Loading...
06/28/1993 CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING June 28, 1993 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met at City Hall, Monday, June 28, 1993 at 9:02 a.m., with the following members present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner Arthur X. Deegan, II Vice-Mayor/Commissioner Richard Fitzgerald Commissioner Sue Berfield Commissioner Fred Thomas Commissioner Also present: Michael J. Wright City Manager M.A. Galbraith, Jr. City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk The meeting was called to order at 9:02 a.m. In order to provide continuity for research, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. Discussion Only #1 Concerned Women for America of Florida re: adult entertainment industry Pam Olsen stated that a coalition has been formed to oppose pornography. She reported a number of adult establishments are cropping up. She felt the community needs to mobilize to legally define and defend community standards laws and a strong ordinance against these activities is needed. She indicated there are many establishments that are not within the City limits of Clearwater but have a Clearwater mailing address and, therefore, appear to be within the City. She provided a list of establishments and when they opened. She stated A Lacy Affair is open next to a church and in the former Gaslight Lounge, which is now Sweethearts, used condoms were found in the parking lot. She stated the coalition is also working with Pinellas County to encourage them to enforce the ordinance; however, Clearwater gets much of the blame because the establishments appear to be within the City of Clearwater. Laurie Labreck stated she would not take her children on US 19 due to what is happening there. She stated the number one Re-Max real estate agent has indicated the number one question of potential buyers regards the crime rate. She stated it is critical that an ordinance be passed to relieve this hazard, and that all public nudity be banned. There is a significant relationship to the crime rate in the area of sexually oriented businesses. She stated sexual crimes increase in the areas of those establishments, as well as prostitution and drug related crimes. Other businesses in the vicinity of these establishments close down and real estate in the area is reduced in value. She stated there was a public hearing on June 16 at which residents of Curlew City, a neighborhood which is within close proximity of one of these businesses, testified that crime has skyrocketed in their area. She stated for Pinellas County and Clearwater those statistics follow, and prostitution has increased 400% in the last five years. Ms. Labreck stated the Clearwater Police Department has more than it can handle and, if there are more of these establishments, they won't be able to handle it at all. She stated they have requested, but not yet received, a vice report on Tattletales. She also complained regarding t-back bathing suits on the beach, stating this should not be allowed on a family oriented beach. She indicated three states have completely rid themselves of such establishments. She felt it would be a long, hard fight, but the City could be cleaned up. She indicated juvenile crime is also rising. She stated we need an ordinance that will be strictly enforced, and need a public nudity ordinance. She indicated this is not a fight against free enterprise. Commissioner Thomas questioned how long the coalition had been putting data together. Kim Booher stated the coalition had been together for one month, but Concerned Women of American had been established in 1981. She stated Concerned Women of America started the coalition opposing pornography, and it will grow stronger. Commissioner Thomas questioned from where they had received their data. Ms. Booher indicated the National Law Center of Children and Family in Fairfax, Virginia had a lot of information on the constitutionality of such ordinances and was willing to help draft the ordinance. Commissioner Thomas expressed concern that the Commission had brought this issue up two months ago and there had been no activity, and now a citizen's group has come forward with more data than staff had come up with. The City Attorney indicated staff has not been inactive. They have been working on ordinances to address this issue as well as collecting other data and reviewing cases. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether or not the City Attorney was working with any of the agencies mentioned by this group. The City Attorney stated no, but he has been reviewing cases; he is aware of these groups but has not been in touch with them. Kim Booher referred to a June issue of Time regarding sex for sale indicating that a lot of information was in that article. She stated the article deals with prostitution with Miami being referenced. She said there is a lot of activity going on in sexually oriented businesses, and there are harmful secondary effects. Ms. Booher stated sex crimes are 506% greater in sexually oriented business areas. She stated it will take as much money to address the crime as to enforce an ordinance, and she indicated there are ordinances in other areas of Florida. St. Johns County has the most strict and sound ordinance which has been litigated three times and upheld. In the Florida obscenity statutes regarding nudity, the display of buttocks is included. The Clearwater code does not include exposed buttocks as prohibited. She stated this is not free speech, but it is conduct. The group presented a video on the war on pornography. Commissioner Deegan added as a footnote that the day after the first letter from Concerned Women of America there was a news article about four women being arrested in a lingerie studio. He also indicated there was a June 17 article in the North Pinellas section of the Tribune regarding Tarpon Springs targeting these types of businesses in order to push them into another city. He indicated if Tarpon Springs and St. Petersburg pass such ordinances, those businesses will come to Clearwater. The meeting recessed from 10:00 a.m. to 11:56 a.m. MR-1 Second amendment to lease agreement for Spoto International & J and D International to add marina building room 28 for the period 7/19/93-4/30/97 Commissioner Deegan moved to approve a second amendment to the lease agreement for Spoto International & J and D International to add marina building room 28 for the period 7/19/93-4/30/97. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PD-1 Extension of contract for purchase of Police Dept uniforms and related equipment with Martin's Uniforms, Tampa, FL, for the period 7/16/93-7/15/94, at a cost not to exceed $75,000 Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to extend the contract for purchase of Police Department uniforms and related equipment with Martin's Uniforms, Tampa, FL, for the period 7/16/93-7/15/94, at a cost not to exceed $75,000. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PR-1 Promotional License Agreement with Clearwater Mall Company to allow the Parks & Recreation Dept to conduct a Mall Show on July 31, 1993 Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned whether there is a cost to the City, and it was stated there is not. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve a Promotional License Agreement with Clearwater Mall Company to allow the Parks & Recreation Department to conduct a Mall Show on July 31, 1993. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PR-2 Res. #93-38 - naming city property located at 2860 Enterprise Road East as "Northwood Park" The Northwood Homeowners' Association has requested the one acre site at 2860 Enterprise Road East, on which playground equipment and other park amenities have been installed, be named Northwood Park. The Parks and Recreation Board considered this request and unanimously endorsed it. The City Manager presented Resolution #93-38 and read it by title only. Commissioner Berfield moved to pass and adopt Resolution #93-38 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey. "Nays": None. PR-3 Contract for removal of foundation structures from City's Sand Key Park to Unicon, Dunedin, FL, for $14,800 The subject property is located at 1551 Gulf Boulevard, purchased by the City for $1,200,000 in December, 1992. Since 59% of the purchase price is being funded with open space impact fees, it must be treated as open space or passive park. The remainder of the site may be used for active recreation such as tennis courts, parking lots, etc. Even though there is no final development plan for the property, there is a need to remove and dispose of existing concrete structures and debris. The base bid of this project includes the removal of disposal of only the vertical structures that are above grade. The alternate bid allows for the removal of the same vertical structures as well as the horizontal slabs that are below grade and the filling of all holes with clean material. There are over 100 of these structures and staff recommends awarding the alternate bid since it will allow for a cleaner site and for less restrictions on future development. The removal of these structures will eliminate an eyesore and allow the City to maintain the property in a more presentable fashion. The bid includes the complete off site disposal of all debris in full accordance with all regulatory agency requirements. Commissioner Berfield questioned why the foundation structures need to be removed. The City Manager stated staff has indicated to surrounding residents this would be done because they are unsightly. He also indicated removal of the structures would assist in maintenance of the property. Commissioner Deegan asked when development is planned. The City Manager stated a CIP project has been budgeted, he believes, in two years. Commissioner Berfield moved to award the contract for removal of foundation structures from the City's Sand Key Park to Unicon, Dunedin, FL, for $14,800. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PW-1 Purchase of double detector check valve assemblies from Davis Meter and Supply of Tampa, for the period 7/2/93-7/1/94, at a total est. $66,400 Double detector check valve assemblies are installed by Water Division personnel on fire line connections to protect the public water supply from backflow or back siphonage and to detect water use from leaks, testing or unauthorized connections in the customer's system. After installation, costs of which are paid by the customer, the devices are tested annually and maintained by Water Division personnel. Customers pay a small monthly fee for fire line connections to help defray maintenance costs. The valves are purchased on an as needed basis during the contract period. Commissioner Thomas, citing the different brands offered by the bidders, questioned whether there has been a quality comparison and whether one brand is better. He also questioned whether there is one brand most frequently purchased by the City. William Baker, Public Works Director, stated there are 10-15 manufacturers from which 3-4 of equal quality are chosen in order to keep parts inventory from getting out of hand. The most frequently purchased brands are Mueller, Hughes and Davis. Commissioner Thomas requested, for future awards of this type, additional information be provided comparing the quality and life span of the different brands. Commissioner Thomas moved to award an annual contract for the purchase of double detector check valve assemblies from Davis Meter and Supply of Tampa, for the period 7/2/93- 7/1/94, at a total estimated cost of $66,400. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PW-2 Contract for Garden Avenue Parking Garage Restoration Project to Preservation Services, Inc., Tampa, FL, for $31,155 The Garden Avenue parking garage was built in 1985. The structure is built with precast, prestressed concrete elements which were assembled on site during the construction process. Spalling and cracking of some upper story elements were observed by staff. The structural deficiencies, particularly as they related to the stability of the entire structure, were examined by Tylk, Gustafson and Associates, Inc. and the original design consultant, DSA Group, Inc. of Tampa. The result of these examinations and the report prepared by TGA determined the deficiencies to be repaired were cosmetic in scope and would involve 1) repair of spalls, structural and non-structural cracks, separation at structural connections (including through-bolt connections), etc.; 2) sealing restoration of the joints (panel to column joint, slab to column or panel joint, curb to slab joint, stairs and lintels to walls and ramps, etc.); and 3) repair of the traffic coating. These repairs will involve the removal of unsuitable material from cracks, joints and spalls and the application of special structural concrete patching materials. Because special materials and methods are to be used by the restoration contractor, a special contractor's pre-qualification was required by the City to determine that the bidders had experience with the repair materials and their application. The contract time for completion of all work is 90 days. The work will be phased by floor to allow the parking garage to remain in full operation. Mayor Garvey expressed concern that the garage is not that old and questioned what had caused the problems. William Baker, Public Works Director, indicated the sealants had deteriorated and better sealants were specified for the repair. In response to concern expressed regarding whether there was a structural problem, Mr. Baker stated the restoration is cosmetic. Commissioner Deegan questioned the spread in the bid amounts. Mr. Baker responded that some contractors really don't need or want the work, but will accept a contract if their high bid is accepted. Others really need the work and bid the very lowest possible. This particular job is specialty work for which a pre-bid conference was held. Anyone not attending the conference could not bid the job. Commissioner Deegan moved to award the contract for Garden Avenue Parking Garage Restoration Project to Preservation Services, Inc., Tampa, FL, for $31,155. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PW-3 Third year of 5 year contract for sludge hauling and disposal for the WPC Division to Davis Water and Waste Industries, Inc., for the period 8/1/93-7/31/94, for a total est. $200,060; and contract amendment wherein Davis agrees to accept & properly dispose of the sludge in accordance with Ch. 17-640 F.A.C. This is the second annual extension of a five year contract for sludge hauling and disposal services as authorized under the terms and conditions of the original bid. The Water Pollution Control Division generates approximately 38 million pounds of cake sludge for which conditions of disposal are regulated by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The contract also provides for transporting approximately 3.5 million gallons annually of liquid sludge from the East facility to the Northeast facility. We were informed by FDER of the need to include in the agreement a "Hold-Harmless" provision for the City's protection. This provision, which requires amendment to the contract, calls for the City to produce a FDER grade "C" sludge, and Davis Water and Waste Industries, Inc., to accept all responsibility and liability for appropriate disposal. The contract is cancelable upon sixty days notice and will be terminated upon the completion of our new sludge facility and the production of a product to be sold or distributed. This is also incorporated by the amendment to the contract. The FY 1992/93 Water Pollution Control Contractual Services code has an available balance of $82,748 as of May 27, 1993, which is sufficient to provide funds for this contract for the remainder of this fiscal year. Funding of $200,000 will be recommended in the City Manager's FY 1993/94 budget. Commissioner Deegan questioned the need for $200,000 in next year's budget when two of the ten months are in this budget. Betty Deptula, Assistant City Manager, stated this contract year covers ten months with the subsequent two months for the remainder of FY 1993/94 being under a new contract. Commissioner Thomas moved to approve the third year of a 5 year contract for sludge hauling and disposal for the WPC Division to Davis Water and Waste Industries, Inc., for the period 8/1/93-7/31/94, for a total est. $200,060; and contract amendment wherein Davis agrees to accept & properly dispose of the sludge in accordance with Ch. 17-640 F.A.C. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. CM-1 First Reading Ord. #5430-93 - extending term of franchise agreement with GTE Florida, Inc., by 6 months to 12/31/93 The franchise agreement with General Telephone Company (GTE) expires June 30, 1993, at the end of a third six-month extension. The franchise agreement permits the GTE telecommunications company to use City rights-of-way for the placement and operation of its systems. In return, the City receives a 1% franchise fee based on GTE local service revenues. That fee base yielded revenues to the City of $182,888 for FY 1990; $196,500 for FY 1991; and $211,368 for FY 1992. Both the City and GTE have presented their initial draft franchise agreements. Examination of the positions and the change in personnel within the City and within GTE preclude successful discussion before the expiration of the agreement on June 30, 1993. Negotiations will require another three to six months at a minimum. Ordinance No. 5430-93 extending the term of the present franchise agreement with GTE six months from July 1, 1993, to December 31, 1993, has been developed for Commission approval. GTE has indicated its agreement in the term extension. Mayor Garvey questioned the status of GTE/St. Petersburg franchise. Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager, stated they have a signed agreement. They had a buy-out provision. Clearwater's structure requires a buy-out clause. Commissioner Deegan questioned whether additional revenue was part of the negotiations. Ms. Rice stated they are, and it is anticipated there will be a retroactive clause regarding the revenues in the new franchise. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve a six months extension of the term of the franchise agreement with GTE Florida, Inc., to 12/31/93. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Attorney presented Ordinance #5430-93 for first reading and read it by title only. Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to pass Ordinance #5430-93 on first reading. The motion was duly seconded and upon roll call, the vote was: "Ayes": Fitzgerald, Berfield, Deegan, Thomas and Garvey. "Nays": None. CM-2 Code Enforcement Program The City Manager gave an overview of the program he is proposing in the 93/94 budget. To respond to the communities needs and achieve swift and fair justice, the proposal includes merging code enforcement with law enforcement, under the direction of the Chief of Police; taking a proactive rather than reactive approach; and modify the code language to state of the art. Code enforcement was established as a priority by the Commission in May, and a task force has been established to review code language. The City Manager requested, when the Task Force meets, it be asked to look into the feasibility of criminalizing some of the violations which will result in more cases going to county court. He indicated this will take serious legal review and additional legal assistance is being recommended to help prosecute. Complaints will be focused through one office, and there would be policing of problem areas. A central clearing house for all violations, team work, and increased customer satisfaction and education on codes is planned. A Police Officer and Code Enforcement team will be assigned to a zone so residents of an area are familiar with the inspector for that neighborhood. It is also anticipated the inspectors will be able to handle library fine problems. It is planned the inspectors be in uniforms. Mayor Garvey questioned why there have been fewer Code Enforcement Board meetings recently. Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager, stated there are two key problem areas: 1) the code makes it too difficult to enforce on repeat violators and 2) better case management is needed. Commissioner Deegan expressed concern that no changes take place before the code enforcement task force is able to bring forward its conclusions. Commissioner Thomas agreed. The City Manager stated this is just a proposal he is bringing forward at this time due to a deadline which had been set. A lot of time has been spent reviewing the current process, with the proposed process being staff's recommendation as the best way to handle code enforcement. It has also been looked at from a budget standpoint, with no need for an increase in personnel. He felt the proposed process should be one of the first issues addressed by the Task Force. He emphasized he was not requesting a vote at this time. Commissioner Thomas reiterated the suggestion from the goal setting meeting regarding the use of retirees working part time at minimum wage for the program. The City Manager stated that is a possibility that needs to be thoroughly explored. In response to a concern regarding not instituting the process at this time, the City Manager stated that, while employees have been told of the recommendation, no changes would be implemented until approved by the Commission. CM-3 Rowe Rados Report re: feasibility of $7,000,000 City Hall project on current site The City Commission had requested the City's consultant on the City Hall project to determine if an additional 80,000 square feet of office space could be constructed on the current City Hall site for $7,000,000 including parking, excluding landscaping, renovations to current City Hall and furniture. Mayor Garvey expressed concern regarding construction on the west side of the current building being a part of the study as a referendum would be required in order to build there. Commissioner Deegan stated he specifically remembers Commission direction to not constrain the consultant with limitations, but asked for anywhere in this general area. Commissioner Thomas felt anywhere around the current building, without violating code, was directed. If it is best to construct on the west side, then a referendum can be held, though he agreed this is a more difficult option. Dean Rowe, Rowe Architects Incorporated, submitted a feasibility study and reviewed said study with the Commission. Dean Rowe stated there are five conceptual approaches, 3 of which are downslope. The study encompasses cost estimates and assumptions; site constraints and opportunities; five concepts; and an appendix including the outline of the scope of the study, consultant's supporting work, and parking requirements. A new 80,000 square foot office building, plus a 400 car parking garage could be built for approximately $7 million. If a four rather than three story building is needed, it would cost approximately $60,000 more. The cost of the parking garage is at $4,200 per car. This is the variable to making the project work. It can be reduced by utilizing available surface parking, or be supplemented by the Calvary Baptist Church to allow them needed additional parking. Three of the five concepts require closing Pierce Street. They require the office building or the parking garage to be built on a site combining Baptist and City owned property south of and on Pierce Street right of way. The other two concepts are to be built on all City owned property north of Pierce Street. However, these concepts will require a referendum to build either the parking garage or the office building downslope, west of City Hall. These alternatives will also require the moving of an 8" sanitary sewer line on the lower slope to create a building pad of sufficient size to accommodate either building. This will add approximately $30,000 to the project. Survey and geotechnical site data from the current building were utilized for the study. The survey information was sketchy and assumptions had to be made. He stated City property south of Pierce Street would best be used for retention. The quality of the building proposed is assumed to be consistent with low-rise market rate commercial office buildings in the area. To increase the quality to institutional levels, an estimated $10-15 per square foot ($800,000 to $1,200,000) needs to be added to the budget. This may produce a maintenance value which could equal the cost increase over a thirty year life. The estimated cost of $4,200 per car for the parking garage allows for two hydraulic elevators and special foundation preparation. Cost for landscaping is not included. Three and four story structures constructed at the top of the bluff area require improvement of the upper soil levels. Footing lines are assumed to be excavated to a depth of eight feet below ground level and backfilled with compacted excavated soil materials. A deep foundation would also be required. A single caisson to a depth of 30 feet below the existing grade is utilized under each building column for either height structure. The slab will be typical 4" reinforced concrete. The structure will be a steel frame system. Walls and windows assume a 9' ceiling height, 3'6" sill height, 14' floor to floor and a 2' high parapet, precast concrete strip panels with sand blasted finish and minimal detail, backed with metal studs and gypsum wall board, all supporting continuous solar glass and aluminum windows. Exterior doors and soffits and projections