I CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was opened on Monday, March 11, 1996, at 6:30 P.M. by Anita T. Cereceda, Mayor, with a pledge of the allegiance to the flag followed by a prayer.

Present at the meeting were: Anita T. Cereceda, Mayor and Council Member; Ted Fizsimons, Vice Mayor and Council Member; Council Members Rusty Isler and Ray Murphy; Marsha Segal-George, Interim Manager, and Attorney Richard Roosa.

Absent from the meeting was Council Member Garr Reynolds.

II READING AND DISPOSAL OF UNAPPROVED MINUTES

Motion: Made by Ray Murphy and seconded by Rusty Isler to accept the minutes of the meeting of February 5. Passed unanimously.

Motion: Made by Ray Murphy and seconded by Rusty Isler to accept the minutes of the meeting of February 21. Passed unanimously.

Corrections to Minutes of February 26, 1996

Ted Fitzsimons advised that on page 11, Section K, Item 2 "Furrow Street," should read "Pearl Street."

Motion: Made by Ray Murphy and seconded by Rusty Isler to accept the minutes as corrected of the meeting of February 26. Passed unanimously.

III PUBLIC COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES

A. Carleton Ryffel

Mr. Ryffel stated that his comments had to do with the LPA ordinance or portions thereof. He advised that the LPA will not do the actual planning of the council's comprehensive plan. There will be a review group that will develop the plan without the professionals and then make recommendations to the council and to the board. It was noted that the present Lee Plan as it relates to the Beach was prepared by Beach citizens with the help of a professional planner, which makes it a little difficult for Mr. Ryffel to understand why the current comprehensive plan is so objectionable now. The Land Development Code, he advises, is the implementing tool of the comprehensive plan and is what used to be called the Zoning Ordinance. It should be a relatively simple matter to amend that ordinance, he feels, specifically by taking out some of the permitting uses and some of the zoning districts that are objectionable.

Mr. Ryffel feels that the composition of the LPA should be diverse. (He is referring specifically to Section 4 of the draft Ordinance 96-02, Qualifications of Members.) The state statute that deals with the setup of the LPA does not specifically indicate where the numbers come from. In other words, they don't necessarily have to be in conflict with Fort Myers Beach. And the statute certainly doesn't limit the membership to only residents of Fort Myers Beach. You should not limit your members to residents only, he stated, but should include property owners. This would provide a diverse pool of candidates for the town to choose from. With this change made, the council could then widely solicit member candidates. He would also recommend, since it is not specifically spelled out in the draft LPA Ordinance, that the council establish some kind of a pool of candidates and that everyone vote on it.

B. Marge Levar

Marge Levar said she felt that the time spent by the general public talking about resolutions and moratoriums could be limited, either by prearrangement before a meeting or by limiting a speaker's time.

IV RESOLUTION ON PRESERVATION FUNDING

This resolution is brought forward with the request that the council consider passing it so that it can be sent on to the state, Mrs. Segal-George, advised. It is a resolution of the Town of Fort Myers Beach requesting the 1996 Florida Legislature to provide adequate funding for the preservation and repair of the state's beaches, to recognize the need for funding non-federal projects, and to identify a long-term, dedicated funding source.

Motion: Made by Ray Murphy and seconded by Rusty Isler to accept the resolution. Passed unanimously.

V NFDES PERMIT APPLICATION -- BRIEF OVERVIEW

Mrs. Segal-George explained that the NFDES ( National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit has to do with the Federal Clean Water Act. It requires political entities to implement storm water management programs within a certain time frame. A permit has to be applied for. The reality of it is that we have no choice but to participate. The county has a division that deals with these types of issues and we can ask them questions and get a better feel for what is happening. This is the second part in the application. The first part was submitted before Fort Myers Beach became a town and was still a part of Lee County. As soon as the town of Fort Myers Beach appeared, it got plugged into this permit application process. We are going to have to participate with the other cities in the county's special districts in submitting it. It has to be submitted by June of this year. Basically, we are going to be relying on the county's data with regards to this application. It is a very expensive application to prepare. Just doing the testing is about $60,000. At some point we are going to have to have an interlocal set on the agenda to consider and approve. The county is working on a recommendation as to what they think this town's funding will be. Everyone is participating in the cost of this permit. We only have two choices: One, we can go it alone or, two, we can go with the county. We have no other choices.

