HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 05 04 City Commission Workshop Minutes
CITY COM'1I SS ION WORKSHOP
MAY 4, 1992
--
The workshop was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Kulbes.
Mayor Philip A. Kulbes, Present
John V. Torcaso, Absent
Don Jonas, Present
John Langellotti, Present
Terri Donnelly, Present
Cindy Kaehler, Present
City Manager R. Rozansky, Present
City Attorney F. Kruppenbacher Present
Attorney Keith Bricklemeyer
Mayor Kulbes said before we get into the meeting on tonight's subject, Commission
Jonas would like to address the Commissioners on a up coming problem.
......
Commissioner Jonas stated that during the past week he had the opportunity to meet
with people who represent our elementary school children, who are attending the
elementary schools in Winter Springs. In the past same of the children had to go to
the Oviedo Recreation Program, because of the inability for their children to came
into our program. We had a meeting with Mr. Whitsett, our Recreation Director along
with the Board members, made up of the parents of the elementary school children. We
solved the problem for this summer, but as you know the school systems are changing,
and will effect a lot of people. Whitsett was able to go through his program and
work out a system so these children will have the opportunity to came into our
Recreation Program this year. However, starting in late August or September, the
school systems in our area are going year round, which means that these children will
be off, starting in September, on blocks of three weeks. Through the entire year,
every three weeks there will be a group of children will be off from school with
nothing to do. Which means that we have to look now in the City of Winter Springs a
full year round Recreation Program to accommodate these youngsters.
Jonas stated that when he met with these people he suggested two things: 1) They
write a proposal that they submit to the Commission, hopefully at a meeting on May
18th. 2) If the Commission so desires, he (Jonas) will take the opportunity and our
Recreation Director, to came up with a program/concept that we can develop a
Recreation Program throughout the entire year for these youngsters. This program
will be on a pay as you attend basis, so it will be self supporting as our summer
program is, we as a City may have an obligation to at least invest in same supplies
that would be necessary to have a Recreation Program. From asking the Commission, my
fellow Commissioners, to guide me as to what you would like to do, would you like a
workshop to go over all these problems that exist or that are going to exist in the
coming year; or would you rather have me represent the Commission and meet with these
people, meet with our Recreation Director, and came up with solving the problem and
bring the recommendation back to the Commission for your approval.
Discussion. The Commission and Mayor were all in agreement for the second plan.
Jonas stated that he would meet with the people and came back to the Commission.
~
Jonas also stated that the City will have to hire people, but not like we would hire
a full time person, so that therefore we would not have to get involved in all the
taxes, medical expenses and so on that would be incorporated with hiring a full time
person. With the help of the Recreation Department we will do that and came back
.
.
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 2
with a recommendation.
Kulbes also asked Jonas to see if there is any interest in the young adults who want
to play ball during the evenings, because same people ages 20-21 years old playing
softball with no place to go.
Commissioner Kaehler stated that there is an age group of children that hasn't even
been address the 13-18 year old's, and she stated that she would like to see
something for that age group before the young adults. If at all possible to work on
samething for the 13-18 year old's first.
Discussion of Special Taxing District for Tuscawilla, and the Lighting Concerns in a
Residential Area Within Tuscawilla:
Kulbes stated that we will discuss the maintenance of the common areas within
Tuscawilla first.
City Attorney Kruppenbacher stated that Keith Bricklemeyer is present to speak
tonight, he will cover the law and the different type districts available.
Kruppenbacher passed out to the Mayor and Commission a hand out on the types of
special districts.
Attorney Bricklemeyer stated that what we thought might be helpful is to go through
various alternatives available under the State Constitution and State Statutes to
give you a flavor for the kinds of districts that can be created by municipalities,
opposed to being created by a County or same other entity. Then we can deal with
same specific questions that have arisen; Frank has done same research in other
circumstances with respect with particular kinds of assessments, there is a thread
that you need to be sensitive to when we talk about this, and that is creation of a
district envisions a governing body that manages same function. Whereas a tax
assessment can be done without the creation of a district per say. There is a little
grey area in there and we will talk about Chapter 197 which authorizes non ad-valorem
assessments but it doesn't set up a structure for creating a district.
Bricklemeyer went over the hand out briefly with the Commission. He stated that one
of the other common threads that you should be sensitive to is that the power to tax
is vested in the State so any power the City has to tax has to be provided for by
general law. We have to search through the Statutes to find authorization for you to
do these particular things that you mayor may not want to do. In the hand out, I
cited the two articles in the Constitution that deal with your powers as a
municipality, Chapter 166, the Hame Rule Powers Act, is the legislation that
implements your authority to provide municipal services within the City. There are a
number of different kinds of districts, and Exhibit A has 22 different statutory
references to various kinds of special districts that can be created. Same of them
can be created only by the County, same can be created by the County and Cities, same
are reserved for the State, same are reserved for the Water Management District; so
there is a relatively complicated web of authority that you have to walk your way
through when you start asking a question about a particular kind of service that you
want to provide. Exhibit B is an outline of Chapter 189, and this chapter is called
a uniform special district accountability act. It was adopted in 1989, to establish
a uniform procedure for the creation and management of special districts. Those
special districts are established to create a quasi governmental structure, a mini
.
