the portion over the annual average usage can be given. A payment arrangement can be arranged to spread the high bill over an agreed upon time period to lessen the financial impact of the high bill. Customers may appeal high bills to the City Manager. Backbilling - Customers will be backbilled for services delivered in all cases except those in which a reasonable person would not know that the service was being delivered. The City will backbill for services provided for the period billed in error not to exceed one year except in cases of unauthorized or fraudulent use. In those cases, the customer will be backbilled for the entire period. In crediting an account, except for stormwater, the City will credit for the period of the overbilling up to three years or for as long as reasonably verifiable records are available. Stormwater will be limited to twelve months due to the administrative costs in computing past charges. Customers may appeal to the City Manager who may reduce the period of backbilling or waive same. John Scott, Utilities Manager, stated the Commission had agreed by consensus at a work session discussion to proceed with these policies. Commissioner Deegan questioned whether one of the steps regarding the one time high bills is to check the meter before giving credit for a sewage charge to ensure whether or not the meter was at fault. Mr. Scott stated the customer supports their claim with plumber's letter or bill for a leak, which indicates the water has not entered the sewer system. There would be no need to check the meter at that time. If we cannot determine where the water went, then the customer is given the option of having the meter checked. Commissioner Thomas expressed that the concern is whether the meter is being checked on one time high bill complaints to verify its accuracy. Mr. Scott stated the meter read is verified. Regarding testing the meter, Mr. Scott stated there is a charge to take the meter into the shop. This step can be avoided if a determination has been made that the water did not enter the sewer system. A credit on the sewer portion of the bill is then given. The City Manager questioned whether a meter is automatically tested after a high bill complaint. Mr. Scott stated they do not. He stated it is an option that the customer has if they are not satisfied; but when it gets to that point, there is a charge. The City Manager stated it is handled that way so everyone doesn't ask for their meter to be pulled and tested for a high bill complaint. He stated he does not remember a case where a meter registered more water than passed through it. Commissioner Deegan requested inclusion in the policy the option to have the meter tested if a customer believes the one time extraordinarily high bill could be due to a faulty meter. Discussion ensued with Mayor Garvey expressing agreement with the meter testing with the customer being charged for the service. If the meter is found to be faulty, the customer would be reimbursed the charge. Mr. Scott stated said procedure is currently in the ordinance. Consensus was to include the meter testing in the policy. Commissioner Thomas moved to adopt the Policy for backbilling utility services and the Policy for collecting one time high bills. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #6 - Declare personal property surplus and authorize disposal through Tampa Machinery Auction, Tampa, FL (AS) Vehicles and equipment have been inspected and approved for disposal. Commissioner Deegan moved to declare personal property, as listed on Exhibit A to these minutes, surplus to the needs of the City of Clearwater and authorize disposal through Tampa Machinery Auction, Tampa, Florida, in accordance with Code of Ordinances Section 2.622, Surplus Sales over $5,000. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #7 - Joint Project Agreement with Pinellas County to install natural gas mains during improvements to Alderman Road, est. labor cost of $30,000 (GAS) Commissioner Berfield moved to approve a Joint Project Agreement with Pinellas County to install natural gas mains during the improvements to Alderman Road at an estimated labor cost of $30,000. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #8 - Purchase of 21 handicapped-accessible outdoor water fountains to Architectural Product Sales, Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, FL, for $15,364.65 (GS) Commissioner Deegan moved to award a contract to Architectural Product sales, Inc., Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, for the purchase of 21 handicapped-accessible outdoor water fountains, at a total cost of $15,364.65 ($731.65/each). The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #9 - Contract for routine service/repair of automatic transmissions for large truck vehicles to Suncoast Industries, Inc. d/b/a/ Aamco Transmission, Clearwater, FL, for the period 10/1/93-9/30/94, at an est. $60,981 (GS) Bids were received for service and repair of automatic transmissions for sedans, small and large truck vehicles. Service includes the replacement of transmission fluid and filter, and any needed adjustments that may be necessary to the vehicle's transmission. Contracting these services ensures that the service will be performed on schedule and purchased at a competitive price. Only one vendor, Suncoast Industries, Inc., d/b/a Aamco Transmission, responded to the bid solicitation for all vehicles. Fifteen firms did not submit bids for the following reasons: 11 do not offer the service, schedules of two would not permit it, one returned the bid late, and one did not want the business. Mr. Transmission submitted the lowest bid but only bid sedan and small truck transmission service and repair. It is recommended the bid be split between Mr. Transmission for the small vehicles and