All of the other cities and special districts would have to share in the total cost of the permit application. Part of this permit requires dedicated funding. They haven't come up with the total cost yet nor have they come up with a recommendation of what they think our share should be. The other cities have agreed to funding based on the formula of the gas tax. Since we are not yet in that formula, that isn't available to us.

At one time the county was going to do storm water drainage system county-wide, but they never put that into effect. The county is now going to do it watershed by watershed. It goes from the large issue of the bay all way down to the smaller issue of the culverts and water quality. It is very comprehensive as far as what it could possibly cover and the permit is very comprehensive.

With a little bit of luck, we could benefit as a community, Ted Fitzsimons stated, because we're so closely attached to our back bay, which is closely attached to all of the estuaries, etc.

This will definitely have standards in regard to potential degrading of water quality.

According to Ted Fitzsimons, there is activity going on region-wide relative to the National Estuaries Program and the inclusion of the Charlotte Harbor watershed area in the National Estuaries Program. He asked if they related at all on the federal level? He was told by Mrs. Segal-George that she didn't think so, that this had to do with the EPA and the whole issue of trying to deal with water runoff and trying to come to terms with some of the problems that have existed for a long time that haven't been cleaned up. It is her understanding that the budget will have a dedicated funding source, possibly ad valorem.

The difference between dedicated funds and committed funds was explained. A lot of times for grants or regulations you have to have dedicated funding, which means that money is used for X and can't be used for anything else. Committed funds could be interpreted as today committed and tomorrow not committed.

VI COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS AND REPORTS

A. Vice Mayor Ted Fitzsimons

Mr. Fitzsimon's advised he had two items. One is a request for an executive session with our town attorney on the situation of legal cases that are presently outstanding and in which we are involved in order to get a clearer picture in our minds as to the exact nature of these cases, their impact, and what our fundamental direction is. This will require a notice and it will require recording, etc.

When asked by the mayor if this was something that he had to agree to, Mr. Roosa said, no, that he worked for the council. Mr. Roosa explained that an executive session normally comes about when there is an offer of settlement or at his request in the instance of either negotiating or involving strategy with litigation. Everything that is said at an executive session will eventually be made public because this is the public's business. We don't usually have an executive session to explain litigation because there is nothing there that is confidential, nothing that involves strategy or would in any way make any difference. Mr. Roosa said that if he wanted to discuss an issue with the council that he didn't want an opposing counsel to be aware of, then an executive session would be appropriate.

The county has filed motions on two lawsuits and Mr. Roosa just joined in them. They are not really at the strategy stage in the lawsuits. We inherited this litigation. This is not litigation that is of any wrongdoing of this town council. Mr. Roosa does not see us as a party with an active interest although we are legally a proper party. If the applicant prevails, they will come to this town council for a rehearing. But they have to get over these hurdles first, Mr. Roosa advised, and he certainly would not recommend our going against the county attorney's office in their motions. And if they prevail on the motion, these lawsuits would be over. Mr. Roosa said it seemed appropriate to him and so he joined in with them.

Ted Fitzsimons stated that the purpose for his recommending an executive session was to discuss the cases both for educational purposes on our part and also to make sure that we all thoroughly understand the nature and impacts of the position being taken by the town. It was Ray Murphy's feeling that everything could be done in an open session and Mr. Roosa concurred.

The only difference between an executive session and what we are doing right now,

Mr. Roosa advised, is the timing difference, because what we are saying now is a matter of public record today. An executive session will become public when the lawsuit has been resolved. The resolution of the lawsuit may bring it back to you. One of the first things that Mr. Roosa would caution the council is that the things that they say ought not to establish a bias on their part.

