HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 11 23 Regular Item A
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM A
Consent
Informational
Public
Hearing
Regular X
November 23. 1998
Meeting
MGR flvr'DEPT
Authorization
REQUEST: City Manager requesting the City Commission review CALNO's
request that Seminole County re-examine the current method of
distribution between the County and the Cities relative to Local
Option Gas Tax revenues.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this agenda item is for the City Commission to review
CALNO's request that Seminole County re-examine the current method
of distribution between the County and the Cities relative to Local Option
Gas Tax revenues; and should CALNO also investigate alternative
methods of distribution of the City's share of Local Option Gas Tax
revenues.
CONSIDERATION:
At the October 7, 1998 meeting of CAlNO the issue of Local Option
Gas Tax was discussed relative to the current method of distribution
between Seminole County and the Cities in Seminole County.
The current method of distribution is structured so that Seminole County
receives 63_6% annually of the Local Option Gas Tax revenues; and the
Cities share the remaining 36.4% annually based on the last five years
of transportation related expenditures.
CALNO is asking each City if they want CALNO to request that
Seminole County re-examine the current Local Option Gas Tax
distribution methodology between Seminole County and the Cities to
ascertain if the Cities could receive an increase share of the Local
Option Gas Tax revenues by either the current method of distribution or
an alternate method.
FUNDING: None
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Commission take action it deems
appropriate after reviewing CALNO's request to re-examine the current
method of distribution and alternate methods of distribution relative to
Local Option Gas Tax revenues with Seminole County.
ATTACHMENTS:
CALNO's letter of October 26, 1998.
June 30, 1998 memo to Finance Director
October 16, 1997 memo to City Manager
Local Option Gas Tax distribution spreadsheet.
City of Winter Springs transportation related expenditures spreadsheet.
Local Option Gas Tax interlocal agreement.
COMMISSION ACTION:
. LONGWOOD
. CASSELBERRY
. ALTAMONTE
SPRINGS
Council of Local Governments in Seminole County
. LAKE MARY
SEMINOLE COUNlY
SCHOOL BOARD
October 26, 1998
Mr. Ronald W. McLemore, City Manager
The City of Winter Springs
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
Dear Mr. McLemore:
During the October 7, 1998 Council of Local Governments in Seminole County
(CALNO) meeting the members discussed the topic of the Local Option Gas Tax
(LOGT). In particular the enacting interlocal agreement and applicable statutes were
discussed. The members of CALNO felt that this review was appropriate based upon
CALNO's role in the interlocal agreement as a recommending body to the County
Commission.
By form of a unanimous motion, the members of CALNO decided to pose the following
question to each City member of CALNO:
"Should CALNO request that Seminole County re-examine the split between the
County and the Cities of the Local Option Gas Tax revenues? In addition should
CALNO also investigate alternative methods of distribution of the City's share of
the LOGT revenues?"
Please agenda this question as soon as practical before your Board. The response can be
returned to the undersigned.
Thank you very much, and please feel free to contact me, should you have any questions
or concerns.
Yours truly,
~:n1~
Chairperson
CG/alll
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Euui~ Rosc AI Clark
'1'''111 Ilag'lOd Jr.
Ilrady'I,cssanJ
Cinuy GClUlcll. Chail'JXl'Son Gary Urcnucr Ron Sargcnt
, Urant ~Ialay Larry Furlong
J"hn Gannon
CITYOFWINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
Ronald W. McLemore
City Manager
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708-2799
Telephone (407) 327-1800
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Harry Martin, Finance Director /1 ,.'
Ron McLemore, City Manager /~
June 30, 1998
Date:
Re:
Local Option Gas Tax
As you know, I have been concerned about the amount of local option gas tax
being returned to the City relative to the amount of transportation related
expenditures expended by the City. You are aware that I asked John Drago and
Bob Guthrie to look into this matter to ascertain if the City is claiming every
transportation related expenditure permitted under Florida Statutes and the
Interlocal Agreement with the County. Part of the analysis was to determine
what types of transportation related expenditures are being submitted to the
County by other cities in Seminole County.