.
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 3
city government if you will, to provide certain services that a particular area wants
to have provided and is willing to pay for. There is a distinction between a
dependent district and an independent district. Chapter 189 principally deals with
an independent districts because what happens in an independent district, it's
created and operates without further interference from the municipality or the County
government. Once it is established, then it runs itself. A dependent district on
the other hand, is a district that is created by ordinance and you either are the
Board or you govern who sits on the Board, or you can tenminate the Board, it is
essentially controlled by the local government, and that is why it is called
dependent, where the independent district is independent of your control.
There are a host of requirements, 15 different items that need to be included in an
application to create an independent district. These provisions in Chapter 189,
monitor, or mirror the provisions in Chapter 190, which you may be familiar with,
Community Development District, it is one of the more cammon kinds of special taxing
districts. You can create an independent special district in accordance with Chapter
190, the Community Development District, or according to the statute as otherwise
authorize the general law. So here we are again, chasing around the general law to
find out what kinds of districts you can or can't create. You can create a dependent
district by City ordinance, it is not as restrictive but the bottom line is the same
proscription will be applicable, there will be limitations on the kinds of districts
you can establish. Chapter 189 goes through the procedure for the elections, how the
assessments can be collected and they can be collected in accordance with either
Chapter 197, which is a non ad-valorem assessment, when the ad-valorem tax bills go
out there can be a separate listing for a special districts taxes, it will say the
name of the district and have the assessment on the ad-valorem tax bill. It can also
be done in accordance with Chapter 170, which is the statutory provision that you are
probably familiar with, with regard to special assessments for capitol improvements,
if you put in a sidewalk the people who abut the road get a benefit from that
particular improvement are specially assessed, that is done under Chapter 170.
Chapter 189 deals with the requirements for the special district issuing bonds, which
they have the authority to do, it sets up a program for the Department of Community
Affairs to monitor and administer those special districts, in Seminole County as
example, DCA has a list, there are 24 special districts in Seminole County, there are
hundreds across the state. There is a requirement that the special district create a
public facilities report, that public facilities report has to be provided to the
local government on an annual basis and you can use that to detenmine what they owe,
what they're operating, what they intend to construct, and you can use that
information in your Comprehensive Planning process, for example if they are going to
build a road then you know that you can add that and take it off your list perhaps if
the City was going to build the road. The Statute sets up provisions for meetings
and for other reports that need to be made by any special district, and requires an
audit of their financing. One thing that we found lacking in the early special
districts was one of the reasons Chapter 189 was created.
The next Exhibit in the outline relates to Chapter 190, that is becoming a more
cammon special district because Developers are faced with situations where they can't
get the local government, whether it be a City or County, to provide the services on
the time schedule they want them. They can create an independent special district
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 4
under Chapter 190, and provide those services themselves, they end up taxing their
own property. There is a very meticulous procedure to insure that the assessments
that are levied against the properties directly relate to the benefit that those
properties received. There are specific services that are as a matter of statutory
right allowed to be administered by Chapter 190 district, water, wastewater, water
management, roads and bridges, and drainage facilities, if the local government
penmits or if it is a project of over a thousand acres it is established by rule
making by the Governor and Cabinet. There are other services that are typically
municipal services that can also be provided by the district: parks and recreation,
fire prevention, schools, security, mosquito control and solid waste. Most of the
Community Development Districts that are established do not get into the second phase
of services, those services are maintained by the municipality or county, essentially
we are going to build the roads put in the drainage facilities and do the drainage
work that needs to be done and the Developer is able to finance that with very
favorable tax rates on his bonds and it becomes a financing vehicle as well as a way
to get the facilities and services in place when you want them. Those districts do
also serve as the management unit for the property that is governed by the district.
There is an independent board, their meeting requirements are established just as in
Chapter 189 and they have reporting requirements as in chapter 189, they are public
body just like the City government is a public body they have to respond to the
people who are in the district and disclose the financial operations of the district.
.
Bricklemeyer stated that he also included in the outline just for information another
district, the mobile home park/recreation district, Chapter 418 provides how those
are to be created and specifies the kinds of things they can do. They can acquire,
purchase, construct, improve, equip and maintain streets and lights, recreational
facilities and other cammon areas of all types including real property and personal
property within the boundaries of the existing platted mobile home park etc. That
district can be established by ordinance and must be approved by a vote of the
electors residing the district, that is it has to be approved by referendum. The
referendum can be avoided if the creation of the district is as a result of a
petition brought to the local government by the people residing in the district, and
if that petition is signed by a majority of the electors in the district.
.
Finally in the outline Exhibit E, is an outline of Chapter 197, this chapter is not a
special taxing district, it is not a special district as that tenm is discussed with
respect to these others. It is a means of assessing taxes, and it is a tax
assessment based not on the value of the property, but on some other method. The
statute sets out a very specific procedure that has to be followed for the adoption
of a resolution to levy the assessment and then the adoption of the assessment role
that is those people that will be taxed for the service that has been authorized in
the previous adoption. The time frames that apply, you have to start it at the
beginning of the year because what you are doing is setting up a process whereby you
provide information in the fonm of an assessment role to the Tax Collector and the
Tax Collector includes that information on the bill, so it has to be merged into his
process so the bill can go out together. The statute provides that if the Tax
Collector is unable to merge your non ad-valorem assessment with his ad-valorem
assessments, then they can send a special notice out where the City would have to pay
the cost of that. The City has to pay the cost of the process involved in handling
the non ad-valorem anyway, up to a maximum of 2% of the monies that are actually City
.