Mr. Roosa reiterated that this was the public's business and that it was only when the public's interest was to be protected that we should have an executive session. There are times when the public should be delayed in its knowledge because if opposing counsel had that information it would hurt the public, he said. That's the real issue. Mr. Roosa said he had talked to the attorneys on both sides of these cases and has no problem, and as a matter of fact, he has no problem with the merits of the cases. But they've got to get through these procedural issues beforehand. And we're not at that stage to get into the merits of these cases yet.

Rusty Isler didn't think an executive session was necessary at this time, they are not trying to protect anything. He thinks we can talk about it just like we are talking now.

Mr. Roosa suggested that we take time to go over each one of these cases and then if we had questions or concerns we didn't feel that we wanted to discuss in public, that would be the time to have an executive session. There is one lawsuit that is a trial de novo. That means that there will be a complete trial for it if we get that far. It is in the early stages right now. These other lawsuits are strictly procedural lawsuits. They are appellate issues. The whole issues are first procedural and secondly legal. Mr. Roosa hopes that the council will direct him to enforce the law as he sees it. The three petitions are pretty clear cut, straightforward legal issues, he feels. In the trial de novo, there is a legal issue and Mr. Roosa has talked to the attorney about that. The legal issues have to do with the fact that there is what he would call an administrative remedy that must be exhausted prior to filing the lawsuit. And that is that they are to file a sworn complaint with the governmental agency that has held the hearing and then if they fail to take action, they go to what is called a trial de novo, a trial from beginning to end, a complete trial on the merits on the case.

According to Attorney Roosa, we have a very unique once in a lifetime set of circumstances, and that is that this period of a 30-day transition occurred during our incorporation. So it is certainly arguable that they should have petitioned the town counsel rather than the county commission, because they are holding us responsible for the county commission's turning them down. Mr. Roosa has talked to the attorney about that and also the other parties that are involved to try to see if there is some way that we could procedurally work that issue out and see if it could be resolved. But again, that's not so much a matter of strategy, that's pretty much a legal issue. It is assumed that what we would want would be a fair application of the ordinances as they existed.

Questioning Attorney Roosa, Rusty Isler wanted to know if we are taking the stand that even though we've been named with these lawsuits, they're not really our lawsuits but we are following along because we're named. Wouldn't it jeopardize our bias?

Mr. Roosa doesn't feel it would jeopardize our bias, because if we were the principal parties from beginning to end we certainly would be aware of what's going on. If the cases die in procedural matters, they'll never come before us and we'll use the time to learn something. Mr. Roosa revealed he had met with the county attorney's office over these lawsuits and they're fairly confident, at least on these two lawsuits, that they'll never get back over here.

Mrs. Segal-George suggested doing a kind of litigation update next Monday night. Attorney Roosa said he could give a written report and then explain it, kind of in an outline form. They will limit the update to a particular lawsuit rather than collective lawsuits, because it will tie into a date when that lawsuit is settled. If we have four lawsuits, when the first one is settled it might put us in an embarrassing situation. We would have to disclose any executive session that was held and yet we may not want to. Each executive session should be on each each specific lawsuit.

Ted Fitzsimons thought they should find out the nature of the case, the position of the county, the impacts.

It was decided to put the matter on next Monday's agenda.

Mr. Fitzsimon's second item has to do with a draft resolution that was, he believes, handed out at the news conference last Friday. It is in everyone's package as Councilmen's' Item 1. He would request that this item be discussed at next week's agenda. Mayor Cereceda felt it was an excellent idea. Rusty Isler also thought it was a great idea and prefers having the public made aware of issues head of time. The item was scheduled for Monday's meeting.

B. Mayor Anita T. Cereceda

Mayor Cereceda advised that the deadline for the town manager applications was the first, and they probably have 75. She would like to propose a way of sifting through all of them just so that they stay within all the guidelines that are required. She suggested assembling the resumes into packets of five and have them all here with a sign in, sign out sheet. Each council member would take packet number one, read it, then sign off that he has read all those resumes and reviewed them. If any particular resume strikes one's fancy, the council member should make a note of the fact. At the end of the week they could review them all and on Monday they could actually come up with a list and begin some sort of interviewing process, if necessary, or a negotiating process with Marsha if that is what they determine.