The conclusion reached is Winter Springs is not claiming every type of
transportation related expenditure permitted by Florida Statute and. the local
option gas tax interlocal agreement. Also, other cities in Seminole County have
for years claimed every type of transportation related expenditures regardless of
the funding source; and the expenditures have not been contested by the
County. Therefore, the following transportation related expenditures are to be
claimed in the City's annual report to the County in addition to the expenditures
already claimed:
1. Any transportation related expenditures from any revenue fund
generated from assessments or impact fees. Examples are:
· Street Lighting Fund.
· Transportation Improvement Fund.
· Transportation Impact Fee Fund.
· Stormwater Management Fund.
· Tuskawilla Lighting and Beautification Assessment District.
P~ap. 1
'.
2. Any transportation related expenditures paid by developers or
reimbursed to the City for the construction or improvement to any
transportation-related infrastructure that will be maintained by the City.
Examples are:
· Traffic lights.
· Turn lanes.
· Medians.
· New roads.
3. Any other transportation related expenditures that the City may incur
between now and the time that the report is due to the County.
I would like to review the City's report you send to the County prior to its
transmittal. I also want to see an itemized breakdown of every transportation-
related expenditure claimed by the City on its annual report to the County.
If you have any information to suggest why the above should not be done please
advise me of that information immediately.
RWM/jp
P~aA 2
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
11>> ~.CC~ii\Ir~
ff1).l.'-....~JJ. W ~
DEe 1 6 1997
1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS. FLORIDA 32708-2799
Telephone (407) 327-1800
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
City Manager
MEMORANDUM
To:
Ronald W. McLemore, City Manager
From:
John J. Drago, Administrative Assistant
Date:
December 16, 1997
Re:
Local Option Gas Tax
You asked me to ascertain why the city's share of the local option gas tax has
decreased; while the city's transportation related expenditures have increased,
and could the city receive additional local option gas tax.
Enclosed are two spread sheets: one showing the percent of distribution and
one showing the transportation related expenditures.
The current interlocal agreement is structured so the county receives 63.6%
annually of the option gas tax, and the cities share the remaining 36.4% annually
based on a five year floating formula. The cities must deduct federal revenue
sharing funds, local gas option tax proceeds and bond proceeds from their
expenditures. Florida Statute 336.025(7) states that bond proceeds are
excluded as a transportation related expenditure. The interlocal agreement
defines what transportation related expenditures are used to calculate the city's
portion of the 36.4% allocation. In essences, cities are "boxed in" structurally to
prohibit sufficient gains in revenue sharing over the life of the agreement.
In order for any city to receive an increase portion of the gas tax revenue, it must
spend larger amounts of funds from new revenue sources on transportation
related expenditures. For example, the City of Altamonte Springs increased their
share of the local option gas tax by increasing their rate of transportation related
expenditures on the new 436 overpass. Cities share the local option gas tax
revenue based on a 5 year floating formula. Therefore, any city that can
increase their rate of transportation related expenditures for a few years, has the
advantage of increasing their share of the gas tax for at least four years. After
that period, the rate will return near its original level. Longwood and Oviedo
received increased portions of the local option gas tax by doing the exact same
thing as Altamonte Springs.
If two or more cities can increase their rate of transportation related expenditures
at the same time, the impact is telt the most on those cities that do not spend at
the same rate. The current interlocal agreement has created a "rob Peter to pay
Paul" syndrome.
The current interlocal agreement has a thirty year term with no termination
clause. The city attorney will have to advise you on how the interlocal
agreement can be terminated. If it can't be terminated, then the county must
agree to re-negotiate a new one. This would be a good issue for the
mayors/managers group to pursue. A unified front by all cities could obtain a
positive result.
OTHER ISSUES
The City should determine if it is possible to accept ownership and maintenance
of any county road system and rights-ot-way when a portion of an un-
incorporated area is annexed into the City of Winter Springs.
Over time, if cities assume ownership and maintenance of county roads and
rights-of-ways as part of any annexation, then the scales can tip in favor of cities
instead of the county as to who is entitled to a larger share of the total local
option gas tax revenue. A second benefit to ownership of county roads is that
cities can implement their own design standards to maintain or create their own
identity or image. The third benefit is increase revenues from traffic
enforcement.
The final issue the city must decide is do we allow the county to control any
revenue stream (i.e. 1 cent sales tax surcharge), or does the city receive their
share and spend it accordingly?
