Post on 09-Mar-2018
transcript
1
CN041111
CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2011
A Regular Meeting of the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Port St.
Lucie was called to order by Mayor Faiella on April 11, 2011, at
7:00 p.m., at Port St. Lucie City Hall, 121 SW Port St. Lucie
Boulevard, Port St. Lucie, Florida.
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Mayor JoAnn M. Faiella
Vice Mayor Linda Bartz
Councilwoman Michelle Lee Berger
Councilman Jack Kelly
Councilwoman Shannon M. Martin
Others Present: Jerry A. Bentrott, City Manager
Gregory J. Oravec, Assistant City Manager/
CRA Director
Roger G. Orr, City Attorney
James Arnold, Neighborhood Service Director
Edward Cunningham, Communications Director
Marcia Dedert, Finance Director/Treasurer
Joel Dramis, Building Official
Pam E. Booker Hakim, Senior Assistant City
Attorney
Daniel Holbrook, Planning & Zoning Director
Jesus A. Merejo, Utilities Director
Karen A. Phillips, City Clerk
Charles W. Proulx, Parks and Recreation
Director
Brian E. Reuther, Police Chief
Patricia Roebling, City Engineer
Gabrielle Taylor, Assistant City Attorney
Carol Heintz, Deputy Clerk Supervisor
3. INVOCATION & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The City Clerk gave the Invocation, and Mayor Faiella led the
Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
2
4. PUBLIC TO BE HEARD
MIKE DI IANNI – COUNCILWOMAN BERGER’S ATTITUDE
Mr. DiIanni said, “I have sat here for the last five or six
months, and I’m basically going to be talking to Councilwoman
Berger. The attitude and the way you spoke to the City Council
and the City Attorney is very disturbing. We had a group of kids
here to see how the City Council runs. If that’s the impression
that they walked away with, shame on us all. At the end of all
of those remarks, you looked at someone in the audience and
grinned and winked. That bothered me even more. It was like a
show, and this is not a show. This is City business, and it has
to do with getting this City back in line, getting jobs,
reducing taxes, and creating sales for homes. That’s what this
is all about. If we can’t work together, then you should resign.
If you can’t work together, someone should resign. All of you
need to resign.”
LAWRENCE E. STUCK – WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT/SAWGRASS LAKES
Mr. Struck stated, “I’m here to discuss the issue of the
Wastewater Treatment Plant at Sawgrass Lakes. I was told by the
Utility Department that I would receive updates, and I have not
received one update from anyone. My wife is ready to pull her
hair out of her head because of the noise. I want to know what’s
going on, and when it will be resolved, so that we can continue
with our lives.”
STEVE CARROLL – BRING BACK THE POLICE/JOBS
Mr. Carroll noted, “I want to renew my five cents a day, keep
the bad guys away. That’s what it would cost to bring back the
15 cops. It would actually cost less, so we might want to think
about that. We keep hearing about jobs from everyone. We had
all kinds of presentations tonight on jobs. The jobs we invested
this money for, and it’s a lot of money, were jobs for the
citizens of Port St. Lucie. We have gotten a lot of high tech
stuff where people came from the outside, because we didn’t have
the labor force. In the future when people come and they promise
jobs, and it’s always some pie-in-the-sky figure, you might want
to beware if they start using words like ‘maybe,’ ‘might,’ or
‘could.’ If the moon and stars are right this might happen. But
if it doesn’t, we have to live with it for a long time. You have
to be careful. The devil is in the details. It all looks good up
front, and everyone is cheering. When the curtain opens and you
see what the real play is, sometimes you don’t like it.”
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
3
ARLENE BROWN – THANK YOU
Ms. Brown remarked, “This is a thank you. I have been a member
of the Treasure Coast Builders Association for a little over 15
years, and I have had the benefit and pleasure of the
association with the Building Department of the City of Port St.