Rusty Isler asked If there was some way that we could use the help of some of the people in the community, two or three people who are neutral.

Mayor Cereceda said she had looked at all the applications and felt that the other council members would be able to quickly dismiss some of them. She already has a volunteer who has offered to put the applications into packets and who has followed this procedure previously. The council was told that there would be no set amount as to the number of preferences and they would all get to see all the applications. They need to hire an assistant or a clerk to the town manager, and therefore the town manager should be in a permanent position. Mayor Cereceda would like to see some resolution on the position of town manager by the end of the month. She would like to start the process tomorrow. They need to get the LPA in place as soon as possible and the LPA's staff is the town manager. It was established that Mrs. Segal-George had signed up for 60 days and was now in her sixth week as interim town manager. Part of her reason for not yet hiring help was the fact that she was not permanent at this point

. Mr. Isler asked Attorney Roosa if they talk to Marsha Segal-George and she wants to stay on, if that would have to be done right here when negotiating a package. He was advised that it should be done here, but they could have Marsha come in with a proposal and then work from her proposal.

In the past, according to Mrs. Segal-George, Lee County designated one person to negotiate and then bring the results back to the entire council. It could only be one person, not two. The county commission would designate the chairman or someone like that to negotiate and then that comes back to the council.

Mayor Cereceda said they would need to quickly send out letters to people who are not going to make the cut. She envisions the council members coming to town hall and looking through as many packets as they can tomorrow night. There will be a check list for everyone to sign off after reading each application.

The chore of selecting applicants should be done next Monday the latest, the mayor said They also needed to make a decision on the selection of the LPA, how the people are going to be appointed. Marsha has suggested that instead of each of the council members choosing one person, each would nominate three people, give their qualifications and tell why they think each person is qualified for the job. Theoretically, then they would have a pool of 15 people to choose from, although some choices may overlap. After everyone votes, the top seven vote getters become the LPA.

Mr. Roosa gave his okay to this selection method. The seven people who will be nominated will, of course, have indicated that they would serve on the LPA. Marsha suggested setting Friday as a deadline for names to come in, then by Monday evening next week she would be able to at least have a list for the council.

Mayor Cereceda announced that the Volunteer Center of Lee County has declared April 12 to April 27 National Volunteer Week and they would like a resolution or something from the town stating that those days are National Volunteer Week in the town of Fort Myers Beach as well. The mayor would appreciate it if a proclamation could be issued declaring a National Volunteer Week in the town of Fort Myers Beach. Traditionally, President Clinton and Governor Chiles have issued proclamations declaring National Volunteer Week in the United States and in Florida. In a letter sent to Mrs. Cereceda, the volunteers disclosed that the theme for this year is "Volunteer because change is possible." Sent with the letter was a copy of the sample proclamation that is being used nationally this year. It was requested that the town's staff members be present with the volunteers when the proclamation is signed and that a picture be taken at that time. Many Fort Myers Beach residents are excellent volunteers who helped the residents of Lee County, the letter stated, and all of these people deserve special recognition. Mayor Cereceda said she thought it would be appropriate to recognize the volunteers in their community and she would like to issue this proclamation. This will be her first proclamation, it was noted.

VII SECOND READING OF LPA ORDINANCE

The title of Ordinance No. 96-02 was read by Mayor Cereceda as she had done at the previous council meeting.

Mr. Roosa pointed out some typographical errors in the Ordinance. On page 6, paragraph j, the last line should read F.S. 163.3191 and not s. 163.3191. On page 7, paragraph m, four lines down should read as may be, not as bay be, and six lines down should read regulations and codes, not regulations an codes. Under Section 18, three lines down, law of contrary should read law or contrary.