JJD/jp
cc: Harry Martin, Finance Director
enclosure
Page 2
0 N Ul; N 10 0 ,... 0
a> ~ 10 ""l" (") (") ~ CD
a> M M N N <r:t ex) N M
~ CD
~ ~ ,... ,... 0 ~ (") 0
IX) a> ""l" ~ a> 10 ""l" N CD
a> M M ~ N <r:t ,....: N M
~ CD
~ 8 ~ (") N ~ ""l" 0
,... 10 ""l" IX) N CD
a> <r:t M ~ M <r:t <0 N M
~ CD
IX) CD 10 0 N ,... N 0
~ ""l" ,... '<t: 0 IX) CD N CD
l() N ~ <r:t <r:t l() N M
..... CD
It) (") ,... N ~ 0 ,... 0
10 N ~ "! CD ""l" ""l" CD
a> l() N ..... <r:t <r:t l() N M
..... CD
ffi IX) IX) a> a> IX) N 0
~ ..... ~ ,... IX) a> I'-: CD
<r:t M ..... <r:t M l() N M
~ CD
0 ..... ~ (") IX) CD ~ 0
('t) 10 10 ~ ,... CD CD 0 (0
a> M M ~ <r:t M <0 M M
..... CD
~ a> (") 0 (") 10 a> ..... 0
IV N a> a> I'-: 10 N CD (") CD
G) a> ..... M ~ ~ M ,....: M M
>- ~ CD
S ~
IV N a> IX) ,... ""l" IX) N 0
'tJ ""l" ""l" ~ ~ CD ..... CD CD
C .....
U) G) a> 0 <r:t ~ <r:t N a; M M
ca ..... CD
<'C 0 IX)
C) ~ CD (") ..... a> N ..... 0
N ,... 10 CD a> 10 ,... CD
Z c g ~ <r:t ~ M ~ a; M M
0 ..... CD
0
i= ;: ..... ~ 10 ..... ~ (") N 0
::s
0. ,g a> I'-: ~ ,... ""l" CD CD
0 :s IX) ..... <r:t ..... M ~ a; M M
~ CD
..J t/)
<'C i5 ~ CD (") ~ ..... 10 IX) 0
'0 IX) N ~ IX) ~ a> ""l" CD
0 IX) ~ l() ~ M ~ ex) M M
0- ~ CD
..J i ~ ~ ~ ~ Ul; 8 ""l" a>
~ ,... ""l" ,... IX)
G) IX) ,....: <0 ..... l() ..... 0 N <r:t
a. ~ CD
~ ~ ~ ..... ""l" 8 ""l" a>
~ ""l" ~ ,... IX)
,....: <0 ..... l() ..... '0 N ~
.....
~ CD ~ ..... Ul; CD ""l" a>
10 IX) ""l" 0 ,... IX)
IX) ,....: <0 ..... l() ..... 0 N ~
.....
~ ~ ~ ~ Ul; 8 v a>
""l" ""l" ,... IX)
IX) ,....: <0 ..... l() ..... 0 N ~
.....
~ ~ ""l" ..... Ul; CD ""l" a>
('t) ~ ""l" 0 ,... IX)
IX) ,....: <0 ..... l() ..... 0 N ~
.....
-
~ ~
c
~~ ~ c:
::J
en ~ c: 0
~ ~~ u
Q) '8 Q)
-
c: .0 ~ "E en "6
0 Qi ~ 0 ...
E 'U .E Q) c
f/) Q) Q) - 'E
co f/) ..lI: c: '> c: c:
- co co 0 co ~ Q)
<: u ...J ...J 0 en en
~
as
'iii
as
l!l
:::.
B
o
...J
....
,
LO 0 ;1; LO
,... 0 en Q) Q) ..,
0 v ,... .., V CD
en a) ~ en" ..... N .n
c? N CD Q)" c? cD l8
.., .., ..... .... N
CD .., v 0
~ C;; Q) v Q) ~
,... C't ,... N
c? M cD LO en 0 r::
Q) ,... CD .n c? c:i
.., .., .... .... .., en
LO en .., ;J; en
,... Q) LO Q) 0
en N v .... en CD ,...
c? ~" ..," .... .... <<i
C;; CD <<i c? a) ~
.... .... N
en ..... LO <<i
d'i ~ ... v .., ..,
Q)" v. 0 LO 0
c? ..... .... CD LO en <<i
~ .., .n c? ,...- Q)
N ..... ... .., CD
.., .., ,... CD
.., 0; ~ ~ 0 .., 0;
en ~ LO
~ cD m en M
9 Q) ,... ..; 9 ~ ,...
N N ..... ... .., ,...