assume two story recessed entrance courts of minimal size with some special design treatment consisting of exterior entrance court, glass, doors, canopies, etc., to produce a more monumental governmental feeling. An allowance of $100,000 has been added into these two items over and above standard hollow metal doors, frames and hardware required for normal exit and service entrances. Interior partitions assumes 50% of total 63,000 square feet of programmed useable space to be accommodated and are to be painted gypsum wall board and metal stud partitions 9' tall enclosing fixed offices, conference rooms and other uses. Interior doors include birch natural finish wood doors and hollow metal doors where appropriate in standard steel frames, fire rated as necessary plus appropriate hardware satisfying all codes and ADA. Standard steel pan prefabricated stairs are included along with two hydraulic gearless elevators premanufactured to satisfy all codes and ADA standards. Interior finishes include $20/yard carpet without padding, tile, aluminum grid acoustical tile ceiling, some special ceiling treatment in lobbies, painted gypsum wall board finishes. Fittings and equipment includes toilet partitions, toilet accessories, window blinds, built in cabinets, signage and graphics. Plumbing includes one mens and one ladies lavatory, each with a handicap stall, one janitor's room with sink, plus one electric water cooler equipped for handicap access. Fire protection assumes fully sprinkled building complete with fire pump. The HVAC system is based on moderate quality system, without excessive quantities of individual thermostats. It uses present day ventilation standards and associated cooling demands. The electrical system excludes individual computer surge protection at desks, but includes protection at panelboards. Lighting includes standard 2 x 4 parabolic fluorescent fixtures throughout A detailing and pricing allowance of 8.5% ($470,000) was included based on the very conceptual basis of the study. General conditions OH&P of 7.4% ($420,000) was included which is competitive in today's market place. All permit fees plus impact fees of $28,700 are included within General Conditions. Mr. Rowe reviewed the site constraints and opportunities stating the big factor that really dictates where you place the building are the view corridors, which are required by zoning. The existing City Hall building really established what that view corridor is on this site. You either have to build over the existing entrance, fountain and parking, or you have to build to the west because you cannot build to either side. If Pierce Street isn't closed, buildable width is restricted to approximately 89 feet. However, the existing church building was built right on the property line and the existing zoning and building ordinances require a setback from that, therefore 15 feet has to be subtracted from the 89 feet to come up with a total buildable width without closing Pierce Street of about 75 feet. A building footprint on the remaining property west of that building, even including City property that is upslope, would require a 6 story building; and the largest buildable footprint would be about 13,500 square feet assuming 30 feet between buildings. Closing Pierce Street picks up 36 feet of buildable width, ending up with a footprint south of the Calvary Baptist church property of possibly 136 feet in width. An abandoned force main and pumping station downslope are not problems; however, the 8 inch line that feeds down into the manhole on the south side of the property would have to be relocated, at a cost of about $30,000, to have a buildable footprint in that area. In response to questions raised by Commissioner Deegan, Mr. Rowe stated Class A office space is that used in urban office parks. He felt Concept B is the best choice without going downslope, but it does require Pierce Street be closed. The other option without going downslope is to construct a six story (75' high) building. Responding to Commissioner Fitzgerald, Mr. Rowe stated institutional grade is above commercial. He stated commercial buildings are built as economically as possible whereas this building needs a 30 year life. In response to Commissioner Thomas's questions, Mr. Rowe stated the energy efficiency of the institutional grade is compatible within the market place, and has 20% fresh air requirements. He stated costs and how soon a payback could be realized can not be determined at this time. Regarding impact fees, Mr. Rowe stated they are included with general conditions; however, transportation impact fees are not charged to governmental agencies. Regarding whether Concept B, a four story building, was based on current limitations of the location, Mr. Rowe stated the property is slated to be zoned urban center bayfront which has a 60 foot height limitation. He stated an interpretation of view corridor is needed, citing the possibility of moving it. Commissioner Thomas stated consideration needs to be given to the advantages and disadvantages of closing Pierce Street. He questioned the parking need of Calvary Baptist Church. Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager, stated they need additional parking and suggested we look at our current site using some of their property. They are interested in working with us to gain additional parking. Commissioner Thomas questioned whether their property is included in the proposals, and Mr. Rowe stated their property line is shown on concept B. Pastor Anderson stated Calvary Baptist needs more parking for Sunday, and would like 100 spaces to use all the time. He suggested a possible property swap with reference to the Maas property. In response to a question whether the Church would be willing to assist in funding, Pastor Anderson stated they are willing to discuss anything. In response to questions regarding parking needs, Mr. Rowe stated surface parking to the north equals 100 cars. Size of the garage could be reduced, saving square footage and elevator stops. There are currently 135 spaces upslope and 70 paved spaces downslope. Pastor Anderson stated there are ingress/egress problems with downslope parking. He stated he needs all the parking spaces he can get for Sunday. In response to a question regarding the proposed concepts, Pastor Anderson stated he feels concept B is more feasible. Consensus was to agenda the proposal for discussion at the July 12, 1993 meeting. CM-4 Maas Brothers RFP - feasibility study for entertainment/convention center complex The City Manager stated a proposal to update their original 1990 study is expected from Hammer, Siler and George this week. Questions were raised regarding the status of the third floor entertainment center and the RFP. The City Clerk responded that Commission gave direction at the last meeting to hold off on the RFP and to do the two proposals separately. Discussion ensued regarding whether it would be best to: seek both proposals at the same time, therefore knowing whether all floors will be useable as planned; or follow through on one proposal, whereby if it fails there would be no need for further action on the remaining floor. A question was raised regarding the demographics of the area, and it was stated a determination was made the proposal would be economically feasible if subsidized. Commissioner Deegan requested a copy of the follow up study on three sites. it was stated the study was not fully completed but what was available would be sent out. Commissioner Thomas suggested staff move forward on the entertainment feasibility study. The requirement of acquiring three quotes was cited, and he stated the top two companies are located in Pasadena, California and Dallas, Texas. It was suggested these firms could suggest a third to contact. Commissioner Berfield moved that the City Manager proceed to find a minimum of three firms to respond to a request for a market and feasibility study of an entertainment complex on the Maas Brothers site, and to recommend he talk with the two firms the City Commission is already familiar with to see if they can give him additional leads that specialize in the entertainment industry. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The City Manager stated he welcomed input from the City Commissioners to assist with this item. PLD-1 Annexation, Land Use Plan Amendment to Low Density Residential and RS-8 Zoning for property located at 1985 East Skyline Dr., Skyline Groves Sub., Lot 27, 0.15 acres m.o.l. (Invandino-Schy/Sch A93-17, LUP93-23) The applicants wish to annex to obtain City sewer service. The street in front of the applicant's property was previously annexed, making the applicant's property contiguous to the City. The lots in Skyline Groves Subdivision which are in the City have a Future Land Use Classification of Low Density Residential and are zoned Single-Family Residential "Eight".. Commissioner Deegan moved to receive the Petition for Annexation, Future Land Use Plan Amendment to Low Density Residential, and Zoning Atlas Amendment to Single-Family Residential "Eight" for 1985 East Skyline Dr., Skyline Groves Sub., Lot 27, and refer the request to the City Clerk to be advertised for public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. PLD-2 Alcoholic Beverage Regulations - discussion only Scott Shuford, Planning Manager, stated staff was directed to streamline and tighten the alcoholic beverage code and permitting process. At the June 1, 1993 City Commission work session, a considerable amount of discussion centered around 1) the appropriate separation standards for non-restaurant consumption on premises uses and 2) the appropriate parking requirements for such uses. Responding to said concerns, the following is offered by staff for Commission consideration. Concerning the separation distance issue for non-restaurant consumption on premises uses, restaurant uses would not require a conditional use permit, nor would non-restaurant consumption on premise uses that are located in shopping centers. There would be no separation requirements for these uses. However, non-restaurant consumption on premises uses not located in shopping centers would be required to meet separation standards established as part of the specific conditional use permit standards. Staff proposed a somewhat flexible standard for these types of uses, tying separation issues to structure and site design. Staff maintains that proper site design could mitigate many of the negative impacts of these types of uses. Given Commission direction, however, staff proposes some revised language concerning separation. Proposed conditional use standards for COP uses are: a) The use complies with all the general standards for conditional use approval listed in code sections 41.033 and 41.052 . b) The use is: 1. Not located within 300 feet of a conforming church, school or park use, residential zone, or similar alcoholic beverage use; or 2. Located within 300 feet of a conforming church, school or park use, residential zone, or similar alcoholic beverage use but is separated from these uses by a right-of-way of 100 or more feet in width; or 3. Located within 300 feet of a conforming church, school or park use, residential zone, or similar alcoholic beverage use but the applicant demonstrates that there are conditions which are unique to the property (such as structure and site design, property location and orientation, or the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the property) that warrant granting the conditional use permit. c) The applicant demonstrates that the potential negative impacts of the uses are mitigated by the design features of the structure and site. Specifically, the applicant shall address the following issues: 1. Structure design - entrances, windows, exterior service windows and loading entrances shall be oriented so as to minimize impacts on adjacent properties. 2. Type of entertainment and hours of operation shall be compatible with surrounding uses. 3. Provision of buffers - perimeter landscaping shall meet or exceed the standards of code section 42.27. 4. Site design - the applicant shall specifically demonstrate that the site design, as determined by such factors as building orientation, outdoor seating, outdoor loudspeakers, parking location, buffers, site lighting, and access and loading area design and location, is compatible with surrounding uses. d) All occupational license approval standards, including the police department background check of the applicant, shall be met. e) There shall be no parking variances required for the use. Alternately, the Commission may wish to consider a stricter standard of separation with no possible variance. Certain properties in Downtown Clearwater may not be able to have a non-restaurant consumption on premises facility under the strict standard. A way to resolve this, if seen as a problem, is to exempt Downtown Clearwater from the separation. Non-restaurant consumption on premises uses would still have to get a conditional use permit but would be exempt from the separation requirements. This could be handled using the conditional use standards as set forth above with condition b) 3. incorporating Urban Center -Bayfront, Core, or Eastern Corridor - zoning districts as the required zoning with no variance capability. Concerning the parking issue, staff has looked at the parking required for several existing consumption on premises establishments. Given the Commission's general direction that increased control over non-restaurant consumption on premises facilities is of predominant concern, staff recommends maintaining the current parking requirement for non-restaurant facilities which provides an extremely strong parking standard for such uses. Issues of concern in proposing alcoholic beverage regulations, with staff recommendations, are as follows. Issue #1 Equity between small businesses and large businesses. Staff proposed to allow large, freestanding restaurants (4-COP-SRX licensed facilities) to be exempt from the conditional use permit process. The Commission was concerned that smaller, freestanding restaurants (e.g. 1-COP, 2-COP & 4-COP licensed establishments) were being treated unfairly by having to go through procedural requirements, unless located in a shopping center. Staff recommendation is to resolve the issue so as to assist small businesses, but minimize the potential for problems by: carefully defining restaurant uses to establish a 51% food sales requirement; adding further requirements to interior design to minimize the possibility of restaurants becoming bars; limiting the zoning districts in which non-restaurant consumption on premises uses are allowed; and allowing smaller restaurants to have the same parking requirements as larger restaurants (ten spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area). It is suggested the definition of restaurant be amended, adding after delicatessens, "An establishment serving alcoholic beverages for consumption on premises shall be considered to be a restaurant if 51% or more of the gross sales receipts are for the sale of food and nonalcoholic beverages and if not more than 15% of the gross floor area of the establishment is devoted to waiting areas, lounges, or entertainment areas." Issue #2 Increase emphasis on discouraging overconcentration and proximity to schools, churches, parks and residential zones. Staff recommends, given the Commission's general direction that increased control over non-restaurant consumption on premises facilities is the predominant concern, adoption of conditional use permit standards as cited above with the elimination of variances. This would establish an inflexible standard, but would exempt Downtown Clearwater from that standard. Issue #3 Is the proposed 25% gross floor area allowance for alcoholic beverage uses in shopping centers too great? Staff recommends, after researching the extent of alcoholic beverage sales uses in the Northwood Plaza shopping center, reducing the percentage of alcoholic beverage uses allowed in shopping centers to 15%, so long as the actual use area, not the total floor area of a store selling alcoholic beverages, is used to determine overall percentage of alcoholic beverage uses. Issue #4 Change of ownership. The Commission was undecided as to whether to permit changes of ownership to occur without conditional use approval. There was a desire to be fair to new owners and not judge them based on previous owners records and, at the same time, to retain continued control over new operations. If the change of ownership does not require conditional use approval, the following controls will exist. The new owner will 1) still be required to undergo a police background check as part of the occupational license approval process; 2) still have to comply with all previously established conditional use permit conditions that pertained to the previous owner; 3) still be subject to City code requirements, including the noise ordinance and laws against rowdy and reckless behavior; and 4) still have to comply with all State alcoholic beverage regulations. If the new