VIII PUBLIC COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES

A. Flip Harby

Mr. Harby referred the council to their discussion of how members of the LPA would be selected. If you are proposing to vote on the LPA Ordinance tonight, he cautioned, that language should already be included in it. There is no language on how the seven members are going to be selected.

Mr. Roosa said that the ordinance provides how the town council will make the selection of LPA members.

B. Pat Loffreno

Mr. Loffreno asked that the town council include people with a background in construction or real estate in their selection of members for the LPA.

C. John McCarthy

Mr. McCarthy said he was a little confused when he heard about the applications and said he believed that if a councilman signed one or marked it in any way that another councilman could recognize, it would be a violation of the Sunshine law. The mayor advised that she was aware of this fact. Mr. McCarthy also said that as the Fort Myers Beach fire chief for years, he concurred with Pat Loffreno that it was very important that members chosen for the LPA be knowledgeable in building and know what a truss is and how to read plans.

D. Arthur McDonald

According to Mr. McDonald, there is a trend nationally and in many localities around the United States today to take into account certain cost benefit analyses in adopting rules and regulations. We see the costs, sometimes extravagant costs, of adopting certain laws and other actions which have the effect of costing one group or another a great deal of money, time, inconvenience, especially legal fees. Litigation sometimes results from the actions of the board. We also see that counties and cities sometimes gain less than they expect by adopting certain rules and regulations. Mr. McDonald proposes that some type of cost benefit analysis be adopted in the LPA in order to disclose to the citizenry the total cost to the city of adopting such action and also disclosing the net benefit to the city of adopting such action to prove whether or not that action will either provide or not provide a net benefit to everyone. If a benefit cannot be proven, then maybe that action should be either reviewed or rejected.

E. Carleton Ryffel

Mr. Ryffel concurred with Mr. McDonald and said he thought that Lee County does that now. He suggested to the council that when we have our workshop with the county tomorrow, we might want to ask them how they do it and what's involved in doing this analysis just for our own information.

Mr. Ryffel thinks the council ought to include property owners in the pool of members and not restrict it just to residents. They have a financial interest here and they ought to be able to at least be considered.

F. Whit Dupree

Stating that he was born here, Mr. Dupree revealed that he owned property here. He sees that the proposed moratorium on building has been temporarily rescinded but that the council does wish to have a local planning agency. He said he has been trying to sell his lot for a number of years and two real estate agents have told him that this talk of moratoriums or even a planning agency are detrimental and will lower the value of his property, which concerns him. He would agree that they should have a cost benefit analysis on a net basis to the town and, also, if the planning agency is going to have as many as seven members, then he would think that not just voting residents should be included but also that property owners would be appointed. He would also suggest including construction industry representatives and real estate people.

The council was asked what they thought about including property owners as LPA members. The mayor said there seemed to be some discrepancy of opinion as to whether or not you could or could not do that. Mr. Roosa advised he could find no statutory prohibition for allowing nonresidents to be members. The initial local planning agency is the town council, and you must be residents in order to be on the town council. By analogy, if you were to delegate that authority, it is arguable that you would also want those members to be residents. In the past, the legislature when they restricted agencies to residents, for instance, under the Code Enforcement, they said that if you couldn't find a particular category that you could use nonresidents. But the emphasis was to use residents first and if they were not available and you felt the need, then you could go elsewhere. It is perfectly constitutional to limit it to residents and the reasoning behind the residency requirement is somewhat supported by the Charter. The Charter establishes the council as the initial local planning agency and, of course, council members are required to be residents.

Council members develop the plan. If there are a whole lot more restrictions and laws it will be a worry to the council and the planning agency also. The LPA does the work and they prepare the ordinance but the council can modify it. The council is not limited to what the LPA prepares.

Attorney Roosa concurred with Mr. Fitzsimons that the LPA is an advisory committee. If the council wanted to address, let's say traffic, you just tell them and they would work on that traffic element first.

Mayor Cereceda asked Mr. Isler for his opinion regarding including property owners as members of the planning agency and he said he would have no problem with including them, that we shouldn't eliminate anyone with good skills because they don't happen to live here. That would be our loss.