~ N S! II)
N ..... 18 ..... ..,
en ~ II) '"
<'Ii .n CD '" c:i
9 ,... CD CD .n 9 .n ,...
N N ... .... LO ,...
~ N 0 ~
0; en .., N ....
N V Q) ~ .....
9 M ~ a) '" u:i
,... LO ..; 0 .n CD
N .... .... , LO ,...
V CD 0 ,...
0 ,... N LO N LO LO
0 .., v .., ,... '"
en M ..; a) .., ,... M
en 9 ~ N v c:i 9 ~ ~
.... .....
w
" 0 r:: 0 en en
en ;J; ,... en ; v
::> v_ N r:: C't
Q) .n ;:( <<i
~ 9 c;; <'Ii 9 N
en 0 <b
en ..... .... .... ..... .....
c
z ... ,... LO .., N ~
(I) 0 Q) CD en Q) ;n
w ..... en 0 ...... C't
(!) Q) :8 <'Ii ~ .., ......-
0- M 9 en I Q)
~ Q) <<i q 0 0
>< " ..... .... ..... ..... CD
W W 0 .., en .., LO
C m ...... v en Q) ...... LO
.., ...... LO .., ...... LO LO
(I) :t Q) ,..: M M ..... ;1; ..;
w 9 ,... c;;
,... ...... .... <<i M .....
a:: 5 w .... ..... .... ..... LO
~ I- 0 N N 0 ......
0- l8 0 ...... .... ~ Sl
~ w w ,... CD ...... ,... ~
<'Ii <<i .n LO M a)
" en 9 v N ... Q) CD 0 en
~ .... .... ..... cD <'Ii ..... v
u.. z C) .., LO ..,
0 Z LO 0; ;1; en c;; c;;
0 l8 N .., .....
~ c Q) ;:( i 0; v .n :g
~ 9 <'Ii .... N
~ Z .... .... en cD N- .... V
<.1 " W N
" ~ Q) en Q) N l8 ~-
0 .., LO en LO en
c( Q) en Q) LO ~ .... ~
0- 9 cD M <<i ..; c:i
en w Q) ,... CD .... N- CD
Z >- l8 v
~ .., ,... Q) ,... en ,... ......
V N ... V ~ CD V
Q) 8' .., ~ ,... ,... M
9 c:i CD <'Ii .n ~ ;J;
I- .... v .... ,...
v Q)
N ,... CD ~ ~ ..,
...... N en
Q) i ..... ~
9 9 <'Ii ~ 9 ,..:
..... LO V
.., .., ~
en .....
.... ,... .., .., ; v
Q) ~ N LO a)
9 9 ,..: en_ 9 ~ ~
.... v .... V
LO 0 l;!l
0 ~ Q)
...... en Q) N
Q) .n .., ,... ,... a)
9 N 9 ;:( Q)" 9 ~ 0
..... .... V N
N N
en d'i ~
...... ,..: ,..:
9 0 I
0 9 9 9 q 0
N I N
Q) .., ......
,... ... Q)
N V ..,
9 <'Ii 9 9 ,... I 9 <'Ii
..... ... q ....
8
c: c: QI
0 (ll QI <.>
! c: Cl c:
~ (ll (ll
c: ~ c:
I 0 "= '= J!! QI
~ ... ~
::E C :j:l c: .~
.c:. Cl '(ij
!!! >- >- ~ in ::E
~ ~ Q)
I- Qj <.> Q) en III
<.> lE Cl :E j
0= (ll (ll QI 'C
~ 0 0 ~ (ll ~ QI
0.. It: It: ~ C I-
~
ai
~
c
o
:j:l
~
Q.
l!!