Lucie and how well they’ve worked with the Treasure Coast
Builders Association, the builders, and trade partners in the
Association for a number of years. Last year, the foreclosed and
distressed properties were coming on the market with no permit
for work that had been done. I had a personal experience with
one of those properties with a relative of mine. I called the
Building Department, and through my relationship with Mr. Dramis
and Mr. Reisinger, they told me it wasn’t an impossible task to
figure out what to do with this. They sent me off in the right
direction, and as a result the work that was done was done with
a permit. The Building Department has put together an amazing
program for the benefit of the realtors in our community. They
have realtor assist e-mail for the benefit of the realtors, so
that if the realtors have a property that they question and need
an answer right now, they can get it straight from the horse’s
mouth. They e-mail it, and it comes back to them. They have the
most wonderful PowerPoint presentation. It’s fun and
informative. They have spoken so far to over 200 realtors in six
offices. I would like to thank Mr. Dramis, Mr. Reisinger, and
Ms. Russell for putting together a killer program.”
CARL IKEN – CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 28, 2011
Mr. Iken said, “At the last City Council meeting, I came before
you to inform you that the City Attorney lied to this Council
and misled this Council. This was confirmed by the Mayor at that
meeting who was present, and then it was reconfirmed by
Councilwoman Martin who heard it from the Assistant City
Attorney. My overall concern is that the Council didn’t address
it with the City Attorney. He’s a licensed Florida state
attorney. He’s acting in the official capacity as an advisor for
the City Council when he sits at the dais, and he provided false
information to this Council. I understand that Councilwoman
Berger and others on this Council have a strong dislike for me,
and I’m okay with that. I also understand that Councilwoman
Berger and Councilman Kelly were upset that the meeting in
question even took place, that the City Attorney and Mayor
Faiella shouldn’t have had that meeting. As elected officials
charged with representing the people of this City in a
professional manner, it’s your responsibility to put your
personal feelings aside and look at the facts presented to you.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
4
At the last meeting it was confirmed that during the March 21
Special City Council Meeting the City Attorney intentionally
misled this Council and didn’t tell the truth. As the City
Attorney he is paid very well to provide this Council with the
facts and truth about situations involving his actions and words
as City Attorney. Instead of focusing on the fact that the City
Attorney lied to this Council, the Council tried to justify his
lie, because of their dislike for me or the homeowner that’s
involved in this case.”
Mr. Iken continued, “Councilwoman Berger chose to ignore the
fact that she had been lied to by the City Attorney, and
proceeded to scold the Mayor for daring to live up to her
campaign promises and have an open door policy with the
residents of the City. Councilwoman Berger even went as far as
to add an agenda item to the end of the meeting, so she would
have even more time to scold the Mayor and personally attack
myself. I once again ask this Council to address the issue of
our City Attorney lying on record to this Council. We can’t
afford to overlook this matter as it greatly diminishes the
integrity of the City. I’m aware that some of you will still try
to make this out about other matters, or make excuses as to why
the City Attorney lied to the Council. Even with all of the spin
and excuses, it’s clear that this Council was lied to by the
City Attorney. The only thing that should matter is that he
lied. To make it simple for everyone to understand and to remove
all of the distractions, I’m going to put it a different way. At
a meeting in the City Council office, the City Attorney said A.
When asked by Councilman Kelly on March 21 if he said A, the
City Attorney said no. At the last meeting the Mayor who was
present at the initial meeting confirmed that the City Attorney
did indeed say A. It was further confirmed by a conversation
Councilwoman Martin had with Assistant City Attorney Taylor that
the City Attorney did indeed say A at that meeting. Therefore,
the City Attorney lied to this Council and to the people of this
City. The only question remaining is what the City will do with
this information. The way I see it you have two choices. You can
hold the City Attorney accountable, or you can continue to make
excuses and justify it with spin and innuendos. I hope each of
you has the character and integrity necessary to hold the City
Attorney accountable for his actions. I understand you may not
like the messenger, and I’m okay with that. But as
professionals, look past your contempt for me and look at the
facts. This is not about me or anyone or anything else. It’s
about our City Attorney violating his duty to the City Council
and to the people of Port St. Lucie. I urge you to do what’s
right, and not what is easy.”