Mr. Roosa said they could eliminate the residency requirement.

Mr. Murphy said he was all for broadening the pool. Business people, he feels, have a very good understanding of what our problems are and he thinks they should be included. If that entails striking the residency requirement, so be it.

There are a lot of ways the pool could be expanded as well as contracted, according to Ted Fitzsimons. Supposing, for example, that the requirement was to be a taxpayer. We have a great number of people who are temporary residents who are property owners, taxpayers. That would tend to make sure they were included in the pool.

Mr. Roosa said he didn't like the taxpayer classification. He sees it as an arbitrary classification and one that's based on wealth and ownership. Residency requirements are a legitimate, constitutionally identified classification. You can pick your residence where you choose, and if you choose to be a resident of Fort Myers Beach, then you can be on the committee. And that includes owners, tenants, all of society. Make the decision on a case-to-case basis based upon the merits of the applicant.

Mayor Cereceda noted that then the only classification of a member would be to be elected by the town council and she asked if anyone objected to this change.

Motion: Rusty Isler moved that Section 4 of the Ordinance, Qualifications of Members, be changed to read "All members of the LPA shall not be salaried officials of the town." Ray Murphy seconded. Passed unanimously.

Motion: Ted Fitzsimons moved to accept the Ordinance and Ray Murphy seconded the motion. Passed unanimously.

IX TOWN MANAGER ITEMS

Mrs. Segal-George referred the council to the eight bills she had given to them for payment. She had copies of the expenditures for anyone who needed this information.

Mayor Cereceda mentioned having received a call today from the Florida League of Cities saying they needed a check immediately for insurance. They were told that the council would be acting on it tonight.

Motion: Ted Fitzsimons moved that Marsha Segal-George pay the eight bills she had presented to the council. Seconded by Rusty Isler. Passed unanimously.

Tomorrow the council will be meeting with the Board of County Commissioners at 1:30.

There was a question regarding how long the CRA was going to pay administrative fees, and Mrs. Segal-George has a copy of the original resolution which showed the CRA paying administrative fees through 1994-1995. Copies are available for council members should they wish to use them at their meeting tomorrow with the Board of County Commissioners.

House Bill 401 has been introduced and it is an attempt to find new funding for CRAs, where the CRAs would receive funding from a percentage of the sales tax. Mr. Roosa pointed out that the local government was deprived of ad valorem taxes because it set those specific taxes aside for that particular project. If they take the town's share of sales tax and do the same thing, the town will still not benefit. If the town were to set up a CRA, what we would do is short circuit some ad valorem taxes. Before they got to the town for general revenue, they would be set aside in that CRA. If it's the same way with the sales tax, that's no more beneficial to the town than the other way. Typically, the legislature doesn't give money to any anybody.

Mr. Harold Huber came to the podium and stated that he had been acting as the purchasing agent for the council. He noted that two weeks ago by an 4-1 vote, the council approved taking out two walls to enlarge a vacant office that looks onto the meeting room for Mrs. Segal-George's use. The capacity of the room was set at 76. The fire marshal came on Thursday and refigured the meeting room capacity up to 130 by leaving the office as it is. If we take the office out, capacity is increased to 136. Total bid was $2634. Taking out the wall brings the cost up to $1754. We would save $880 by leaving the room there, but by removing the room we would have a nicer meeting room. Mr. Reynolds has requested we have a revote on taking the room out, as he would like to use it for an office.

Motion: Made by Rusty Isler to change the walls in Marsha Segal-George's new office to enlarge it. Seconded by Ray Murphy. Passed unanimously.

It was suggested that they could lower the counter so that people could see over it. Mr. Huber did not anticipate any real cost problem to do this. Mrs. Segal-George concurred with the change.