~
/.:(!i':
, ,: .,
", \'
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the COUNTY OF SEMINOLE~
a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose address is
Seminole County Services Building, 1101 East First St ree t.,
Sanford, Florida 32771, hereinafter referred to as COUNTY~ and
the following municipalities:
CITY OF ALTAMONTE SPRINGS, a Florida municipal corpora-
tion, whose address is 225 Newburyport Avenue, Altamonte Springs,
Florida 32701, hereinafter referred to as ALTAMONTE SPRINGS; and
CITY OF CASSELBERRY, a Florida municipal corpora7ion,
whose address is 95 Lake Triplet Drive, Casselberry, Flbrida
32707, hereinafter referred to as CASSELBERRY 1 and
CITY OF LAKE MARY, a Florida municipal corpora~ion,
whose address is Post Office Box 725, Lake Mary, Florida 32746,
, ,
hereinafter referred to as LAKE MARY 7 and
CITY OF LONGWOOD, a Florida municipal corpora~io~,
whose address is 175 W. Warren Avenue, Longwood, Florida 3~750,
hereinafter referred to as LONGWOOD1 and
CITY OF OVIEDO, a Florida municipal corporation, whose
address is Post Office Box 159, Oviedo, Florida 32765, hexein-
after referred to as OVIEDO: and
CITY OF SANFORD, a Florida municipal corporation, !whose
address is Post Office Box 1778, Sanford, Florida 32771, h~rein-
after referred to as SANFORD; and
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, a Florida municipal cor;pora-
tion, whose address is 400 N. Edgemon Avenue, Winter Springs,
Florida 32706, hereinafter referred to as WINTER SPRINGS.
WHEREAS, under the authority of Section 336~025,
Florida Statutes, and pursuant to Seminole County Ordinances Nos.
83-22, 85-33 and 85-34, the COUNTY levied a combined six cents
( $.06)' local option gas tax upon every gallon of motor fuet and
special fuel sold in Seminole County and provided for distribu-
tion of the proceeds from the tax between itself and municipali-
ties within Seminole County; and
From
7671
Dala
-1-
Co.
Phone II
PhOne #
Fax'
Fax#
T~'~ ~~~~ b?~ )~b
...,-1 'J:>.lHloI '::!'>lH"" -In I I T '"l
J";:I. aT J c:c. T _l"""f.lI ^......~,'
ZOd Nd OS:SO L6-S0-!1
cl2l'd ;1l:ilOl
. 1 ,~
860E-t2E-LOt NO~d
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 313, passed during the 1986
Legislative Session, provides that an interlocal agreement t~
determine the method for distribution of local option gas ta*
revenues may be entered into prior to August 1, 1986 to be
effective as to 1986-1987 local option gas tax proceeds or prior
to June 1 of any year thereafter; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY and Signatory municipalties iritend
to provide for the distribution of local option gas tax proceeds
according to this Agreement:
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the coven:ants
contained herein, the receipt and adequacy of which are he!reby
acknowledged by all parties hereto, the parties agree to provide
for the distribution of local option gas tax proceeds as follows:
SECTION 1. TERM. This Agreement shall become effec-
-
i
tive when approved by the Governing Bodies of the COUNT~ and
the requisite number of municipalities pursuant to Section
I
336.025, 3(a)(1), Florida Statutes (as amended 1986), and iupon
the dismissal by ALTAMONTE SPRINGS of its petition file~ on
August 27, 1985, with the Administration Commission.
This
Agreement shall remain in effect for the lives of the taxes
,
adopted pursuant to Seminole County Ordinance 83-22, as amended
by Seminole County Ordinance 84-33, and Ordinance 85-34.
,
SECTION 2. DISTIUBUTION OF PROCEEDS BEGINlnNG :FISCAL
YEAR 1987-1988.
($.06) local option gas tax levied and imposed by the CO~NTY
shall be allocated for calendar year JanuarYr 1988 and for ~ach
calendar year thereafter until the expiration of this Agreement
on the basis of the formula set forth at SUbsections (b) and: (c)
of this Section. Net proceeds Shall mean the combined six c$nts
($.06) local option gas tax collected by the Flo~ida Depa~tment
of Revenue less the amount ~etained by the Flo~ida Depa~tment of
Revenue for administration as provided in Section 215.20, Florida
Statutes, or its succesSor provision.
(a) The net proceeds of the combined six cents
I
-2-
(b) The County portion of the combined six cents
($.06) local option gas tax shall be distributed for cale~dar
years beginning January, 1988 and thereafter for the live~ of
the taxes, as established pursuant to Seminole County Ordinances
83-22, as amended by Ordinance 85-33, and Ordinance 85-34 on the
basis of 63.6 per cent (the County portion) to the County. ; The
balance of 36.4 percent (the municipal portion) shall be dis~ri-
buted to all eligible incorporated municipalities in Seminole
County, Florida.