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
5
PTBH/COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilwoman Martin said, “I want to address Mr. Struck. A
couple of weeks ago, we had a tour of the plant and found that
the noise is from a deodorizing unit attached to the new
building that holds the sludge. It was determined that after the
building was done and the deodorizing unit was put in that the
blower and fans on that unit were creating the noise. We were
there with the Utilities Director Mr. Merejo, and we explained
that we were looking into the situation with regard to
containing the noise. Currently, Mr. Merejo has asked for a
proposal on ways to contain the noise. He said that we should
have that proposal within 30 days.” Mr. Merejo stated, “The
consultant has been hired, has been to the facility, and will
have a recommendation within 30 days. Then we will proceed with
how we’re going resolve the issue.” Councilwoman Martin noted,
“On the tour you had also said that we would have to get another
independent person in to review that, because of state
guidelines and regulations.” Mr. Merejo commented, “We have to
go through the permitting process to make a change to what has
already been done. We’re hoping to have everything fixed by the
end of June or early July.” Councilwoman Martin asked, “Until
that time, do we have any other way to cut down on the noise?”
Mr. Merejo replied, “No. At this time, we have not provided you
with any feedback, because there was nothing to report since the
last time we met. By next week, we will give you an update on
where we’re going and any future recommendations we may have. We
really have to wait until we receive something back from the
consultant who was there last week.” Councilwoman Martin pointed
out, “As soon as anything comes back from Utilities, I will keep
you and all of the residents informed as to what’s going on.”
Mr. Stuck asked, “Is there some kind of tent they can put over
it temporarily to baffle the noise?” Mr. Merejo replied, “At
this time we do not want to modify it, because that could end
the warranty we have on the unit. We do not recommend putting a
Band-Aid on it at this time. We will do everything possible to
address that issue as soon as possible.”
Councilman Kelly remarked, “I want to address the City Attorney
allegation that was brought up. I don’t know where Mr. Iken gets
his information, but to say that I, along with Councilwoman
Berger, was against that meeting is not true. I never gave any
indication to anyone privately or publicly that I was against
that meeting. I’m the one who did ask the question. I do believe
that it was taken out of context. I heard the Mayor say when it
was brought up again in her conversation, when it was asked if
the City Attorney lied, I heard her say, ‘No, not it that way,
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
6
it didn’t happen.’ That’s what I heard the Mayor say. Now, if
you take it out of context, it’s a whole different story. I have
worked with this man for 11 years, and he has never once lied to
me. His integrity is higher than anyone else I know. I get angry
with him when he doesn’t give me the answers I want to hear, but
as far as his integrity, it’s second to none. I’m sure people
make mistakes, but I think the man was taken out of context. I
didn’t hear the Mayor say that he lied.
Councilman Kelly continued, “The other gentleman who spoke about
Council people getting passionate about what they think, if
someone thinks there’s a policy deviation or a policy change and
they want to put it on at the beginning of the meeting, they can
do that. As far as grimacing or wincing, I’ve been here a long
time. I didn’t get along with another Mayor for many years.
There were many times that I grimaced, winced, rolled my head
back, and threw my hands up in the air. I did the same thing
with the Mayor after him. I’m sure it will happen with this
Mayor doing it to me. This Council is no different than any
other Council we’ve had. There are going to be differences and
people get passionate. I’m not taking sides with anyone. We have
to work as a team. Sometimes, you think something is wrong and
you get a little passionate. Mayor, I did not hear you say that
the City Attorney lied. I hope that’s the end of that one.”
Mayor Faiella noted, “I don’t know what transpired on the 21st
when I was not here, but the question was ‘Did the City Attorney
state that?’ Ms. Taylor was in the room and said that there
would not be a proceeding unless there was a permit pulled. That
was the conversation we had. I even turned around to Mr.
McKeever and said, ‘How long would it take you to pull the
permit?’ I don’t know what happened afterward. There was
something going on with Ms. Taylor and him with the permit. When
I left for Tallahassee, there was no permit pulled, and that is
where we left off. Whether the permit was pulled or not, I don’t
know where it ended afterward. Was it the beginning of December
or February when we met with Mr. McKeever?” The City Attorney
replied, “I think it was January.” Mayor Faiella pointed out,
“That was the extent of the conversation. If he pulled the
permit would there be a nuisance abatement proceeding. Is that
correct?” The City Attorney replied, “We gave him dates, and we
followed it up with an e-mail to him answering questions that he
asked to be answered. We gave him a series of dates, deadlines,
and milestones that he had to meet. He did not, and we initiated
the nuisance abatement process when those milestones passed. The
dates were in February, and that meeting might have been in late
January.”
