The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998 01 12 Regular Item G COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM G Regular X Consent Informational January 12. 1998 Meeting MGR fiv/ DEPT Authorization REQUEST: The City Manager recommending the City Commission to authorize any actions it deems necessary resulting from the Tuscawilla Beautification and Lighting Assessment District workshop, including the implementation schedule recommended by Government Systems Group, and the mail ballot rules. PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to provide the Commission the opportunity to take any formal action it deems necessary resulting from today's workshop and to adopt a resolution of intent to utilize the uniform method of collecting non-ad valorem assessments required by state law, assessment district implementation schedule and mail ballot voting rules. CONSIDERATIONS: On January, 12, 1998, the City Commission will hold a workshop on the implementation of the Tuscawilla Beautification and Lighting District at 4:30 P.M. It is anticipated that this workshop may result in formal actions that the Commission may need to take at its regular meeting at 6:30 P.M. Government Systems Group, the City's Assessment District Consultant's have proposed a revised implementation schedule for review and adoption by the City. The schedule includes a mail out ballot similar to that utilized in the Oak Forest Wall Assessment District. The City adopted a set of rules for the Oak Forest ballot. These rules should be adequate for the Tuscawilla ballot. FUNDING: No funding is required for these actions. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) The City Commission take any formal actions it deems appropriate resulting from the Tuscawilla Beautification and Lighting District workshop. 2) The Commission approve the implementation schedule as revised by Government Services Group, the City's Assessment Consultant's. 3) The Commission adopt the voting rules recommended and adopted by the City in the Oak Forest Wall Assessment District mail ballot in Commission agenda item liE" of June 9, 1997. IMPLEMENTATION: As per the approved schedule. ATTACHMENTS: a) G.S.G. Recommended implementation schedule. b) City Mail ballot rules. Commission agenda item liE" of June 9, 1997. COMMISSION ACTION: 2 GOVERNMENT SERVICES GROUp, INC. Providing Solutions & Systems to Local Government ~ ",.", ..-?""7'1i"'""~11 ..~. 'I ' I ,: ~. .", f' . ~ .-,..;, ..', ',' !'~' ':: '.' '. "'I':r.Jj::,.~~l?,.:_.;.. \:f . j'.i., ~ _ I. (, --", ) December 12, 1997 DEe 1 7 1991 Mr. Ronald W. McLemore City Manager City of Winter Springs 1126 East S.R. 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708 CITY 0(= WlNTER SPRINGS City Manager Re: Revised Crtitical Events Schedule Dear Mr. McLemore: Pursuant to your discussions with Mark Lawson and Robert Sheets on Wednesday, I have revised the critical events schedule. The critical events schedule anticipates that both the City and County will publish notices of intent to use the tax bill collection method commencing the week of January 19, 1998. If you have any questions regarding this revised schedule, please call Mark Lawson or me. Sincerely, (A;/J; ~/~K Camille Gianatasio Vice President SUITE 860. BARNETT BANK BUILDING. 315 S. CALHOUN STREET. TALLAHASSEE. FLORIDA 32301 (850) 681-3717. FAX (850) 224-7206 TUSCAWILLA IMPROVEMENT AND BEAUTIFICATION CRITICAL EVENTS SCHEDULE Event Phase I Notice to Proceed by the City Date December 12, 1997 City seeks consent from Property Appraiser and Tax Collector to adopt Resolution of Intent between Jan. 1 and March 1998 by January 5, 1998 Input and concurrence of Tuscawilla Homeowners Association January 5-12,1998 Initiate County concurrence to participate January 12-16, 1998 Publish Notice of Intent to Adopt Resolution to Use Uniform Method once each week during the following period: January 19-23 January 26-30 February 2-6 February 9-13 Adopt Notice of Intent Week of February 16-20, 1998 Draft Governance Alternative and Assessment Report February 25, 1998 City commission chooses governance alternative March 16, 1998 Constituent mailing March 30, 1998 City Commission decision to proceed May 12, 1998 Draft improvement and beautification charter May 25, 1998 Proforma assessment rates June 1,1998 Final Assessment Report June 1, 1998 Delivery of final improvement and beautification charter June 15, 1998 Phase II Update assessment budget, rates and roll June 1998 Calculate annual assessment rates for FY 1998-99 July 1998 Draft Recurring Assessment Implementation Resolution July-August 1998 Interlocal Agreement with Tax Collector July 1998 Revised 12/12/97 First class notices June-July 1998, 1999, 2000 Published notice June-July 1998, 1999, 2000 Annual Assessment Resolution July-August 1998, 1999, 2000 Certified Assessment Roll by September 15, 1998, 1999,2000 Revised 12/12/97 , COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM E REGULAR X CONSENT INFORMATIONAL June 9. 