(c) The municipal portion of the combined: six
cents ($.06) local option gas tax shall be distributed: for
calendar years beginning January 1, 1988 and thereafter for: the
lives Of the taxes as established pursuant to Seminole County
Ordinances 83-22, as amended by Ordinance 85-33, and Ordinance
85-34, among the eligible incorporated municipalities in semirole
County, Florida, based upon a five (5) year floating formula,
annually adjusted, based upon the proportional share of the
total transportation expenditures made by each of the
municipalities.
SECTION 3. ROLLING FORMULA COMPUTATION.
(a) The COUNTY shall collect from the municip:ali-
ties and the municipalities shall provide to the COUNTY, on or
before a date established by the. COUNTY and in a form determined
!
by the COUNTY, adequate data detailing the expenditures mad~ in
each category listed in subsections (b) (l) through (b) (7) of
this Section. The COUNTY shall oompute distribution percen~ages
therefrom and provide to the municipalities a. summary of. the
percentages computed and make available for review the documents
from which such percentages were computed.
The distribution
percentages shall apply to revenue distribution during the ~ext
,
calendar year and, on or before July 1 of each year, the COUNTY
!
,
shall forward the provided percentages to the Florida Depart~ent
of Revenue.
Failure by any City to provide the expenditure
,
,
information in substantial compliance as required herein shall
-3-
Tn- I nrn(""'o ....":'.-. ,_.....
~ ~ .... '. - - "". ~ "..... ,J, .:J.
authorize the County to use that City's transportation expendi-
tures contained in that City's audit reports, for that City's
current calculations.
(b) In accordance with Section 336.025(7), Flo~ida
Statutes (1985), transportation expenditures utilized in calcu-
lating each party's distribution proportion of the local option
gas tax proceeds shall only include expenditures by each party
from local or state shared revenue sources, excluding fed~ral
revenue sharing funds, local option gas tax proceeds, and
bond proceeds, for the fOllowing programs:
(I) public transportation operations and maintenance;
( 2 ) roadway and rig h t - 0 f - way m a in ten an c ea n d
equipment;
(3) roadway and right-of-way drainage;
(4) street lighting;
(5) traffic signs, traffic engineering, signaliza~ion
and pavement markings;
(6) bridge maintenance and operation;
(7) debt service and Current expenditures for transpor-
tation capital projects in the foregoing program areas, including
construction or reconstruction of roads.
SECTION 4. DISTRIBUTION OF PROCEEDS FOR FISCAL YEARS
1985-1986 and 1986-1987.
(a) The distribution proportions for the proceeds
of the first four cents ($.04) of the combined:six cents ($.:06)
local option gas tax for fiscal years 1985-1986 and 1986-1987
up to and including December 31, 1987, shall be as set forth
below and are based upon the proportionate share of the total
transportation expenditures made by the COUNTY and eligible
municipalities for the five (5) fiscal years preceding authori~a-
tion and imposition of the tax (1978-1982):
-4-
o~u~-'~~-~uV nv~d
Local Government Distribution Proportion
Seminole County 64.89%
Altamonte Springs 7.46%
Casselberry 6.86%
Lake Mary 1.04%
Longwood 5.41%
Oviedo 1.54%
Sanford 10.06%
Winter Springs 2.74%
(b) The distribution proportions for the proceeds
of the last two cents ($.02) of the combined six cents ($;.06)
local option gas tax for fiscal years 1985-1986 and 1986-1987 up
to and inCluding December 31, 1987, shall be as set forth below
and are based upon the proportionate share of the total transpor-
tation expenditures made by the COUNTY and eligible municip~li-
ties for the five (5) fiscal years preceding authorization.and
imposition of the tax (1980-1984):
Local Government Distribution Proportion
Seminole County 61.09%
Altarnonte Springs 11.87%
casselberry 6.59%
Lake Mary 0.93%
Longwood 5.31%
Oviedo 1.33%
Sanford 9.64%
Winter Springs 3.24%
SECTION 5. COVENANT OF THE PARTIES.