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
7
5. PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
a) PROCLAMATION – CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE VOLUNTEER MONTH
The City Clerk read the Proclamation. Mayor Faiella presented
the Proclamation to Lana McClain and Maureen Puglisi. Ms.
McClain said, “I’m not here to collect this Proclamation for me
or for Volunteer St. Lucie who I represent. I’m here
representing all of the volunteers in Port St. Lucie and St.
Lucie County. We all know the importance of volunteers.
Volunteers help things keep going. They’re supporting blood
drives, food drives, and they bake cookies for the kids at
school. They’re Girl Scout leaders and Boy Scout leaders. They
lead youth groups, support their churches, and all of our
organizations. Volunteers come out in disasters. We have at
least 70 active volunteers right now at the Civic Center.” Ms.
Puglisi stated, “Thank you for recognizing volunteerism. We
could not get by at the Civic Center without the help of the
volunteers.”
b) PROCLAMATION – CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH
The City Clerk read the Proclamation, and Mayor Faiella
presented the Proclamation to Chris Robertson. Mr. Robertson
said, “Castle has been around for 30 years, and this past year
there have been 198 children who have died from child abuse or
neglect in the State of Florida. Those 198 children could have
been the next Council person, the next Mayor, or anyone of these
fine community members, but they did not have a chance to speak
for themselves. Castle is here to spread awareness, to put our
Memory Field of Flags out there to speak for those children.
Every year, we put the flags out, go from county to county, and
we have dedication ceremonies. We have speakers and clients that
are extremely courageous who talk about what Castle has done for
them. Without everyone’s help in the community, this problem
will still grow. The Treasure Coast, and especially Port St.
Lucie, is double the national average for children dying of
abuse and neglect. If we don’t step up and make a difference,
it’s going to continue to grow year after year. Five years ago
we put the Memory Field out there with 73 children. It’s now up
to 198 children.”
ADDENDUM ITEM
e) WALGREENS AND THE DIABETES RESEARCH INSTITUTE WALK FOR
THE CURE DAY – STEVE FLYNN
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
8
The City Clerk read the Proclamation, and Mayor Faiella
presented the Proclamation to Steve Flynn, and noted, “I had the
pleasure of walking with all of you yesterday for two miles. We
had over 500 people, with people from 14 other cities around
Florida participating.” Mayor Faiella asked, “How much did we
raise?” Mr. Flynn replied, “Between the business sponsorships
and the community coming out, we raised probably over $5,000.
The goal is $1 million throughout the state, and right now we
have raised over $400,000, and we’re going until the end of the
month.”
c) SPECIAL PRESENTATION – WYNDCREST DD FLORIDA, INC.
UPDATE, JOHN TEXTOR, CEO/CHAIRMAN
Mr. Textor presented a slide show and said, “In terms of our
employee count and based on our projections, which some thought
were aggressive, we’re supposed to be at 90 employees in our
animation studio by the end of this year. We’re already at about
243. We’ve expanded our business model, because we have been
really surprised by the quality of the town locally. Just with
Port St. Lucie and Treasure Coast employees alone, we’re higher
than what our aggregate projection was going to be for the year.
You have it on the schedule as Wyndcrest DD Florida, Inc. To
make things easier, we went through a name change. That entity
is now known as the Digital Domain Media Group, headquartered in
Port St. Lucie. We’re working on two summer blockbusters in Port
St. Lucie as we speak. The original stories are developed in
Port St. Lucie. That group started to grow much more quickly
than we expected, because of some of the key people we hired
from the Disney Animation Studio in Orlando. We outgrew our
space at Tradition Square very quickly, so we took over a
65,000-square-foot building from Liberty Medical. We put about
$600,000 into the retrofit of that building to make it work. We
have a couple of years on the lease, and we might stay there
even after our facility in Tradition is built. This allows us to
grab people with digital media capabilities at the high school
level, put them in our ‘Boot Camp,’ which is anywhere from a
five to ten week training program, and they can contribute at a
high professional level on this expanding marketplace. We were a
500-job proposition expecting all of those people to be in the
animation studio. Now we think we can add at least 500 jobs in
the conversion of 2-D films to 3-D stereographic films. We had a
job fair and probably 120 to 150 of those people came out of
that job fair.”