ownership does require conditional use permit approval, the new owner will have to comply with a shorter review process than is currently the case, and the reviewing board will have the opportunity to review the application and question the applicant, as well as the opportunity to modify or add conditions to resolve any remaining compatibility problems. Staff recommends, given the Commissioner's general direction that increased control is the predominant concern, retaining the conditional use permit requirement for new owners. Issue #5 Which board should consider conditional use permits, and what should be the avenue of appeal? Staff recommends, given general Commission direction that some other board besides the Commission should hear the alcoholic beverage conditional use permit request, leaving that review authority under the Planning and Zoning Board, those most familiar with the conditional use process. Concerning appeals, staff recommends the City Commission hear appeals of the Planning and Zoning Board decisions on alcoholic beverages, with further appeals occurring in Circuit Court. (NOTE: Under this approach, an affected party, including the City Commission, could appeal the Planning and Zoning Board's decisions to grant or deny a conditional use permit to the Commission.) Issue #6 How should distance between an alcoholic beverage sales establishment and a conforming church, school or park use, residential zone, or other alcoholic beverage use be measured? The current procedure is to measure from the nearest point between the structure containing the use and the nearest property line of the other affected property. This method creates problems for properties that have more than one alcoholic beverage use. A property line to property line measurement would eliminate this problem, while creating a more stringent separation requirement for uses located on separate properties. Staff recommends going to a property line to property line measurement technique, given general Commission direction that some flexibility should be provided to properties containing more than one alcoholic beverage use, and that there be greater controls for separating uses on different properties. Issue #7 Should variances be permitted? Under the proposed conditional use permit standards, no parking variances would be allowed and perimeter (buffer) landscaping consistent with City code would be an automatic requirement. Staff recommends, given general Commission direction for greater controls over alcoholic beverage uses, retaining a standard of approval that no parking variances be permitted. This would allow consideration of other variances, such as variances to signage, setback, height, and open space requirements. In addition to the above issues, several of the members of the Planning and Zoning Board wanted the Commission to be aware of their concerns about the package sale of refrigerated alcoholic beverages, especially at establishments primarily serving motorists, such as gas stations. They are concerned about persons being "encouraged" to drink and drive due to the availability of cold alcoholic beverages. The City Attorney's office has advised that addressing this issue is a matter for the State. The Board is interested in pursuing a ban on refrigerated alcoholic beverages on a statewide basis. In addition, the Planning and Zoning Board has requested that a joint work session be scheduled to allow them to discuss with the Commission various issues involved with alcoholic beverage sales. Regarding requirements for alcoholic beverage sales in shopping centers, Commissioner Berfield questioned whether the minimum of five businesses in the center is restricted to not allow all alcoholic beverage establishments. Mr. Shuford stated to qualify as a shopping center, there has to be at least five retail businesses in a minimum of 25,000 square feet. He stated a maximum percentage of floor area for alcoholic beverage sales could be established. In response to Commissioner Thomas's question regarding standards for restaurants, Mr. Shuford stated a 4COP/SRX license needs, a minimum of 150 seating capacity and 51% sales in food and non-alcoholic beverages is required. These licenses are regulated by the State. The City Manager stated the City does not issue liquor licenses; it just regulates where alcoholic beverage establishments can operate. Mr. Shuford stated consideration needs to be given to smaller restaurants licensed under 2COP or 4COP. He stated, in response to a question, licensing for restaurants is for on premise consumption only. The City code does not address the various state licenses, it only provides for conditional uses of package sales or consumption on premises. State 2COP and 4COP licenses allow both, and the City restricts this to one or the other through the conditional use approvals. Staff proposes to define restaurants as on premise consumption only. Discussion ensued regarding the Northwood Plaza research results. In response to a question, Mr. Shuford stated Winn Dixie would under the proposal, by right as part of a shopping center, be allowed package sales as a large retail store. He stated an alternative would be to reduce the percentage of floor area devoted to sales. He recommended ten percent for retail centers, and to limit consumption on premises by right just to restaurants. Commissioner Deegan stated complaints have been received regarding the proliferation of alcoholic beverage establishments in Northwood Plaza. He expressed concern regarding the exemption of consumption on premises when located in shopping centers. Commissioner Thomas, referring to Winn Dixie having the largest space with smallest amount dedicated to alcoholic beverage sales, questioned their ability to double their display causing the overall maximum percent of the shopping center to be maxed out, and whether it could be stopped. He expressed concern whether we are trying to be too restrictive, citing the need for more than one criteria. Mr. Shuford stated a maximum percentage could be permitted, with a conditional use option beyond. Commission Deegan stated he receives complaints that too many bars and lounges springing up. Commissioner Berfield stated they are trying to put a cap on alcoholic beverage establishments, desiring to re-establish Clearwater as a the family oriented tourist community. Commissioner Thomas stated the problem is not just shopping centers, but anywhere one can buy alcoholic beverages. The perception is there are too many such establishments. The City Manager stated an increase in the distance separation could be established, citing the fact that most commercial strips back up to residential areas. Mr. Shuford, requesting direction, stated there is a concentration of strip centers on Gulf-to-Bay, S.R. 60, Missouri, U.S. 19, Sunset Point, and the beach district. In most cases, these facilities do back up to residential neighborhoods. Commissioner Thomas asked Mr. Shuford if he felt the proposed changes would reduce proliferation, maintain the status quo, or increase alcoholic beverage establishments. Mr. Shuford stated, hopefully, it would encourage more restaurants and discourage non-restaurant consumption on premises facilities. Commissioner Deegan questioned whether to remove the conditional use exception in shopping centers. He stated he would prefer a 15 rather than 25 percent cap on floor area useable for alcoholic beverages. Commissioner Fitzgerald expressed concern that this would put the process back where we were. He stated most of the businesses in Northwood Plaza are restaurants. He felt going the shopping center approach would eliminate trips and problems for people. In response to a question, Commissioner Deegan stated he wishes to allow restaurants; "gin mills" are the problem. Mayor Garvey was in favor of encouraging alcoholic beverage establishments in shopping malls as they regulate their tenants. Commissioner Deegan stated he was content to leave staff's proposed conditional use standards for consumption on premises as is. Mr. Shuford indicated in order to provide flexibility to allow consumption on premises establishments in shopping centers, the commercial center zone would need to be added. Mayor Garvey expressed concern that alternative B's strict standards are too difficult to meet. Commissioner Deegan expressed his desire to adopt alternative B, with no additional zones. The Planning Manager suggested allowing some flexibility by adding commercial center and highway commercial zones. Commissioner Deegan expressed concern that current