(a) Prior to challenging the distribution of
local option gas tax revenues under the provisions of Section
336.025(5) (b), Florida Statutes, or its successor provision, in
any forum, jUdicial or administrative, a party shall submit,: in
writing, its objection to the distribution proportion to :the
Seminole County Office of Management and Budget, which shall,
within thirty (30) days of receipt, provide to the chairperso~ of
-5-
('"'n'... t':I~n.... ""''''=''_
~Od
Wd IS:SO L6-S0-11
860C-~ZC-LO~ WO~d
the Council of Local Governments in Se~inole County (CALNO), an
analysis of the challenge. Upon receipt of the analysis, CALNO
shall, within thirty (30) days, hear the challenge at a special
meeting called solely for said purpose, at which CALNO sh~ll,
upon majority vote, render an advisory and non-binding opinion as
to the validity or invalidity of the challenge.
(b) In the event that any party hereto shall
challenge the distribution of local option gas tax revenues under
the provisions of Section 336.025(5) (b), Florida Statutes~ or
its successor provision, in any forum, jUdicial or administra-
tive, the revenues to be distributed to the parties shall not be
held, escro~ed, or delayed by the Florida Department of Rev~nue
during the pendency of the dispute and, to the extent legally
permissible, the revenues shall be distributed to each partf to
the extent that each party'S distribution share would not be
reduced if the challenge were successful.
SECTION 6. AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE 83.22. Upon'due
authorization, execution, and delivery of a valid Interlocal
Agreement by and among the COUNTY and municipalities in accor-
dance with Section 336.02S(3)(a)1., Florida Statutes {l985),the
COUNTY will cause Seminole County Ordinance 83-22 to be amended
as follows:
Delete Section 3 in its entirety and substitute
therefore the following
SECTION 3. ~ISTRIBOTION OF PROCEEDS. Proceeds
of the tax hereby imposed shall be divided and distri-
buted among the County government and eligible munici-
palities in accordance with the provisions of Section
336.025, Florida Statutes, as amended.
The County
shall prOvide the Department of Revenue, State of
Florida, ~ith the actual distribution percentages
whether derived from an inter local agreement as
authorized by Section 336.025(3)(a)l, Florida Statutes
(1985), or by applicability of the statutory formula
-6-
set forth in Section 336.025(4), Florida Statutes
(1983) .
SECTION 7. SAVINGS CLAUSE. The parties agree tha~ if
any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid in :any
administrative or judicial proceeding, the provisions of Seminole
County Ordinance Numbers 83-22, 85-33, and 85-34 shall survive
disputing distribution percentages pursuant to Sect:ion
and be in full force and effect without preju~ice to any party
336.025(S)(b), Florida Statutes (1985).
Agreement to be executed in eight (8) counterparts by their
respective and duly authorized offices On the resp~ctive dates.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties having caused this
ATTEST:
~~~~lClerk
PAT WAINRIGHT,
By:
TAMONTE
Date:
~//~I P &.:
ATTEST:
CITY OF CASSELBE~RY
LINDA GARAVANO, City Clerk
By:
OWEN SHEPPARD, Mayor
Date:
ATTEST:
CITY OF LAKE MARy
BY'~ (lfiL-
RIC ARu A. FE S,:Mayor
Ci/~~ /Tb
Date:
ATTEST:
CITY OF LONGWOOD
DONALD L. TERRY, C1ty ClerK
By:
LARRY GOLDBERG, Mayor
Date:
ATTEST:
'1pC/~~ ~
NANC K. , ~ty (; ark
v
By.~~;JIJ
.~. ~MaYOr
Date: 9- /(- ?h
-7-
I
ATTEST:
Hd~-
Ci Y Clerk .
ATTEST:
~ 7:- t1J~
MARY'A~. NbRTON, City Clerk
RIEN
Clerk to th Board of
County Commissioners of
Seminole County, Florida.
As authorized for execution
by the Board of Co ty Commis-
sio~~s in their ,
19~~, regular rnee
-
LNG/gg
061786
Rev 070286/1f
Rev 070386
Rev 070786
Rev 070886
Rev 080686
Rev 080786
CITY OF SANFORD
."
~
By: . . f). v
B'~ 8MI/;; Mayor
Date: 1;/tr '//
/ .
, Mayor
BOARD OF COqNTY COMMISSIONERS
SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Date:
"'8-