.
.
Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 5
assessed and collected. So there is a provision of recovery of some of your
administrative costs, or there is a prOV1Slon for charging you for those
administrative costs which you should then anticipate somehow recovering.
Bricklemeyer stated that he has outlined the procedures for both the adoption of the
assessment and the assessment role, and he stated that he didn't know if it is
necessary that we go into that unless there is some specific questions about that,
that's a pretty broad brush picture of the kinds of things that can be done, as I
indicated 20 or so different statutes that can be brought to bear on the issue with
respect to how or if you want to establish a certain kind of district then it becomes
essential to detennine what is the purpose, and is that purpose legitimate under the
structure that you want to choose, a chapter 189 district, a chapter 190 district, if
you just want to do a non ad-valorem assessment, you have to evaluate each of the
kinds of things that you want to collect money for and spend money for and then
figure out whether it fits into the picture that you want to create.
Kruppenbacher stated that with the mass of laws that exists, one cavitate he would
add, he said that in each public entity that he represented before the public entity
has embarked upon any form of special taxing or community taxing district, I have
always recommended that once that public entity defined what it wanted to do, it's
purpose and it's goal, for us to submit that to the Attorney General and have him
sign off on that, the reason being that gives great weight to the court, because if a
mistake is made you can be out of pocket all the dollars and have no way of
collecting them and if you can read through all the Attorney General opinions around
the State on assessments and taxing, what they do is spend all their time explaining
the confusion generated by their previous opinion; I think you come back on the
fundamental issue is what are the problems, what is the best way to address them to
the public and what do you want to do, and as you give us that guidance we can frame
you in the direction you want to go.
Kulbes had a question on Exhibit B, section 5 - elections, it says members of its
governing body are appointed by the governing body of the municipality; and then
talks about the elections controlled by the Supervisor of Elections. He asked if
they are talking about the elections to establish the district or are they talking
about elections to get people to be on that districting board.
Bricklemeyer stated that it is talking about the independent taxing districts, and
you don't appoint them, those people are elected by the electors in the district.
Chapter 190 district, for example, when the district is formed either by rule or by
ordinance of the local government, the party that is fonning the district selects the
first Board of Supervisors and there is a procedure for that controlling party to
gradually phase out and then the electors in the district end up electing the parties
who sit on the board. The dependent district you would control.
Kulbes still questioned the statement of having the elections supervised by the
Supervisor of Elections. Bricklemeyer stated that he was not sure either about that
statement, and said he would look it up and let him know.
Commissioner Kaehler asked if it would be a better idea if the homeowners what it is
they are willing to be taxed for and then try to work our way around whether we need
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 6
an independent, dependent or whatever it is, because we are working in the dark here,
she stated that she would rather know what they want and then figure out a way to do
it or find out that it can't be done, it seems to make more sense.
Kaehler also asked Bricklemeyer that when the issue of the taxing district came up it
was with the issue of a COD in mind, and was told at that time that you couldn't form
a COD if it was for sanething that was "nice" like the plants and fountains and that
sort of thing. There are different types of taxing districts for specific things, do
any of those districts address landscaping and that sort of thing.
Bricklemeyer stated most community development districts (COD), that are formed to
put roads in, at least one of the things they want to do, they finance the
construction of the roads and maintain them after the fact. The maintenance function
will include properties that are the rights-of-way of the road and if there is
landscaping in the r-o-w then the people who are being taxed are willing to pay the
price - yes then those are the kinds of things that can be included and they are
typically included in COD's.
.
Kaehler said that we are not talking about the same thing, we are talking about that
these are public rights-of-way, in other words this isn't the people of Tuscawilla
coming in and putting in a major road and they are landscaping their own medians, we
are talking about we have a public road and in the public r-o-w there are landscape
medians, in front of the entrances there are landscaped areas with fountains and that
sort of thing, and they want to keep them to the standard that the developer does
right now, something that as a City we might not be able to handle and that was one
of the things that was asked at at least one homeowners meeting that I attended. So
what I'm saying is, is there a district that will handle that.
Kruppenbacher asked who owns that land. Kaehler stated that the public r-o-w the
City owns. Bricklemeyer stated that you certinally would not create a CDD to do
that. Kulbes stated that the public r-o-w does not include the area where the
fountains are, that is outside the r-o-w, and the developer owns it now. Kaehler
asked wasn't there an agreement to take over the medians.
City Manager Rozansky stated that we have always owned the right-of-ways but the
developer has always cut them and maintained them. He stated that an agreement was
made and that he let the developer keep some equipment that the water company had to
maintain the areas.