Suncoast Industries, Inc. d/b/a Aamco Transmissions to handle the large truck vehicles. Commissioner Thomas questioned why only one bid was received. The City Manager stated servicing of Allison transmissions is specialized work. Commissioner Deegan requested staff look into the companies that have sent proposals to the City offering to do fleet maintenance. The City Manager stated he plans to compare in-house shop services with public services during the next year. Commissioner Thomas questioned from where the $61,000 came. George McKibben, Purchasing Manager, stated prices bid were based on quantities estimated at the time for the coming year. The final dollar amount is based on a lesser quantity determined to actually be required for the coming year. Regarding why only Aamco bid on servicing allison, Bill Baird, General Services Director, stated most companies do not like to work on loaded solid waste trucks. Responding to a question raised regarding the use of out of area vendors, Mr. McKibben stated there would be a longer turn around time, and the added expense of towing these large trucks a longer distance. Commissioner Deegan moved to award a 12-month contract, 10/1/93 - 9/30/94, to Suncoast Industries, Inc., d/b/a Aamco Transmission, Clearwater, Florida, for the routine service and repair of automatic transmissions for large truck vehicles, at an estimated cost not to exceed $60,981.00. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Commissioner Deegan requested information be obtained from TECOM regarding what services they are offering to perform for Fleet Maintenance. Mr. Baird indicated he is looking at the current operation and comparing it to a private company. He plans to have the study completed by January, 1994. ITEM #10 - Contract for routine service/repair of automatic transmissions for sedan and small truck vehicles to Mr. Transmission, Clearwater, FL, for the period 10/1/93-9/30/94, at an est. $20,853.50 (GS) Commissioner Thomas moved to award a 12-month contract, 10/1/93 - 9/30/94, to Mr. Transmission, Clearwater, Florida, for the routine service and repair of automatic transmissions for sedan and small truck vehicles, at an estimated cost not to exceed $20,853.50. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #11 - Extension of contract for purchase of equipment repair and maintenance parts with Anderson Auto Parts Company, Inc., Clearwater, FL, for the period 10/1/93-9/30/94, at an est. $800,000 (GS) In September 1990, the City Commission awarded a three-year contract to Anderson Auto Parts Company, Inc., Clearwater, Florida, for the purchase of equipment repair and maintenance parts at an estimated cost of $800,000 per year. The use of a third-party parts supplier has allowed Fleet Maintenance's operation to run more efficiently. When the city had its own parts function, approximately $130,000 was invested in parts inventory which is unnecessary with the privatized operation. Anderson Auto Parts, Inc. has provided excellent service and response to Fleet Maintenance's diverse equipment requirements. The contract allows for a one-year extension at the same terms and conditions as the original contract on the mutual consent of the City and Anderson Auto Parts, Inc. In response to Mayor Garvey's question regarding for how many years this process has been used, Baird stated since 1981. In response to Commissioner Deegan's question regarding inventory storage and delivery, Mr. Baird stated parts are delivered as needed and we can still competitive shop. In response to additional questions of Commissioners Deegan and Thomas, Mr. Baird stated as of June, $500,000 has been spent. The contract renewal offers the City the same discount as last year. It was stated the parts prices may vary. Several price listings have been compared, and Anderson has the overall best prices. Commissioner Deegan moved to extend the existing contract for an additional year 10/1/93 - 9/30/93, to Anderson Auto Parts Company, Inc., Clearwater, Florida, for the purchase of equipment repair and maintenance parts at an estimated cost of $800,000. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #12 - Purchase of 4 - 1994 Peterbilt Model 320 rear-loading solid waste vehicles from Palm Peterbilt-GMC Trucks, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for $364,539.36; financing to be provided under city's master lease-purchase agreement w/AT&T Credit Corp. (GS) Commissioner Thomas requested consideration of assigning the vehicles to specific drivers. He felt this would provide an incentive for making the trucks last longer. Consensus to discuss this at a later date. Commissioner Thomas moved to award a contract to Palm Peterbilt-GMC Trucks, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida for the purchase of four 1994 Peterbilt Model 320 rear-loading solid waste vehicles, at a total cost of $364,539.36 ($91,134.84 each) with financing to be provided under the City's master lease-purchase agreement with AT&T Credit Corporation. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #13 - Board of Trustees of Clearwater Police Supplementary Pension Plan - reappoint William Horton (PD) Commissioner Berfield moved to re-appoint William Horton to the Board of Trustees, Clearwater Police Supplementary Pension Plan. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #14 - Purchase of Dance Band Services of Paul Spagnuolo Trio for the period 10/1/93-9/30/94, for $22,880 (PR) Commissioner Berfield moved to award a contract to purchase Dance Band Services of Paul Spagnuolo Trio during the period 10/1/93 to 9/30/94 for a total price of $22,880 as authorized in Code of Ordinances Article 11, Section 42.23(5), Impractical to Bid. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #15 - No item. ITEM #16 - Purchase of liquid alum (aluminum sulfate) from General Chemical, Parsippany, NJ, for the period 10/1/93-2/28/94, at an est. $70,452 (PW) Commissioner Berfield moved to award a contract for the purchase of Aluminum Sulfate from 10/1/93 to 2/28/94 from General Chemical, Parsippany, N.J., for the Water Pollution Control Division at an estimated cost of $70,452 under Pinellas County Co-op Contract in accordance with Clearwater Code of Ordinances Section 2.564 (1) (d), (Other Governmental Bid 885-99-93). The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #17 - Contract for private street sweeping services to C.P.Ward, Inc., Largo, FL, for the period 10/1/93-9/30/96 subject to annual fund availability for $347,220 (PW) The current three year sweeping contract with C.P. Ward is in the amount of $373,200, ending 9/30/93. The sweeping program has proven very satisfactory since its inception eight years ago. The contractor will sweep the Downtown commercial streets and parking lots twice each week; and the beach commercial streets and parking lots (including Memorial Causeway) three times each week. the City will continue to sweep the mainland thoroughfares each week, and beach and mainland residential streets at a frequency varying with resource availability. The performance of C.P. Ward has been judged very satisfactory based on 1) no more than six complaints received over the three year period; 2) Pavement cleanliness has been monitored after a shift sweeping; 3) staff can easily recognize a pavement surface which has been recently swept; and 4) as the haulers of the swept material, staff observes the amount of material dumped from each sweeper hopper at the storage unit. In response to questions raised by Mayor Garvey, Bill Baker, Public Works Director, stated residential sweeping is done in-house. The new three year contract is less money than last year, and cheaper than doing in-house. Some of the cost comes from the stormwater utility. Commissioner Deegan moved to award a contract for private street sweeping services form 10/1/93 to 9/30/96 subject to annual fund availability, to C.P. Ward, Inc. of Largo, Florida for a total cost of $347,220. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #18 - Building consolidation report (CM) Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager, stated in May, 1993, the CC requested staff investigate a consolidation with the County Building Department. The City Manager assigned a team which consisted of Bob Lockwood, Administrative Support Manager in the Fire Department, Carole Greiner, Assistant Planning and Development Director, Mike Laursen, Human Resources Director, Jake Stamwers, Assistant County Administrator, and Ms. Rice as the team leader. Claretha Harris, who was the City's Internal Auditor also worked on this report prior to being hired by the County. The process was beneficial and gave a different perspective on building, zoning and occupational license services. She suggested this type of study should be only one step in the entire process that would schedule review of the operations every two years. Ms. Rice stated in the short term, the following issues and recommendations are brought forth: 1) decide what you want the department to be. The customers stated they weren't really concerned with which code is used, who administers it, or where they have to go for service. They prefer one code be used for the whole county. 2) If the choice is to have a consolidated code, recommend going with the county. 3) If the city wishes to retain its own code, the services should remain in the city. Concern was expressed by the citizens that they had too many different places to go to complete the process, which became a customer service issue. The county said the only service they would consider consolidating would be the building inspection services, not zoning or occupational licensing. Ms. Rice stated her understanding is that Clearwater has codes for its own reason and would not want to consolidate. Regardless of the option, the City should make every effort to consolidate all permitting into one location with satellite locations for the Marina and some police department activities. She stated some of the costs were found to be in other departments, and suggested all costs should be in one cost center. Ms. Rice requested authorization to work with the tax collector to investigate initiating a pilot program for occupational licensing. She stated she had concerns regarding cost and different codes. With a small pilot program those costs and ideas could be developed. Mayor Garvey questioned whether we were utilizing a state program for transfer of information. Jim Polatty, Planning and Development Director, stated the City passed a resolution asking for the information which is to be kept confidential. The City Manager further explained the program is for exchange of information regarding sales taxes and licensing. The resolution had to promise to keep said information out of the sunshine, restricting the number of individuals who can review it. Kathy Rice stated another recommendation is, if the decision is to keep the program, that building services should immediately implement a telephone permitting program much like the one Pinellas County has. That was a comment both in the telephone interview and in the City of Clearwater customer service survey follow up of which there were over 400 responses. If the decision is made to consolidate codes, it is suggested the responsibility of enforcing zoning and building codes be transferred to Pinellas County. Ms. Rice thanked the friends of the library who volunteered to call contractors day and night to get responses to the telephone survey. Commissioner Thomas questioned a) what is the gross revenue we would lose if we transferred the inspections to the county and b) how many full time