variance requests are based on uniqueness, which leaves it up to individual interpretation. The majority agreed they do want some flexibility. Mr. Shuford stated the Planning and Zoning Board requested the Commission meet with them to discuss alcoholic beverage concerns. In response to questions regarding whether the Commission would have the right to appeal a Planning and Zoning Board decision, Mr. Shuford stated they would. The City Manager indicated if the City Commission desired to have control, the application should be brought to them for approval. Regarding grandfathering existing uses, Mr. Shuford stated existing uses could be grandfathered in with transfer rights as a variance or conditional use. New facilities would not be allowed. If the alcoholic beverage sales have not been in use for a certain length of time, the property would lose the grandfather. Concern was expressed that establishing stricter criteria may increase the value of existing establishments, but also limit use and value of strip malls. Regarding Clearwater Beach, Mr. Shuford stated the plan is to remove alcoholic beverage sales except for restaurants. It was stated complete beach redevelopment is being looked at, with a separate district being established with separate standards. Mr. Shuford stated this presentation was not made to the Planning and Zoning Board; and they are desirous to meet with the Commission for discussion. Consensus was to set a joint meeting with the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Shuford recapped the direction provided thus far: 1) take package sales out of the definition of restaurant, 2) non-restaurant consumption on premises in shopping centers will require a conditional use, 3) the cap on the percentage of floor area for alcoholic beverage in retail complexes and shopping centers is yet to be decided, and 4) restaurants will be allowed as permitted uses. Regarding sales of cold alcoholic beverages, particularly from establishments that also sell gasoline, Mr. Shuford stated the Planning and Zoning Board discussed this at length and determined it is a state issue. Commissioner Berfield suggested City staff look at the problem citywide, stating there is no logic to selling gas and alcohol from the same establishment, citing the DUI concept. In response to a question, the City Attorney stated it would help to have evidence the alcohol was purchased from a gas station when someone is cited for DUI or has accident. Consensus was to investigate the issue through the Florida League of Cities. City Clerk Items #s 1 through 5 were continued to July 1, 1993. CLK-1 Long Center Board of Directors - 1 appointment CLK-2 Center Foundation Board of Trustees - 1 appointment Commissioner Thomas stated the Center Foundation Board has a requirement for membership of a $1,000 donation. The City Manager stated the City representative is exempt from said requirement. CLK-3 Clearwater Neighborhood Housing Services - 1 appointment CLK-4 Marine Advisory Board - 2 appointments CLK-5 Airport Authority - 1 appointment Legal Department - No Items Other City Attorney Items - No Items City Manager Verbal Reports CM-1 Vision Cable - televising/taping Monday meetings The City Clerk stated she spoke to Mr. Brian Aungst of Vision Cable regarding the taping and airing of the Monday City Commission meetings. He informed her that, due to scheduling conflicts, they will not be able to air the meetings live. Also, their staff will not be able to tape the meetings until August; however, they want to make the ceiling camera change and set up a control booth which will enable them to tape with only one person. In response to a question regarding how soon the recorded meeting would be aired, the City Clerk stated she did not know exactly when but it would be aired prior to the Thursday meeting. Item Trolley Betty Deptula, Assistant City Manager, stated a letter was received this morning from Roger Sweeney, PSTA, regarding the downtown trolley. The City Commission authorized an extension to the July 10 termination of the downtown trolley service. Mr. Sweeney states the service can not be extended until a public hearing is held in August. Also, we are waiting to hear how much money they want to compensate them for the decline in ridership on Route 80. City staff can not operate the trolley during the hiatus in service due to major liability insurance concerns. Ms. Deptula stated PSTA has a Board meeting on July 7, and she requested direction from the Commission. Commissioner Thomas stated it is inappropriate that the City has not received sufficient notice, and he will discuss it with the Board at its meeting. He stated the non-profit organization is being worked on by the City Manager and PSTA. Item Accident Rates, Police Department The City Manager stated he has asked Val Mahan, Coordinator of Emergency Services, and Police Chief Klein to get together to analyze the statistics to compile into a report regarding the number of vehicular accidents. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated the Police Department has 24 hour exposure, and some of the accidents may be people backing into them. Each report needs to be analyzed. Commissioner Thomas cited the lack of a regular re-training program for defensive driving. He felt there needs to be a yearly requirement for defensive driver training. Commissioner Thomas expressed his initial opposition to a vehicle take-home policy stating after additional research he believes a vehicle will be more properly cared for and last 2-3 times longer. Commissioner Fitzgerald asked if the Safety Office gets involved regarding Police Department accidents. The Deputy City Manager stated there exists an Accident Review Committee who recently redefined accident to include anything that could cause damage to a vehicle. They also require employees having accidents to go to a defensive driving class. She stated drivers in the Fire Department are required to have EVAC training which is special training for high speed in residential areas. Ms. Rice agreed it is an issue regarding safety and worker's compensation. Commission Discussion Items #1 and #s 3 through 8 were continued to 7/1/93. 1. Vision Cable franchise discussion 2. CA Dept Audit The Law Office of Claude L. Mullis submitted a proposal June 22, 1993 for the audit of the Legal Department incorporating the following. Phase One would include a study of duties of the Legal Department prescribed by Charter, Ordinance, Executive Order, Florida Law, Custom, Administrative Order, requirements of professional responsibility, court cases and city custom and usage. The review process would include that of the role of the City Attorney in the operation of the City; potential conflicting roles which the City Attorney may confront in representing the various branches of city government; departmental organization; staffing; and procedures established for fulfilling all responsibilities required by the City. The City Attorney would be asked to submit his views on the role of his office. Phase Two would undertake to assess quality, manner and efficiency of City Attorney and staff in fulfilling duties to the City. Interviews would be conducted with department heads, staff, public officers, judges, legislators, informed local citizens, attorneys, board members, advisory committees of City, if any, to determine perception and knowledge of functions of the City Attorney and staff. There would be review of office files opened and closed staying within code of professional responsibility for lawyers; appellate proceedings and files relating to negotiated settlements including those with the State, County or Federal governments, if any. In addition, a review of the budgets of other cities similar in size and scope of activities would be performed. Upon completion of the study, changes deemed advisable in the Legal Department, and any changes in any other operational function of the City, if the changes would improve the services rendered by the City Attorney and staff to the City, will be recommended. Total fees and expenses amount to $47,500 for both phases of the audit which include the services of the Center for Local Government and NIMLO (National Institute of Municipal Law Officers). Mr. Mullis introduced Dr. James Seroka, Director, Center for Local Government Administration, and distributed the resume of Benjamin L. Brown, Executive Director of NIMLO, Washington, DC. He stated Dr. Seroka will assist in the audit, and the services of Judge Brown will be available if needed. Commissioner Deegan expressed