Rozansky said that he stated at a haneowners meeting one time, that the City's
problem is that we couldn't maintain them at the same level that the residents are
use to having them maintained, so hence that is how the special taxing district came
about. Now, where the fountains are, that is not r-o-w and the developers maintain
that. Kaehler stated that is part of the question, we have areas that are still held
by the developer, we have areas that are City r-o-w, and we have the parks that we
wanted to talk about, and like I said, I would like to know what the homeowners want
and what they would like to be included and then we can attack it in that direction.
.
Kulbes stated that we have to get from the homeowners, 1) do they intend that this
taxing district maintain the cammon areas which includes the fountain, do they want
....-.... ....-....
--
.
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 7
to include the r-o-w to their standards, or turn them over to the City's standards
and let us maintain it the best we can.
Kruppenbacher stated that Orlando or Winter Park, lots particularly Orlando, many
people don't realize that 27 million dollars is given to that City a year from cue,
it is easy to have the City look pretty with the tax base and that money coming in.
Same cities simply say we are going to have a city wide beatification plan and build
that into our general fund, and tax all our employees as part of our regular taxes
and we will deal with beatification everywhere. Other Cities say it's not our role
to deal with beatification per say, and it will be by a neighborhood, by neighborhood
process, so I think that is your first question, is it a general fund issue to you,
if not a general fund issue to you then you ought to focus on the properties that are
owned by the public entities and then the issue of the properties owned by the
private entities. There is a whole set of different issues when it is a private
entity that owns it.
John Ferring, Oak Forest Homeowners Association, stated that he is confused at this
point. I think before I can understand this, I would like to have same direction as
to what determines how this whole thing operates. There has been PUD established,
the PUD covers a lot of different areas, I have no problem with setting up a
municipal taxing district in a PUD, in fact it is a blessing for all the homeowners
associations that does not have a mandatory homeowners associations and cannot get
the funds required to maintain their properties. However, in my research going back
a few years ago, every time I discussed this with the County and with the City
Manager, I was told at the time it would require a bi-partisan effort on both the
City and County and certain geographical guidelines have to be established as to who
would be in these guidelines there is utter confusion. Like can you take a PUD and
have 24 different pieces and each one have their own little "empire" and is the City
responsible for making all the elections in all the districts, or do you treat this
problem of the PUD as a whole. At this point the people in Oak Forest are not aware
how to approach this. There is no legal clarity on how to approach this thing.
Kruppenbacher said that there are multiple complex different avenues, you mention and
MSTU, the City can not have an MSTU, these are technical terms, there are other
districts. The homeowners can petition the State to have their own independent
district, this body can create any number of different approaches to dealing with the
issue, I think you have to go back to what Commissioner Kaehler suggested and that is
what are the issues you are looking to correct or deal with, and then say what
vehicle best addresses the issues. I agree, my recommendation would be that it would
not be wise to came up with separate units in Tuscawilla since you have a PUD. I am
not sure we ever wash listed what are the matters we have to address and until we do
that I don't think you can figure out which is the best way to solve the problem.
Ferring mentioned that he believes that Oak Forest is part of the Tuscawilla PUD, and
there is a 5 acre parcel on the north west section of Winter Springs Boulevard that
was originally dedicated in the land developing planning map as a 5 acre park. As
the homeowner association we approached the president of Bel-Aire Development, Roy
Dye, who was also chairman and sat on the Board of Winter Springs Development. Dye
stated to me from communication that there was no intention of developing that 5 acre
park because all the parks built in Tuscawilla was for the use of all the residents
...-.....""-'"
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 8
~~
in the Tuscawilla PUD and therefore their commitment was met. Also as the west side
of Winter Springs Boulevard, the median has also been dedicated to the City of Winter
Springs, they have never taken care of it, the homeowners association has been doing
this for the City of Winter Springs. These questions are in the mind of the
residents in Oak Forest, again to reiterate, we have no problem of getting some type
of formulation established that can benefit all the residents of the PUD.
Kruppenbacher said to refocus the issue, we have a target that we are shooting at and
I'm not sure anybody knows what the target. I mean what is it that we are looking to
fix, is it Winter Springs Boulevard, is it the parks, is it drainage and retention,
is it streets and I bring you back to the fundamental issue what are the problems
that are foreseeable for the future that we would attempt to deal with through one of
these particular units. Then once you wash list that we can figure out which works
the best, maybe same of those we can handle without even creating a district.
Joe Genova, Adidas Road, gave the background on how the residents came up with the
idea of having a special taxing district for Tuscawilla.
Kulbes mentioned the different types of taxing districts.
.
Kruppenbacher stated that the Commission needs to identify what and where are the
problems, then they can focus on the issues. Kulbes stated that what he has heard
the issues to be are the maintenance of the cannon areas. Discussion on the areas
designated and meant by common areas.
Moti Khemloni, President Tuscawilla Homeowners Association, stated that he thought it
was made very clear at a meeting last year when Tom Freeman came down and explained
that the City had taken the position that we first must identify the scope and then
come up with a plan for taking care of the area within that scope. At that meeting
which he stated he has a record of, in which Freeman said it doesn't matter what the
scope is, you got to have an ordinance that covers any scope within the City. And
there are ordinances in various Counties of the State of Florida that allow the same
privledges. We are not asking for anything brand new we are just asking for our
Attorney to investigate what is available.