employees would be lost and what is their cost in terms of salary, pension, overhead, etc.? Ms. Rice stated the lost revenue would be $726,500. The employee costs are not in the report, but will be provided. Commissioner Thomas stated the reason for studying building services was because it is an income generating and expense department, and would help determine whether it would be effective to consolidate city/county services. He questioned the County's position of taking over the services using half the staff and keeping all the revenue. He stated Clearwater staff has tried to work with the County regarding consolidating and felt the County has been less than forthcoming in sharing any savings with the City. Commissioner Thomas commended Ms. Rice and the committee for a job well done. He requested additional information to show where the $726,500 and $141,139 are being spent within the city. Commissioner Deegan stated, based on previous conversations with contractors and people who were involved in getting building permits from the city and county, that people were more satisfied with the services from the county. He expressed surprise that the report indicates there are as many people dissatisfied with county services as there were with city services. He expressed concern over the small percentage of response to the survey. He felt staff did a valiant job in pursuing customer satisfaction and investigating the consolidation of services. Ms. Rice stated a survey was done which has provided direction regarding additional training and procedural needs. Commissioner Thomas stated he has had complaints from people stating they can't work things out with city staff. He requested that standards of productivity and accountability be addressed, and that permitting become more user friendly. Commissioner Deegan recommended the permitting department have someone designated for helping people through the permitting processe, expediting the process. He recommended that person be from the management level. Ms. Rice stated when a problem is identified or somebody is concerned, they currently designate one individual to deal with the issue. Oftentimes people don't understand the rules and they may not ask the right question. The City Manager suggested more cross training would help eliminate turf lines and help determine how much staff is really needed. Commissioner Thomas suggested there may be more staff than needed which, if eliminated, could change the process into a profit operation. Discussion ensued regarding this concept with consensus being that it should not be a profit center. It was felt if costs are reduced, fees should be reduced. The City Manager recommended the Building Division stay with the City. Ms. Rice stated there are six recommendations: 1) keep the program, 2) make an effort to consolidate all the permitting in one place, 3) keep all those costs associated with that program in one cost center, 4) try an occupational license pilot program with the tax collector, 5) implement a telephone permitting program, and 6) if consolidating, transfer to Pinellas County the responsibility for enforcing zoning and building codes. Commissioner Thomas questioned why experiment with a program which is estimated to cost $100,000, stating he is not willing to approve payment up front. Ms. Rice stated that cost is based on what the Tax Collector charges the county. To see what the costs really are, a small pilot program would be instituted. If the costs are less, it might be good customer service to be able to buy your county and city license at the same time. Commissioner Deegan moved to approve recommendations 1-3 and 5, and to delay any action on recommendation 4. Mayor Garvey requested clarification on the recommendation regarding whether or not to keep building department services. Ms. Rice stated the recommendation to keep the services is A2. Mayor Garvey reiterated the direction of the Commission as: 1A2 - to retain its own code and that the service remain in the city; 1B - make every effort to consolidate permitting into one location with satellite locations for the Marina and some Police permitting; 1C - the expense for all zoning and development services be recorded in one cost center; and 1E -building services implement a telephone permitting program. Commissioner Deegan moved to approve recommendations 1A2, 1B, 1C and 1E. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Discussion ensued regarding the pilot program for consolidated occupational licensing. A more detailed scope of work is to be provided. ITEM #19 - Direction request re: Downtown Development Plan (PLD) Since the Plan was last considered by the City Commission in February, 1993, other review agencies have provided the City with both formal and preliminary review comments. The Downtown Development Plan contains several recommendations which may no longer be considered valid. Examples are provided in the following paragraphs. On page 18 under the discussion of the Design Issues for the Bayfront District, the Plan notes that the Maas Brothers building should be removed as soon as possible to improve the aesthetics of the Cleveland Street entryway into the Downtown. Along the same lines, removal of the surface parking at the Maas Brothers and Coachman Park sites is recommended. In this same section, there is discussion about closure and vacation of Drew Street to allow Coachman Park to be linked with Clearwater Harbor. On page 21 under Design Issues for the Core District, the Plan discusses removal of surface parking in this district. This may conflict with the Commission's decision to provide parking on Cleveland Street. On page 23 under the Functions section for the Eastern Corridor District, there is discussion about the East End Project involving retail and/or residential