Mr. Textor continued, “We should be at about 400 employees by
the end of 2011, which puts us well ahead of our original
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
9
projections. About 36% of the people there today were coming
from outside Florida before accepting these jobs. That number is
a little misleading, because I think about 20% of those people
had ties to Florida. About two-thirds of our people were Florida
residents at the time of hire. Of course, 96% of those people
are from Florida, and 4% are from other states. Either we’ve
left them in training positions in California, or they are
people who are planning on moving. Among those Florida
residents, 23% were from the City of Port St. Lucie, 40% are
generally from the Treasure Coast, and 60% come from other
communities in Florida that are coming into this area.
Approximately 50% of our people have chosen to live in Port St.
Lucie, or they were already living here. There are a number of
people who chose Ft. Pierce or Jensen Beach. Of the non-Treasure
Coast people 20 of those people are now commuting from Palm
Beach every day. We have a number of people who will commute in
for the week and then go back to their homes on the weekends.
The large majority of our 243 are between the ages of 21 and 30.
We have 12 who are under the age of 20. We have approximately
100 people in the 31 to 50 age bracket. With reference to our
contracted companies, 88% are from the Treasure Coast. We have
about 120 people on site every day, and 82% of those workers are
from the Treasure Coast, with a vast majority being from Port
St. Lucie. During the final stages of construction, we will have
a substantial increase in the number of workers on site.”
Mr. Textor stated, “Whether we stay in the facility on the east
side of town or build more near our studio on the west side of
town, just to house the 3-D stereoscopic division we’re going to
have to have a similar construction project, because it looks
like that group may grow faster than our original animation
studio. We did acquire extra land at Tradition, so we’ve got the
ability to build on site there as well. We just hired 80 people
within the last 45 days, and of those 80 people I bet 65 were
from the Treasure Coast. The IRSC program is great. They’re
turning out good graduates. I think we have about 35 people from
there. We hope to have our studio complete by the end of this
year.” Mayor Faiella noted, “You said something to me last
weekend pn the phone. You said that you didn’t realize what
talent we had here. That was quite interesting.” Mr. Textor
commented, “I thought it would take a lot longer to develop. I
believed that at this stage two-thirds of our employees would be
from LA. We have been very pleasantly surprised at the talent
that’s here in this area. In our first Boot Camp, we brought in
50 people. We expected that one-third of those people would wash
out. Of our first 50, we only had four people who didn’t qualify
at the end of that program. About 90% of the people we bring
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
10
into these Boot Camps from largely local sources have been
working out well for us.”
d) SPECIAL PRESENTATION - 2010 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR), FINANCE
Mr. McBee said, “The City’s financial statements present fairly
the financial position and activities of the City for the 2010
year. You will see within the basic financial statements the
City’s Statement of Net Assets or balance sheet for the year,
which shows the City had ample resources to cover its current
obligations. However, I will point out for the year ending 2010,
the City did incur an operating deficit in excess of $3 million
in the City’s General Fund, which brought the fund balances down
to about $12.5 million. The other item I refer to is the
Management Letter, which is our comments we found during the
course of our audit procedures. The current year’s Management
Letter has reference to our recommendation that the City should
consider using the services of an independent financial
consultant. This is as it relates to certain activities in
regard to higher level financing or investment transactions and
items of that nature. Sometimes the City gets its advice from
the same party who’s selling them the financial package. I have
prepared the general recap of pertinent data of the City’s
activities as it relates to prior years and also to other cities
of comparable size, population, or revenues. As you look at the
balance sheets, we’re comparable to where we were last year with
the exception of the deficit that was incurred within the last
year of $3 million. The revenues were relatively comparable to
prior year, as well as the expenditures. However, there was
little fluctuation, and we put those comparisons on a per capita
basis. The Water and Sewer Fund held relatively constant for
2010 as compared to 2009, whereas the Stormwater Fund increased
its revenues and correspondingly increased the net bottom line.”