X TOWN ATTORNEY ITEMS

Attorney Roosa advised the council that he had distributed to them this evening two interlocal agreements. One agreement is for the delegation of certain municipal street maintenance duties in Lee County and the other is for the delegation of certain land use powers to Lee County. These are pretty much consistent with the previously adopted emergency resolutions. He also plans to bring before the council a request for a special master proceeding by Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lyman. In their petition the applicants have identified three possible special masters. Mr. Roosa has discussed them with the town manager and they would recommend that the council select R. Scott Barker. Scott Barker is the former hearing examiner for Lee County. We have ten days from the time they serve us to get the information to the hearing examiner.

Motion: Made by Rusty Isler and seconded by Ray Murphy to accept R. Scott Barker as the hearing examiner for the Lymans. Passed unanimously.

A question has been raised to Ted Fitzsimons about discussion of circumstances relating to a particular piece of property in the community for which there is an outstanding application for a COP (Consumption on Premises). Mr. Fitzsimons wishes to know if council persons would be disqualified from discussing anything with an individual relative to that piece of property. Attorney Roosa advised that the problem is whether or not they could still be impartial after having that discussion. He reminded the council how Bob Britt had talked about the fact that we could adopt a resolution or an ordinance which would allow for council members to have such discussions and require only that they record and summarize that discussion to maintain their impartiality. Even if it could be done by a resolution, that would necessitate an ordinance. It's sort of a procedural matter. The way the law is written, you are not required to adopt the procedure to still take advantage of that procedure, but Mr. Roosa recommends this be done. It might be appropriate to have a resolution allowing you to have those contacts and then report them. There is a procedure for reporting when the conversation occurred and a summary of the conversation, then when it did come before the town council, it would be brought up. You could also refuse to engage in a conversation on a matter that will be brought up before the town council. It is up to you.

XI PUBLIC COMMENTS AND INQUIRIES

A. Cherie Smith

Mrs. Smith identified herself as one of the co-chairman of the town's inaugural party that was held on December 31. She reminded the council she had asked to put the party together in September and that the party had turned out terrifically. The people on the Beach put together a committee and they also put together a flag with the interim logo on it which they flew on the day of the inaugural party. Mrs. Smith then presented the flag as a gift to the town council from the committee and the people of Fort Myers Beach. The Mayor suggested that it could be hung on the wall and thanked Mrs. Smith.

Mrs. Smith next presented the council with pictures that had been taken by Charles Hester, their professional photographer on the inaugural day. One is a picture of the flag as it flew that day. They also put together a composite of the council members as they were sworn in by Judge Pack that they could also put on the walls. Mrs. Smith received a round of applause from the public attendees and the council for her gifts.

B. Al Van Horn

Mr. Van Horn advised he was getting tired of hearing innuendoes and negatives about the "bare bones" approach to their government. The negatives are the result of one or two expenditures which have exceeded what they had perceived the cost would be. Mr. Van Horn explained that a budget is a management tool and you do not take a particular figure, divide it by 12, and say that's the limit that we have for this particular month. One case in point was the charges to date of the cost of our legal counsel. These were largely startup costs which were more than anticipated and should level off. Mr. Van Horn likened this cost to a hospital stay where the first three days are peak costs, then become lower. He commends everyone for the job they did in furnishing the town hall quarters. The rent is excessive, Mr. Van Horn noted, but offsetting that is the furnishings, much of which were obtained without any cost to them at all. He would urge those who are quick to criticize perceived excessive costs to give the town a chance. This is not to say that the budget should not be monitored. There have to be some checks along the line. Mr. Van Horn urges that everyone have some confidence and some faith in our council in being able to assume the proper fiscal responsibility which has been delegated to them.

C. Pat Loffreno

Mr. Loffreno feels that time is of the essence for the council to get money from the county and the state. He believes that Mr. Fitzsimons was a participant in the work on the comprehensive plan in 1988 and had the opportunity to remove C-1 zoning in different areas but has not done so. The council, noted Mr. Loffreno, has the final say on what is built on Fort Myers Beach. If he wanted to build a home, the council could say no to him.