development on the current City Hall Annex site. Changes are needed to the Plan to reflect more current Commission decisions and direction is being requested. Concerning approval of the process for the Plan, the City has received formal approval of the associated Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan amendments relative to the "expansion areas" on the periphery of the actual Downtown from the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. We are anticipating similar approval from the Department of Community Affairs. Approval will also be needed from the Pinellas Planning Council and the Countywide Planning Authority (Board of County Commissioners) for these periphery areas. Based on conversations with Pinellas County Planning and Legal staff, it appears to be advantageous for the City to separate the "expansion areas" from the Community Redevelopment Agency portions of the Plan. This revision will minimize confusion and allow the two component parts to the overall Downtown Development effort to be considered on separate tracks. The proposed total approval of the Plan, associated Land Development Code amendments, and the expansion area Land Use Plan amendments, assuming no major plan changes are needed, is anticipated for November/December, 1993. Scott Shuford, Planning Manager, stated the plan as approved in February, 1993, included four areas that would be added to the Downtown LUP classification: a) two would have an urban center zoning classification but would not be part of the CRA plan, as there is no proposal in the plan to expand the CRA boundary and b) two areas would have a zoning district to be created for them which would provide an incentive for providing a higher density multi-family use and also allow some high tech type manufacturing options. There are four components to the plan: 1) approval of both the Downtown and CRA plans plus an addendum that addresses four areas, referred to as the periphery area, that had the land use plan classification associated with them; 2) zoning changes for two areas - one just south of the annex and the other south of Drew Street - to urban center zoning district and land use plan changes; 3) land use plan classification as Downtown District for four areas outside the existing downtown; and 4) many land development code amendments regarding urban center zoning district. Jim Polatty, Planning and Development Director, stated the recommendation regarding removal of the Maas Brothers building may need to be changed. The City Manager stated a feasibility study is under way regarding reusing the existing building. He questioned whether language should be incorporated that if the existing building is not found to have any feasible use it should be removed. He stated this will eliminate having to amend the plan again. Mr. Polatty stated they are simply providing options. He suggested the same be done with the CRA plan which would not counter the desired results, but give options. He cited the issues of surface parking on Cleveland Street and the closure and vacation of Drew Street to allow Coachman Park to be linked to Clearwater Harbor as examples where options could be given. Regarding the Maas building and design issues, Mayor Garvey questioned whether options could be incorporated to cover the ifs/ors without changing the flavor of the plan. Scott Shuford suggested, rather than going through each issue, providing options as the standard approach for all yet undecided issues. He stated he will provide a revised copy with additions, based on changes that are option oriented, noted in a summary. Mayor Garvey questioned whether a reference regarding the many options should be included. Mr. Shuford stated he will include the boiler plate language. Mayor Garvey raised a question regarding receiving direction from the soon to be appointed CRA Executive Director as to what they see as feasible or not. She expressed that person would probably have some ideas he/she would like to input. Commissioner Deegan expressed concern regarding the intergovernmental approval process and that it not be delayed until additional staff is on board. Responding to Mayor Garvey's desire to eliminate the need to go back for additional approvals, Mr. Shuford stated he feels there will be no need to go back to the PPC, TBRPC or the State. Changes to the CRA plan, however, have to be coordinated with the County Commission since it involves some of their tax money. Their review would be outside the framework of the land use plan approval process, which will greatly shorten the review period. Commissioner Thomas questioned the issue of alcohol, stating there has been a lot of criticism regarding it being a permitted use in the Downtown districts. He asked if that has been addressed in the plan, and Mr. Shuford stated it has. Commissioner Deegan questioned the statement regarding conversations with County planning and legal staff about separating the CRA from the expansion areas. Mr. Shuford stated they suggested the addendum, which basically deals with the land use plan component, be removed from the plan and let it proceed on a separate approval track from the CRA plan. Having the different components going on their separate tracks will speed up the approval process and eliminate presenting issues to the different agencies that are not related to them. Regarding the peripheral area, Mr. Shuford stated he would like to bring back the periphery area plan separate from the CRA plan to reduce some of the potential for confusion. Mayor Garvey raised a question regarding work on the performance zoning district. Mr. Shuford stated they would like to include it as part of the periphery plan once it gets through review. That is, essentially, adopting a new zoning district that would cover the two areas to the