1997 Meeting MC;R.~ Authorization ,REQUEST: City Manager ,requests the City Commission to esublish the voting requirements for the Oak Forest Wall mail ballot. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the Commission to determine who shall be authorized to vote, and what the Commission shall determine to be a decisive vote relative to the Oak Forest Special Assessment District. CONSIDERA nONS: The mail out ballot for determining the desire of residents of Oak Forest to create a Special Assessment District to construct and maintain a wall, and related landscaping for the subdivision are scheduled to be mailed out on July 14, 1997, and returned by July 24, 1997. Since there is no statutory direction relative to non binding mail out ballots the Commission needs to make several policy decisions regarding the ballot as follows: 1) Who shall be allowed to vote and; 2) Does the Commission desire multiple parcel owners to have one vote, or one vote per parcel owned. 3) Does the Commission desire to afford a decisive margins of victory. Who Shall Vote There are two options as follows: 1) Renters and property owners. 2) Property owners only. Page 1 Since assessments represent an obligation against property, not persons, it is recommended that only parcel owners be allowed to vote. This gives the added advantage of staff being ab Ie to match voter list with Parcel list, thus a verification of persons voting. Multiple Parcel Owners Within the subdivision there may be instances of property owners owning multiple parcels. This raises the question as to whether property owners get one vote, or one vote per parcel owned. Due to the fact that assessments are related to property benefited it is recommended that property owners get one vote per parcel owned. Decisive Margin There are two basic options: a) Do not set a decisive margin and retain full latitude to make a decision regardless of the number voting and % of favorable votes b) Establish a specific margin that will decide the Commissions's willingness to create the district. It is recommended that the Commission decide a specific margin to give the voting process more meaning and to give those working for and against a level playing field on which to persuade the voters. However, the Commission could require that a minimum number of persons be required to vote in order to have the decision decided by the ballot rather than at the full discretion of the Commission. For example, the Commission could establish that in order for the vote to be valid at least 50 % of the parcel owners must vote. Otherwise the Commission will retain full discretion to decide. If the Commission decides to establish a decisive margin two questions need to be answered as follows: 1) Will the Commission require a % of the persons voting. For example, the Commission could establish a simple majority of the persons voting to decide the issue. 2) Will the Commission require a % of the total possible Dumber of votes. For example, the Commission could require 50% + 1 of the total number of possible votes. Since there are approximately 950 parcel owners, 476 favorable votes would be required to decide the issue in favor of creating the district. It is recommended that the Commission establish and publicize that the vote will be decided by a simple majority of the persons voting. This puts the full responsibility on the public to vote. Furthermore, it is the most commonly accepted method of voting. FUNDING: It is estimated that the mail ballot will cost approximately $1,500 including mail out cost and production of a ballot and fact sheet. The general fund would advance the funds for the cost. Page 2 RECOMJ\tIENDA TION: It is recommended that the City commission establish the following guide lines for the mail out ballot: 1) Persons authorized to vote shall be limited to parcel owners. 2) That parcel owners be limited to one vote regardless of the number of parcels owned. 3) That the ballot shall be decided by a simple majority of the persons voting. 4) That the City Commission retain full discretion to decide any challenges to the vote. 5) That the City Commission delegates the counting of the vote to the City Manger, Chief of Police and the City Clerk. 6) That the City Clerk shall certify the results to the City Commission. SCHEDULE: The ballots shall be mailed out on July 14, 1997. The ballots shall be received no later than July 24, 1997. The ballots shall be counted on July 25, 1997. The results of the count shall be published by the City Clerk on July 28, 1997. ATTACHMENTS: Sample ballot COMMISSION ACTION: Page 3