he could not see the benefit of the audit without both phases, and asked whether Mr. Mullis felt the two phases were truly separable. Mr. Mullis stated that is the City Commission's decision. One part is the analysis of the City Attorney's authority; the other, the role of the CA as the Commission sees it and as he sees it. Commissioner Thomas questioned what Mr. Mullis thinks the Commission is seeking to accomplish with the audit. Mr. Mullis stated, based on the information received, he got the impression the City wanted a management audit of the City Attorney Department to determine the duties and responsibilities, if they are being carried out in a professional manner, and make recommendations to make the Legal Department more efficient and competent. Responding to additional questions by Commissioner Thomas, Mr. Mullis stated efficiency and qualifications are determined as perceived by the City Attorney and City Commission. Regarding what criteria would be used to determine the quality of performance, Mr. Mullis stated he would use what is generally acceptable, including interviewing others and evaluating responses. He felt winning cases and how they are prepared would be the criteria in determining litigation abilities. Commissioner Thomas, citing the difference in compensation levels of municipal attorneys and private attorneys, asked whether Mr. Mullis felt the municipal attorney was more of a quarterback in passing out different types of cases to outside attorneys, or should litigation be handled in-house? Mr. Mullis stated he has been in municipal law since 1953, and he does not believe higher compensation makes a better lawyer. Private law can not be compared with municipal law. There are so many constraints on a city attorney; he must know municipal law, public meetings law, public records law. Fortunately, municipal attorneys will be aided somewhat when the new statute becomes effective allowing some confidentiality in attorney/client relationship in litigation matters. He felt farming out cases should be up to the City Attorney and City Commission, looking at individual cases and how much money you want to spend. In response to a question from Commissioner Deegan regarding what would be the three most important responsibilities mentioned as part of a job description for a city attorney, Mr. Mullis stated 1) to exercise his opinion and judgment independent from outside influence; 2) efficiency and 3) his role as he perceives it and who is his client - how he handles various aspects of his position, advising the City Manager and City Commission at the same time. Commissioner Deegan questioned whether the qualifications of a person heading up the legal department, given a city of 100,000 people and a legal department with an attorney and staff of 7-8 people, some of whom are professional, some paraprofessional, should have more legal/technical qualifications or managerial qualifications, or both? Dr. Seroka stated in a city this size and growing, an important consideration now and in the future would be the technical/managerial aspects of the job. With the current staff, it is suspected strong legal and courtroom skills are very important. With the growing litigation in society, growing number of areas that impends upon municipal operations and behavior, its going to be important for the future that the City Attorney office be equipped with modern management tools and approaches to work smarter, not harder, and get more bang out of the taxpayer's dollar. He feels future consideration for attorney qualifications will have to include more managerial technical prowess. Commissioner Deegan asked Dr. Seroka what expertise he will bring to the project based on his background and skills. Dr. Seroka stated for the last 20 years he's been studying local governments, primarily cities and counties, across the nation. He is interested in getting local governments into utilizing the 20th and 21st century technology available. In Florida, the Tampa/St. Petersburg area, including Clearwater, is a rapidly growing, very dynamic area. It can not afford to stay in the back water; it has to modernize its activities, including utilization of computer data files, and computer analysis of court records and judgements. It is very important for management of files, and to improve efficiency and productivity. Dr. Seroka stated a comparison will be made with other cities. In response to questions regarding how much interviewing will be performed, Mr. Mullis stated they expect to interview four to five people in about 10 cities. Locally and internally, they anticipate interviews including department heads, City Commission, City Manager, Circuit Judge to see how others perceive the City Attorney. In response to a question regarding performance evaluations, Dr. Seroka stated the intent is to provide an overall office performance evaluation, not individual ones. In response to questions by Commissioner Deegan, Mr. Mullis stated productivity standards would be determined by caseload, legal opinions, and opinions of staff. He stated as much time as needed would be spent in Clearwater. He responded his health is excellent. Commissioner Berfield asked Dr. Seroka who would handle the technical/managerial aspect of the office; and whether he has ever recommended to a city that they bring in an office manager or have the City Attorney doing the managerial portion rather than the legal aspect. Dr. Seroka stated he did in Illinois, but they didn't accept the recommendation. Mr. Mullis stated Jacksonville had hired an Office Manager. In response to question by Commissioner Thomas whether they had ever conducted a survey of this type before, Mr. Mullis stated not to as in-depth as requested here. He has set up small departments, been advisor to 15-20 different cities & counties over the years; and looked at full-time as opposed to part-time lawyers. He stated he believes Judge Brown, when with the University of Maryland, had set up some similar audits. Mayor Garvey asked how much time during the eight month period for completion of the audit would be spent in Clearwater. Mr. Mullis expressed he personally would spend about 50 hours, in addition to the rest of the team. Eight months would be the maximum time needed. Commissioner Thomas asked Dr. Seroka what are the most important points he would look for. Dr. Seroka cited 1) technical/managerial - public management, total quality, efficient, strict arrangements and use of office manager or attorney to distribute cases; 2) strong legal skills - he would work with Mr. Mullis here, since it is his area of expertise; and 3) modern management tools - access to law information, rapid communications, computer. Responding to how much time he expected he would spend in Clearwater, he stated he doesn't know the depth of issue, but he would spend as much time as needed to acquire information necessary to give appropriate recommendations to carry out something innovative. Commissioner Thomas questioned what type of backgrounds the other researchers of the team have. Mr. Mullis stated in addition to himself, Dr. Seroka, and Judge Brown, they would probably be using students working towards a masters degree and/or junior lawyers. They would chose the most competent and qualified. In response to Commissioner Thomas' question regarding criteria used to judge legal skills, Mr. Mullis stated these would include professionalism, services performed, results accomplished, education, and experience. He stated once the work is analyzed, a judgmental opinion can be rendered regarding management of the department and how staff rates in ability and compensation in comparison to other cities. The opinion rendered will be under the code of professional responsibility, and within that responsibility to the client. Dr. Seroka stated the final report will provide concrete recommendations, suggestions and an overall appraisal of the department. Commissioner Berfield requested a presentation be requested of Hildebrandt before a determination is made. Consensus was to set said presentation for July 12, 1993, and final decision for July 15, 1993. 3. Recommendations to the Development Code Adjustment Board 4. City Commission Rules 5. Code Enforcement Task Force membership 6. Direction re: Environmental Advisory Committee review 7. Signs for new businesses 8. Commissioner Thomas' letter to FEMA Other Commission Action A resolution was requested for Thursday night that would address the order of the agenda - placing Citizens to be Heard after Public Hearings. Adjourn - 5:06 P.M.