Mr. McBee continued, “From there we compare the City with other
cities of comparable size, and how they relate as far as
governmental revenues, tax revenues, and intergovernmental
funds. We’re sizeable above other cities with reference to long
term debt. However, the bulk of that is the special assessment
debt, which is mainly from the expansion of the water and sewer
system and a few of the special assessment districts that were
set out there to develop an infrastructure for various expansion
areas within the City. Page 12 compares the ad valorem taxable
assessed value of the City to other cities of comparable size.
We’re holding relatively constant in comparison there as well.”
Councilman Kelly noted, “We had a Retreat last summer and I got
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
11
corrected. We have a lot of money tied up in the SBA Funds,
which is like our checking account with the state. The money got
frozen. We still have in the neighborhood of $10 million or $11
million in that fund. Is that money spent? Can you explain
that?” Mr. McBee replied, “The SBA Fund was where the City
previously had parked most of their current financial resources,
because it was readily available, it wasn’t time dependent, and
had a relatively good return for liquid assets. Whenever the
financial meltdown happened, it was subsequently discovered that
many of their assets were backed in the derivatives and items of
that nature.”
Mr. McBee stated, “There had to be an allowance made for
collection of those monies over the course of a longer term as
opposed to immediate needs. Therefore, the fund was split into
two different segments, where upon one was currently available
and the other would be available as resources came into the SBA
Fund. I will point out that the City’s Finance Department had
done the bulk of their due diligence. The bulk of the City’s
funds that went in there was approximately a day or two before
the SBA shut things down. The $155 million bond issue from the
Southwest Annexation District had sizeable dollars, and those
dollars were moved up into the SBA Fund. However, the City
Manager’s Department and the Finance Department called there
prior to confirm that everything was fine, and they got the okay
that everything was fine. Three days later things weren’t fine,
so the City had many dollars tied in the SBA Fund. Currently, we
rate that down every year based on what’s determined to be
available and what’s being recognized as write offs.” Councilman
Kelly noted, “We did call because we heard rumors, and we were
assured by officials there that there was nothing wrong. It has
been a tremendous burden on the City, but we still have a good
credit rating. We were prepared.” Mr. McBee commented,
“Fortunately the City is in a situation where there are other
dollars available. They shuffled monies within the various funds
and borrowed funds for current needs whenever a large project of
that nature comes up, and payback as the draw downs come down on
Fund B from the SBA.” Councilman Kelly pointed out, “It was 33%
of our ad valorem tax money that got tied up.”
Councilwoman Berger remarked, “I appreciate your comments about
the independent financial advisor, and I know that’s a
conversation the City Manager and I had in the past. I look
forward to making those changes.” Councilman Kelly moved for
approval. Councilwoman Martin seconded the motion. The City
Clerk restated the motion as follows: for approval of acceptance
of the CAFR. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
12
6. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Councilwoman Martin moved to approve the Agenda. Councilman
Kelly seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as
follows: for approval of the Agenda. The motion passed
unanimously by roll call vote.