Kruppenbacher stated that we have done that, and you keep mixing "apples to oranges"
the County created per a special statute only available to Counties, MSTU's, I go
back to the same issue, lets wash list 1) what are all the areas and where are they,
are we all talking about the same property, same are talking about fountains, some
about the golf and tennis villas, this is very relevant because you can not pass any
documents until you know what property you are going to be governing.
Khemloni stated that his concern is that if that is the case then the City is going
to have to came up with an ordinance for every little development, for every specific
community within the City of Winter Springs, and I think that is not very...
.
Kruppenbacher said that is not what he said, what he said was that you will have to
came up with a list of every piece of property and the problem we are addressing, I
didn't say we are going to create a separate ordinance for everyone of those, but I
did say that this body legally is going to have to know what it is creating and what
......-.... ....-...
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 9
--
it is fixing. You just can't have an ordinance that says here is a taxing district,
you five people can go tax for whatever you want.
Khemloni said what he is saying is that if you are going to restrict a group called
Tuscawilla Homeowners Association that considers a community to specify exactly what
they want to take care of then, there might be another area in the City of Winter
Springs and you are going to ask them the same question, identify what you want and
then we'll tell you how to solve your problems and I'm saying what you are doing then
is you are going to start in creating all kinds of little ordinances that take care
of little districts. I've seen in various other communities and Counties that have
one ordinance that handles the issues that the Tuscawilla Homeowners Assoc. have. We
can go for a second opinion Mr. Mayor.
Kruppenbacher stated what you are talking about is a County MSTU.
.
Kaehler stated that Moti, you have to understand Tuscawilla is unique, you are a PUD,
you have special needs, the area that I live in has no recreation areas, we have no
medians to take care of, we have no fountains, we have no plants. You are a unique
area and therefore, and we've asked I don't know how many times, all we want to know
is what do you want, that's all that we want to know, and for you to just say we want
a blanket, we can't give you that, the Attorneys have given us very specifically what
we can do. We are trying to find out what it is that you want, so we can plug into
each of those areas what it is that you want, so that's all that we want to know.
Khemloni said when I brought my Attorney over here last year and I wish you had made
that statement because he answered your question, he said you have to have an
ordinance... Kaehler said but our Attorneys are telling you that's not true.
Kruppenbacher said Moti what you gave me from your Attorney through Mr. Partyka, was
the Seminole County MSTU ordinance which is not available to a City, crossed out and
etched out and written to say let the City do it, I ask you give me a City in the
State of Florida, since you say there's other public entities that has a City wide
blanket ordinance and I'll be glad to take that ordinance and make it applicable, but
give it to me. Give me this document from some City somewhere in the State because
what Seminole County passed was per Statute 125 which is only applicable to Counties
not to Cities, we can't use 125 and all that's been done here is 125 was crossed out
to say 163; 163 doesn't enable the City to pass this document.
Khanloni asked if you are saying that there are no Statutes in the State of Florida.
Kruppenbacher said no, we just covered a multiplicity of Statutes all we are saying
is simply say we want to address the parks and maintaining, we want to address
rights-of-way, the different properties, Staff needs to wash list the different
properties and then we can give the Commission the one or two mechanisms and what
properties would be assessed and how you would do it to solve it, but we just can't
create some broad ordinance that says go out and assess.
.
Khemloni stated that he wished that that statement was made to their Attorney last
year ...Kaehler and Kruppenbacher both stated that it was.
Kruppenbacher stated that he has said that since day one about an MSTU, I said it
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 10
from day two about the fact that there were limited if any ways to create these
taxing units, I talked about the general fund, I wrote off to the Attorney General on
street lighting, don't sit here and say they weren't told that, in fact I set up the
lunch with you and you didn't show up Paul showed up. Don't sit here and imply that
the City has not been responsive, they have been.
Khemloni said, Frank you told us in 1988 that we can't even have a taxing district,
now you are telling us....Kruppenbacher stated no, that is not what you asked, you
wanted a taxing district to plant flowers in 1988 and I said you can't have a taxing
district just to plant flowers. Khemloni we didn't say for to plant flowers, that
whole meeting had nothing to do with flowers, and I have minutes and recording of
that we did not concentrate on flowers... Kruppenbacher asked, Moti what is the
problem with giving us the wash list of what it is you want fixed and what properties
we are talking about.
--
Khemloni said what we are looking for as we have said in that document common areas
to include the entrances of Tuscawilla that is number 1, now what I suggest let's
start with at least those areas that the developer is taking care right now, because
when the developer leaves we want to be assured that those common areas will be
protected in the same manner as we enjoyed for the past many years.