northwest and south central part of the CRA. A rezoning process will be needed but will not require going to the State or the PPC for any reviews because the associated land use plan changes are already in a separate processing track. Regarding the processing schedule, Mr. Shuford stated 2nd reading has been moved back about two weeks to probably the first meeting in October. It is hoped the process will be complete by the end of the year. Responding to Commissioner Deegan, he stated the Commission will be provided the specifics prior to 2nd reading. ITEM #20 - Conveyance of surplus lots to Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services for infill housing construction, Plaza Park Sub., Blk G, Lots 1 & 10 (PLD) Mayor Garvey questioned whether any property is being donated to Habitat for Humanity. The City Manager stated three lots were donated to them through the Housing Authority. Commissioner Berfield moved to convey Lots 1 and 10, Block G, Plaza Park Subdivision, at appraised value, to the Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Service to facilitate construction of infill housing units, serving a valid public purpose. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #21 - Receipt/Referral - Land Development Code Amendment re Nursing Homes in Multiple Family Zoning Districts (LDCA 93-09) (PLD) Commissioner Deegan moved to receive the proposed Land Development Code amendment and refer it to the City Clerk for advertising and scheduling a public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #22 - Receipt/Referral - Land Development Code Amendment re Nonconforming Density and Intensity on Barrier Islands (LDCA 93-14) (PLD) The City Commission, responding to the Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force report, requested staff investigate ways in which density or use intensity incentives could be provided to promote redevelopment in conformity with City code requirements. Staff initially proposed a comprehensive plan amendment allowing density increases on the barrier island if there was complete compliance with flood hazard prevention regulations, and contingent upon safe hurricane evacuation times being maintained and concurrency regulations being met. The State Department of Community Affairs rejected this amendment, but did advise staff that local governments were free to deal with issues involving existing densities and intensities of use. That is, the State allows us to maintain existing densities but we cannot increase them. Following this suggestion, staff has prepared a draft ordinance allowing property owners who are voluntarily repairing or reconstructing their buildings to retain existing nonconforming densities or intensities of use so long as they meet all other City development requirements (such as setbacks, open space, landscaping, flood hazard prevention, and building code requirements). Staff feels this would provide a limited incentive for bringing properties into compliance with City development regulations (other than density or intensity of use requirements). There will be no conflicts with Countywide Plan (Pinellas Planning Council) use intensity rules since local governments are allowed to address nonconformities completely at their own discretion. Scott Shuford, Planning Manager, stated presently, if you want to redevelop your property on the barrier islands more than 50% of the value of the property, nonconforming density will be lost. What is being proposed is a way to retain the density. According to what the State allows, we cannot do an overall increase in density of the barrier islands but we can recognize and grandfather existing density. The proposed ordinance allows for redevelopment to meet FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Association) regulations, setbacks, and parking requirements; but it also allows an incentive of being able to keep the existing density. Commissioner Deegan stated the suggestion of the Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force was for a positive incentive to encourage people to begin consolidating some of the structures, especially on the small lots. He questioned the cap on density and the feasibility of redistribution of density. Mr. Shuford stated that will be looked at separately. The current proposal is to make sure the existing density does not get lost in redevelopment activities. Staff would like to put together a proposal looking at the overall number of units available on Clearwater beach and then determine if there is a way to provide incentives for redevelopment without losing density. Commissioner Deegan expressed concern that such a report was mentioned before and they still don't have anything. The City Manager stated when the topic was previously discussed there was disagreement with some of the board members regarding the first come, first served proposal on density. He related it to the capacity reservation charge for highways. Mayor Garvey expressed concern that one big motel could come in and take up all the density. Commissioner Deegan suggested there could be a way of limiting it. He questioned whether other suggestions would be made regarding the Task Force recommendations, and when they would come forth. Mr. Shuford stated he expects they would have something next spring. Commissioner Deegan expressed concern regarding the delay in responding, with the City Manager reminding the Commission that priorities were set when the Task Force recommendations came forth. The Commission accepted recommendations and approved a work program. Mr. Shuford stated it needs to be determined what the Commission wants to accomplish with an incentive program. He stated there is a possibility of tying it into the recommendations of the tropical seascape committee. Mayor Garvey stated Clearwater Beach needs to be addressed as a whole, deciding what major changes are desired and how to do it. It was previously suggested a special district be established for the area. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether the density on Clearwater Beach was set before or after the 1985 down-zoning, and whether or not density has been lost. Mr. Shuford stated the density was set with the adoption of the comprehensive plan in 1989. Mr. Polatty added the density would be retained if a property had already been built to that density. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether density was lost if a property was not built to allowed density and was down-zoned since 1985. Mr. Shuford stated that is correct. The City Manager stated the density on the beach today is the density associated with the land use. He stated the State of Florida has to be convinced to increase densities beyond what was approved in 1989. Mr. Polatty stated the Comprehensive Planning Act of the State of Florida, enacted in the early 1980's, says you cannot increase densities on barrier islands above its' current zoning. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether or not the State has ever allowed any changes in density anywhere in the state since the law was enacted. Mr. Shuford stated he does not know if there has been any increases allowed. He stated staff responded to the Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force proposing, as a comprehensive plan amendment, a study be done to see what incentives could be given to make sure FEMA regulations were being met, hurricane evacuation times were being decreased, and that concurrency regulations were being followed. We proposed as an amendment that, if we can do all these things, a density increase be considered. The State was adamant about not supporting that particular position; they would not even allow a study of the issue. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether the density of a hotel is different than that of an apartment building. Mr. Shuford stated roughly 1-1/2 times more hotel units are permitted than residential accommodations. This relates to dwelling units, not people. Commissioner Thomas stated improving the zoning structure on Clearwater Beach is long overdue and feels it should be a priority, citing the need to address the many run down dwellings in the north beach area. In response to Mayor Garvey's question regarding units on the beach that don't meet minimum housing code, Mr. Polatty stated based on a windshield survey done a while ago, there are some houses with many code violations. The City Manager stated an in-depth inspection has not been made to determine whether a house needs to be demolished or repaired. Commissioner Thomas expressed these properties should be addressed the same as others in the City. They need to be brought up to code. Mayor Garvey agreed, expressing concern regarding public safety and welfare. Commissioner Thomas requested a copy of the list of the things that have been previously prioritized. Commissioner Deegan suggested he also be given a copy of the report consisting of 67 Beach Task Force recommendations and to which departments they have been assigned. Mr. Polatty stated there is also a work program for the Planning Division which lists all the land development code amendments on which staff is working, in addition to other tasks including responding to the CBBRTF (Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force) report. Commissioner Deegan moved to receive the draft ordinance and refer it to the City Clerk for advertisement and public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #23 - PSTA - 1 appointment (CLK) Commissioner Deegan moved to reappoint Commissioner Thomas. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #24 - Parks & Recreation Board - 1 appointment (CLK) Commissioner Deegan moved to appoint Donald Harris. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #25 - MPO request - Res. #93-51 - approving a new interlocal agreement governing the MPO; reappointing Commissioner Thomas as a voting member (CLK) Milton A. Galbraith, Jr., City Attorney, stated the agreement has to do with a membership reapportionment plan. The most recent version of the agreement submitted by the MPO was supplied to the Commission Friday, August 13, 1993. Commissioner Deegan moved to continue this item to the meeting of August 19, 1993. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #26 - (Cont. from 8/2/93) Community Relations Board - 1 appointment (CLK) The City Clerk stated the at-large category allows for a representative from unincorporated Pinellas County, but is not required to fill this vacancy. Commissioner Thomas moved to appoint Richard Leandri. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. City Attorney Reports ITEM #27 - Other City Attorney Items - No items. Commissioner Deegan left the meeting at 6:00 p.m. City Manager Verbal Reports ITEM #28 - Police Transportation of Prisoners Pursuant to Commissioner Thomas's request for a study on how long it takes to transport alleged criminals to the Pinellas County Jail System, Police Department staff has determined this information can be captured most effectively with the current CADS program. It will take approximately three to four days of programming, however, to make the necessary changes to the current system. Commission direction is being requested as this study will take more than eight hours. Commissioner Thomas stated he would like to see the Police Department programs computerized in order to retrieve more accurate data more quickly. The City Manager stated a complete overhaul of the department's computer system and dispatch is planned. He stated it would probably take two years to have the system up and running. If the City