Mr. Loffreno feels that the idea of a resolution is just as bad as the moratorium proposal and is costing them a tremendous amount of money. He has been told that the comprehensive plan can cost about three years in time and from $400,000 to $700,000 in expenses. Mr. Loffreno expressed concern about the town attorney's salary. He feels the town spends too much time talking about expansion and carpets.

D. Mark Ebelini

Mr. Ebelini noted that he represents two vested developments on Fort Myers Beach owned by Sunstream, Inc., and Star Dial, Inc., which are the Diamond Head Convention Hotel and Bay Beach. Since the council has delayed action on Mr. Fitzsimon's proposed unnumbered resolution until next week, Mr. Ebelini said he would save his comments on this matter until next time.. In the interim, however, he would ask that the council would answer the following questions for the benefit of the residents:

1. Is the resolution an attempt to effect vested projects?

2. Is this resolution an attempt to stop the Diamond Head Convention Hotel or Bay Beach as they have been approved?

3. If this is so, how much have you budgeted to pay for the damages and litigation costs which your actions will require you to raise?

Mr. Ebelini said it would be better to answer these questions now rather than next week when the council will be working on the language of the proposed resolution.

E. Flip Harby

We did away with the moratorium, Mr. Harbey stated, and we gained a resolution to be voted on next week. He compared the resolution language to that in the moratorium, particularly in Section 3 where it delves into development order extensions and permit extensions and says there is no mention of that in the moratorium. He finds it a direct assault on projects that are ongoing on this island or soon to be starting up.

Referring to the Fort Myers Beach Goals/Objectives/Tasks which he thinks was prepared by Bill Mills prior to his departure, he said it had about 6 or 7 areas with as many as nine subdivision headings. He wishes to know if the council has completed all these tasks. Have we secured our revenues? The state said it is $43,000. Have we secured all the necessary interlocal agreements? The council passed a lot of emergency ordinances that carries it to March 31, twenty days from now. Beyond March 31 you have to enter interlocal agreements with various agencies that are to provide services to this island. Has that been done?

Under I, Section F, it states that the council needs to insure in the community's national flood insurance program status will continue in force so that flood insurance remains available to town property owners. It requires confirmation from FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) in the very near future and they require certain specific actions by the council. The council needs to look into the town's status with the FEMA community rating system. The CRS (community rating system) gives the town property owners significant discounts on their flood insurance premiums. Without specific action this fiscal year the town may lose its current CRS status on October 1, 1996.

The town has a budget it has to assemble submitted on or before July 15, 1996.

The point is, Mr. Ebelini stated, have we lost focus, are we using tunnel vision for moratoriums to stop, cease and desist building. Aren't there more important things to get under way.

F. Don Pickworth

Mr. Pickworth said that he represented some property owners who have purchased property within the Bay Beach project. He was sent by his clients a draft of a resolution which essentially says that any development permit, which is pretty broadly defined, has to have the approval of a local planning agency and a town manager. It contains no standards. From the standpoint of his clients,

Mr. Pickworth said the council is urged to consider issues such as vested development rights, certainly standards and other things which at least give members of the public an opportunity to rationally analyze this and discuss it.

G. Howard Rynearson

Mr. Rynearson thanked the council for postponing the resolution until next week. He urged that they didn't push it through until they talked to their people.

H. Carleton Ryffel

Mr. Ryffel said he appreciated the council's vote on the LPA Ordinance including getting rid of the residency business. The council might want to consider taking out an ad in the paper because people didn't know that they could be included.

Mr. Ryffel stated he had been upset when he heard about the resolution. His impression of what this resolution is supposed to do is simply to get information from Lee County about what is pending. Looking at the resolution, it did not match that principal. If the issue is to get information from Lee County, all you need to do is get a letter from Mary Gibbs about once a week and you don't have to do any of these things. He doesn't think the resolution is necessary. The council has a letter from Mary dated March 7 which tells them what is pending. He doesn't know why they can't continue with this rather than go through a resolution requiring the involvement of the LPA.

XII ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Anita T. Cereceda adjourned the meeting at 9:50 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Lorraine Calhoun

Recording Secretary