~-
Kruppenbacher asked what are the common areas. Khemloni stated to ask the developer
what he is doing and I think that information is available. Kaehler stated at the
time of the meeting in 1988, the developer was maintaining the parks and now the City
has taken over jurisdiction of the parks and we had talked in the past whether or not
the homeowners also want the responsibility for that. Khemloni stated that he would
say right now let's take care of those issues that the developer is taking care of,
the developer is taking care of the common entrances, lets look at that, let's not
muddy up the water and have every inch of territory measured and identified, we are
looking for taking care of major issues here. Kaehler stated it is what you asked
for and parks are major issues, and you brought it up at the meeting that we were
talking about. Khemloni stated that the park is being taken care of...Kaehler stated
that she understands that but what you said was it was the same thing that you wanted
back in 1988, and you said at that time you wanted the parks, I'm just trying to make
sure that you get everything that you want, rather than going through it three or
four times.
.
Khemloni stated that we would like also eventually take care of the park, having it
be public right now we are undergoing a lot of problems because a lot of people are
complaining, a lot of the residents are complaining, there was an article in the
paper in our newsletter last time that there are people coming in from outside, there
is a lot of nuisance although the City has done an excellent job, in taking care of
that park, there are still because it's open, there are problems where people are
coming in and taking the park as if the homeowners in Tuscawilla don't have any
right, they come in early in the morning and continue playing all day long and the
homeowners in Tuscawilla have difficulty... Kruppenbacher ask how is the taxing
district going to solve that it is a public park. Khemloni stated that is why he
doesn't want to mention the park right now.
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 11
Kruppenbacher said, but Moti you can see the problem some people think the park and
some people don't and that's why we can't write this thing until somebody says this
is the problem and these are the properties.
Khemloni stated that he was not here as some people, I'm here on behalf of the
Tuscawilla Homeowners Assoc. Kruppenbacher said, then on their behalf what are the
specific. Khemloni stated that he just made it specific, we want to take care of
those areas that the developer is taking care of right now as the common areas, it is
very simple there is no magic to those words, it is very simple, the developer is
right here he knows what he is taking care of let's have him identify the areas that
he is taking care of and then establish where we go.
..
Glenn Childs, Wild Cat Court, said the most important question that needs to be
answered by the developer is when are they going to quit paying the bills, and why
should he as an individual tax payer relieve him of his duties. Why should we as
homeowners relieve him of the obligation of maintaining for what he is providing now.
I don't feel the developer will be out of the area in the near future, let then do
the work. We need commitments from the City, what do they maintain what are they
going to do, we need commitments from the developer what their going to do and for
how long, it is roughly $10,000 per year just to pump water out of two fountains in
the front, should we pick up that tab right away? I don't think so, not me as an
individual homeowner.
Kaehler stated that this wasn't our idea, this was your homeowners associations idea,
and that is why we are here at the request of your homeowners association, and what
we are trying to establish is at the point of time when the developer is not
responsible what is it that you are going to do, and that is what we are trying to
establish right now so this way we won't be in a situation where it takes us a year
to find out what it is that you people want and to set up everything, we will be
ready to go when they are ready to go.
Kruppenbacher stated that when the Mayor called this workshop is was for the purpose
for us to layout all the different legal mechanisms, no one had the benefit of
knowing that there was the multiplicity of confusing facts, but Mayor I would like to
suggest I met with Partyka on this particular topic and when he spoke with me it was
very clear to me what objective they wanted to achieve and what the problem was.
.
Paul Partyka, Oswego Court, stated that what Moti is talking about is a very real
situation and forget the homeowners for a second just people, what we ultimately want
here in Tuscawilla is to make it a pretty community. I really don't care who is
taking care of it right now, we are taking the assumption that some point in time
whether it is the City, the developer, or whatever, somebody may go away and we have
to do a little extra, we are ta1king about value added money to get those little
extras that we want. The whole principal lies here in the fact that it is not just
in Tuscawi1la it could be anywhere in Winter Springs, if peop1e in other areas of the
City want to have something special they ought to have that right to do that. What
we are looking for is a very simp1e procedure. Maybe the simple procedure is to
start off with specifically what pieces of property we are talking about as Frank
said, that is a11 we want, we want this place to be pretty at some point in time when
the developer leaves or the City does not want to take care of it as well as maybe we
can; Ol~ we want to do something even special, that is fine, I think that is the right
.
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 12
of the people in that particular area. The goal is to make it pretty. So if out of
this whole little workshop all you need to know very specifically in list of things
this property, this property, etc., we can do that if that's all it takes.
Kruppenbacher said he thinks there is two issues. Which parcels of property and then
which people are taxed or an assessed to take care of it, because I think this
Commission which the homeowners are asking to use their power to create, have to
answer the very real question raised "once they create the mechanism, if I am the
developer and I don't have any legal thing binding me, I walk away from whatever I'm
doing" so the third issue being to those homeowners who say why are you taking the
"monkey" off the developers back who have an incentive in the marketing of their
property to maintain it, and that is a very real issue.
but his position is, to assume from a marketing stand
like to take care of that property for the next 2 1/2
goes away, what mechanism goes into place to take care
here is when the developer leaves we would be able to
is at least equal or better than what it is now.
Partyka said that he agrees,
point, the developer would
years, at 2 years 7 months he
of that. The ultimate goal
take care of it in a way that
John Horan, Wood Duck Drive, said that he is speaking for himself and not the
homeowners association, but what he believes they are taking about; first he thinks
they are talking about some areas that have already been turned over to the City for
example the parks, definitely about entrances, it has a direct value effect on my
property, he stated that he doesn't think the entrances are a common area, we are
also talking about the medians, greenbelt areas, drainage and retention areas.