Commission wants the information requested by Commissioner Thomas now, it needs to so direct. Commissioner Thomas agreed with Police Chief Klein that it is cheaper to transport prisoners versus developing a paddywagon system. He is uncomfortable, however, in not having the data to support that position. The City Manager stated funding is in the budget to completely review the computer needs of the police department. The scope of work is being developed and will be brought forward to the City Commission for approval. ITEM #29 - Direction re: Sign Ordinance recommended by Businesses Involved in Government, Inc. This item was continued to the meeting of August 19, 1993. ITEM #30 - Tropic Hills Fence Michael Wright, City Manager, stated he visited the site in question during the daytime. There is a wide grassy area where the fence was with homes on one side leading to the lake. Across the street from the suburb is a downslope to the lake. Discussion ensued with concern expressed if this lake is fenced in, all the lakes would have to be fenced. Commissioner Thomas moved to not take any action regarding replacing the fence at Tropic Hills. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. ITEM #31 - Environmental Advisory Committee recommendation re: Bayside Arbors This item was continued to the meeting of August 19, 1993. ITEM #32 - Clearwater Housing Authority re: SHIP Howard Groth, Chairman of the Clearwater Housing Authority, stated he and Deborah Vincent, Executive Director of Clearwater Housing Authority, met with Commissioner Deegan regarding the City's offer for the Authority to administer the SHIP program. They initially declined the offer due to other priorities and a lack of sufficient administration fees allotted with which to adequately oversee the program its first year. The Clearwater Housing Authority has since reconsidered, and requests staff meet with them to draft an agreement with parameters of what is expected from the Authority. He stated they initially hadn't looked at the long range positive aspect of acquiring more funding. Mayor Garvey expressed concern regarding overburdening the Housing Authority. Commissioner Thomas moved that Commissioner Deegan work with the Clearwater Housing Authority on an agreement. Mayor Garvey disagreed recommending City staff work with the Authority. The City Manager suggested staff and Commissioner Deegan work with them. Commissioner Thomas amended his motion to have the City Manager work with Commissioner Deegan to come up with an agreement with the Clearwater Housing Authority. The motion was duly seconded. Upon the vote being taken, Commissioners Thomas and Berfield voted "aye." Mayor Garvey and Commissioner Fitzgerald voted "nay." A tie vote continues the issue to the next meeting. The City Manager reported the oil spill will probably not come north of Redington Shores. Commission Discussion Items Items 33-36 were continued to the meeting of August 19, 1993. ITEM #33 - Commission Rules - Continued. ITEM #34 - Beautification Committee recommendation re: parking on front lawns - Continued. ITEM #35 - Police Department - location of new station; type of computer equipment The City Manager stated Commissioner Thomas requested discussion regarding the construction of a new facility in the central part of the city and computer equipment. Mayor Garvey expressed concern regarding discussing computer equipment without Computer Information Services present. She recommended discussion be continued to the next meeting to allow Commissioner Deegan to be present. Consensus was to continue the item. ITEM #36 - Minutes Production/Court Reporter - Continued. ITEM #37 - Other Commission Action Commissioner Thomas expressed concern the press receives information prior to him receiving same. It was stated the press does receive information from other parties over which staff has no control. Also, it is a Commission rule that Commission mail be copied daily to the press. This will be part of Commission rules discussion item. Commissioner Thomas stated Roger Sweeney has added a clause to the nearly completed agreement with PSTA regarding the Beach Trolley incorporating right to cancel anytime without cause. He requested Commission support for removal of said clause. Commission requested the latest draft be copied to them for review before further action. Mayor Garvey reviewed resolutions adopted by the Florida League of Cities. The topics included aid to the mid-west cities, national flood insurance, request for no support of insurance companies that remove themselves from the State after a disaster, legislation regarding unfunded mandates, supporting Orlando for the 1993-94 World Cup Soccer event, and a proclamation regarding Florida Government Week. Commissioner Thomas questioned if a resolution with a stronger stance regarding FEMA legislation could be added. Mayor Garvey stated it is the Home Rule 20th anniversary, and Building Safety Week is designated in April, 1994. She stated additional meeting dates have been submitted for the joint work session with the Planning and Zoning Board. Setting a date will be scheduled for Thursday night. Mayor Garvey expressed concern regarding a letter from Commissioner Thomas requesting tolls remain on the Clearwater Pass Bridge for five years. The City Manager indicated he initiated the letter to explore options. The Mayor and Commissioner Fitzgerald felt this should have been discussed first since it has been expressed for years that it is the Commission's desire to eliminate the toll. The City Manager requested the Budget Meeting scheduled for Friday at the East Library be held in Commission Chambers due to the continuation of the computer presentation to that meeting. Commission approved said change. ITEM #38 - Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.