Kruppenbacher stated that the City is in the process of finalizing a
drainage/retention ordinance that ought to solve the problems of maintenance of
drainage and retention areas. The parks are public parks open to the public so when
you get into who you are going to assess you will have a real problem if you try to
identify a particular group of people to assess for a public park. By narrowing it
down you are talking about greenbelts, medians and entrances and you can start
talking about what particular parcels of property are assessed to maintain that or
who gets assessed for the entrances, the medians and the greenbelts. The question
becomes if that is what we are talking about who would pay for the entrances etc.
Kulbes said since we have a good nLmber of independent homeowners associations in
Tuscawilla PUD, it looks to me like those people have to get together with the bigger
one and form a committee of sorts, to determine what each of those people want to
cover on those four or five items that we discussed, and they come back to us and say
this is what we are going to cover, other than that there is nothing else we can do
at this time. We have to wait for them to come back and say we need some direction
from the Commission.
Khemloni said before the homeowners can take action, they even need to know what the
total ramifications are, what we are looking for is just a particular ordinance that
allows us to then go and advertise the pros and cons of that ordinance and then we
can layout the scope of the community we'd like to cover because there will be
certain areas that don't want to participate, such as the area in the PUD that is in
Seminole County - the Dyson entrance. There are a lot of people out there that does
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 13
not want the City of Winter Springs to touch their check books, so my concern is all
we are looking for is please at least have same network in place so that when the
developer leaves we can start taking care of the major aspects of the Tuscawilla
development, and I'm not talking about the Tuscawilla PUD, I'm talking about the
Tuscawilla development right now, so that those people who would like to contribute
to take care of those areas, and maybe the words common ground is not the appropriate
term, we would like to have that addressed by 55% of the homeowners to my best
estimate.
Horan also mentioned the median down Winter Springs Boulevard and maintenance of
walls.
Russ Robins, Beautification Board of Oak Forest, spoke about the fact that the
homeowners association has taken care of the entrances of their development and the
median down their end of Winter Springs Boulevard which is owned by the City. We
would like to have our maintenance to what we are accustomed to when this taxing is
in effect. He also spoke about the potential problems when Tuscawilla Road is
widened for the homeowners along the road and would like to see some sort of
provision for a berm or landscape type of obstacle to help against the noise etc.
He stated that he would like the ordinance flexible to make changes when needed.
...
--
Ethel Glasell, Cas a Park, asked who will be assessed as her development has a
mandatory homeowners association.
Kruppenbacher if we are dealing with entrances, and medians, you may want us to bring
back to you at the second meeting in May the different procedures and recommended who
could be assessed and not assessed and the two or three models and that night have
you say which way to go.
Kaehler asked to
whether they want
cost them out of
district and have
have cost factors because it will make a difference to these people
to support whatever decision made, depending on how much it will
pocket. Kruppenbacher stated that the Commission could create a
it come up for vote.
Marvin Kovel, Spalding Road, said that we should find out what the developer is
paying for now and get a list from the developer in order to make a decision of what
should be include and what shouldn't be included.
Kulbes stated that we now all have a good idea
not solve it now, more homework needs to
Commission, so at this time I would like to get
coming up.
how complex this problffil is, we can
be done before it comes back to the
into the lighting district that is
.
Kruppenbacher asked for some direction so everybody present will know a time frame
and what we are doing, we are ready to go if somebody gives us this information to
give you model A, B etc., and have at your second meeting in May make a decision.
He said what is the direction from the Commission at this point, do you want models
brought back to you dealing with entrances and medians, do you want your Staff to sit
with the developer and wash list for us what you are currently taking care of what
the budget is that they expend for the upkeep and then have us look at bringing those
parcels back to you or explaining why those parcels aren't in the deal. I think we
have to have that in fairness to the homeowners.
.
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 14
Kaehler said to short circuit it all together we are also talking about a lighting
district, bring us back a model for a lighting district , we know what they want,
they already brought it to us, we weren't able to do it within the City's budget now
they are asking for a special tax district, what does it take to accomplish that for
the individual developments that have a need for it.
Kruppenbacher said that the Staff needs to get with the developer and give us a wash
list of the properties and where they are located so we can build them into the model
and also the budgets. If we can have that information for next meeting, then at the
second meeting in May, we will bring you back ready to do model A, Band C, so you
can get on with the process. I will speak on the lighting issue because we do have
an opinion from the Attorney General, on the ability to maintain.
Discussion on the meeting to bring this back, it was determined that it would be the
first meeting in June, as the 25th of May is a holiday and there will be no meeting.
Kruppenbacher stated just to summarize again, we will bring back to you based upon
what we heard today as entrances and medians, the models for you to implement the
steps to create and put in place one of the applicable districts that you choose to
deal with this issue at the time the developer leaves.
-- ...-...
Kulbes stated now we will talk on the lighting issue.
--
Kruppenbacher said the issue is street lighting, what do you want to do with street
lighting. Kulbes stated that the homeowners in that district asked us to look into
it and give them some guidance on how they can get it done, and I think that is what
they are looking for to you Frank to tell them how they can or if they can get it
done.
Kruppenbacher stated that it is his understanding that that neighborhood is private
streets, the Attorney General in the opinion to me of Jan. 17, 1992, said that a
municipality may not lawfully expend public funds to maintain privately owned streets
or roads located within the municipality. The question was may a municipality expend
municipal funds to pay the electric bill for street lighting, the statement from the
Attorney General if you are dealing with a private street, a public entity cannot go
in and impose it's taxing power to deal with the private street.
Kruppenbacher read a letter written by Mr. Lein to the Attorney General regarding the
response the City Attorney received from that office.
.
Bricklemeyer stated that there is another issue and the way the Attorney General
responded was with regard to spending municipal funds, Chapter 197 that was
referenced, is a way to assess not on the basis of value but on some other basis a
specific set of people to pay for specific services. So that non ad-valorem
assessment procedure is potentially applicable to a street lighting district even
though it's private streets and private subdivision. But there are Attorney General
opinions allover on what qualifies and what does not, if that is something you want
to pursue then my recommendation would be that we ask the Attorney General whether
that is applicable.
.
.....-.... ..-....
-
.
. ~
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page ,15
Kaehler asked what is the advantage to those homeowners, either they are assessed
through their homeowners association or assessed on their ad-valorem.
Kruppenbacher stated that his understanding from hearing Lein was somehow they got a
better rate, or I thought he heard him say, was that there was some benefit to this
process as opposed to the homeowners, I may be wrong, but that is what I heard. My
answer to Lein is if you want to do this, even the letter that we already have, given
the maze of conflicting opinions, that they issue, is to go back and say this is the
property they want to use 197, your previous opinion is "X" may we use 197 for street
lighting. without misleading anyone I think that if the answer is yes, you've lead
the homeowners to believe we will use the process.
Bricklemeyer stated that that doesn't solve the basic issue that was raised in Lein's
letter of paying for it twice, he still is going to pay his taxes to the City and now
he is going to pay on top of that a special assessment for lighting in that
subdivision.
George Kennedy, Winged Foot Circle East, President of the Homeowners Association for
Country Club Village, there are two issues, we are paying through our taxes through
the City for City services i.e. lights, we are also paying directly to the utility
for utility bill for the lights, we are being hit twice and we are finding out this
is a fact of life because we are a private organization and we pay that extra just to
have our organization private, so that issue is really washed up. The issue here is
that of the number of homes that we will have in our organization, right now there is
178, what we want to do is to have this lighting bill spread evenly over our own
organization through an ad-valorem tax such that the developer and homeowners will
pay their equal share and that will drop our rate from what we are paying now $40.00
a piece down to 28 a piece. Under that one statute, 197, we can create a special
taxing district within ourself where a utility bill will come into the City and will
be put on as a one line item onto our own taxes such as the developer pays for his
section now.
Rozansky asked how many lots are not developed. Kennedy stated when all 1S developed
there will be approx 268.
Kruppenbacher stated the only way to do it 1n his op1n10n is go back and ask the
Attorney General with the specifics we have at hand, but I think that in fairness to
the homeowners, if we are asking that answer and it comes back yes, I think we are
leading everyone to believe that we will then do it, other wise why are we asking for
the opinion.
Kaehler stated that if it saves them money and it doesn't cost the other residents
money, I don't have a problem with doing that. Basically what they are trying to do
is kind of piggy back on our bulk rate, so to speak, for our lighting, that is
basically what they are trying to do, I don't have a problem with that.
The Commission directed the City Attorney to write the letter to the Attorney General
to see if 197 can apply.
Kruppenbacher said that one caveat is that he doesn't have all the homeowners
association documents, he doesn't know whether any particular documents or agreements
.
....-.. ...-...
~~
.
....-
City Commission Workshop
May 4, 1992
Page 16
with developers would preclude any of this, I don't know whether or not same
developer with vacant land hasn't protected himself by saying "nobody can do anything
to our property until we leave.
Ralph Bemus, Antelope Trail, representing a small group of homeowners who live around
a retention pond area.
Rozansky stated that about 8 or 9 years ago they had problems with that pond, and I
think that is when they had the Lake Doctors or someone go in and they fixed the
drainage on one end and then the association was formed to take care of it, and we
really haven't heard much since then about the pond. However we should take care of
the structure because we have an easement where the weir is and then there is another
one, but when the new ordinance comes into effect it will be on the agenda soon for
their initial consideration.
Kruppenbacher stated that the City Manager is aware of that
dealt with before, basically we have a whole separate process we
care of those issues, because it is tied to an overall retention
whole City.
issue because it was
put in place to take
pond thing for the
Kulbes stated that he received in the mail from the National Organization on Flag
Day, based in Washington D.C., and they requested that the City Hall Flag Day on the
17th of June with same kind of a ceremony, if the Commission wishes I will take it
upon myself to create a committee to work on that and have a little ceremony saluting
the flag and singing the National Anthem on that particular day. The Commission was
in agreement to this.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
Margo Hopkins
Deputy City Clerk