7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
a) APPROVAL OF MINUTES – January 18 and February 22, 2011
Zoning Appeals, February 2, 22, 2011, March 7, 2011
b) TERMINATION OF DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS,
LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 2318, PORT ST. LUCIE SECTION THIRTY THREE,
TRC #289, MARJAN, INC., CITY IS OWED $5,912.18, LEGAL
c) MELVIN BUSH CONSTRUCTION, INC., AMENDMENT #19, CHANGE
ORDER #1, CITY WIDE CULVERT REPLACEMENT AND SIDEWALK
CONSTRUCTION, EAST LAKE VILLAGE DRAINAGE REPAIR IMPROVEMENTS,
#20070008, $2,604.65 FOR A NEW CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $28,793.55,
AND 21 ADDITIONAL CALENDAR DAYS FOR A NEW TOTAL OF 51 CALENDAR
DAYS, FUND 401-4105-5340, ENGINEERING
d) PROPOSED CONTRACT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE, LOT 8, BLOCK
2388, PORT ST. LUCIE SECTION THIRTY-FOUR, 114 SW MILLBURN
CIRCLE, $42,000, PROPERTY NEEDED FOR THE REVISED BECKER ROAD
WIDENING PROJECT PHASES 2 THROUGH 4, STEGEMAN
e) WAIVER OF BID PER SECTION 35.11(A), EMERGENCY
CONDITIONS, CENTRIFUGE REPAIR AT GLADES WASTEWATER TREATMENT
FACILITY, ANDRITZ SEPARATION, INC., #20110057, $31,447, FUND
438-3513-5630, UTILITY SYSTEMS
ADDENDUM
f) FERRY ENTERPRISES, INC., AMENDMENT #1, ADDITIONAL
MOWING AND TRIMMING ALONG VILLAGE PARKWAY BETWEEN TRADITION
PARKWAY AND BECKER ROAD, $37,688.85, #20060116, CONTRACT PERIOD
IS DECEMBER 1, 2006 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 2011, WITH AN OPTION
FOR AN ADDITIONAL 5 YEAR PERIOD, FUND 104/401-4127-5341, PUBLIC
WORKS
Councilwoman Berger moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Vice
Mayor Bartz seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the
motion as follows: for approval of the Consent Agenda. The
motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.
8. SECOND READING, PUBLIC HEARING OF ORDINANCES
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
13
a) ORDINANCE 11-11, REZONE 1.13 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED
ON THE EAST SIDE OF BAYSHORE BOULEVARD BETWEEN DUVAL AVENUE AND
DUXBURY AVENUE FROM RS-2 (SINGLE FAMILY) TO I (INSTITUTIONAL)
FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS RMP ENTERPRISES, P10-164; PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE, QUASI JUDICIAL
The City Clerk read ordinance 11-11 aloud by title only. Mayor
Faiella opened the Public Hearing.
STEVEN CARROLL said, “I was here for the First Reading and there
was this ‘Throw up the hand. We can’t stop this. We can’t do
anything.’ I’m a disabled person and I do a lot of disabled
rights work. Are these houses going to be ADA compliant? You’re
making a residence into a commercial building. I suggest you
look at the ADA law on this, because you could change this and
the feds could come in and slap you hard. They could really make
some problems for you. I don’t see where these people would be
exempt. They’re on disability if they’re drug rehab.” The City
Attorney replied, “As I understand, these are treated as
residential structures. If they pull permits, they will
certainly have to comply with the ADA regulations at that point.
They’re not City structures, so we won’t be looking at that
issue from the City’s point of view. They will have to meet the
regulations, but not the City.” Mr. Holbrook stated, “As a part
of the discussions that we initially had, staff did review and
discuss the ADA issue. The way that’s addressed is that if this
is approved, the applicant has to come back with a Site Plan for
the property. That property has to be in compliance with all
City rules and regulations, one of those being the Florida
Building Code. ADA requirements are established there. That will
address the issue when they come forward. As an outcome of the
Planning and Zoning Board meeting, one of the neighbors was very
specific in requesting that they maintain their existing fence.
If that’s the pleasure of Council, it was one of the comments
from the neighbor, and I would request that it be specifically
mentioned as a separate motion for approval. We did discuss that
they plant additional landscape to bring it up to City
requirements.”
There being no further comments, Mayor Faiella closed the Public
Hearing. Councilman Kelly moved to approve Ordinance 11-11, with
the change proposed by our Planning and Zoning Director on the
fence. Councilwoman Martin seconded the motion. Councilwoman
Berger stated, “I did want to mention that I spoke with our
staff, Ms. Hakim, in reference to this and some other
outstanding litigation that was from outside the area. Putting
that out there now, if it’s going to come back for Site Plan
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
14
approval, seems like a disconnect to do it during the zoning
time.” Mr. Holbrook noted, “It’s not a request of the applicant,
but the applicant has agreed during our past meetings publicly
at the Planning and Zoning Board to be in compliance. The Site
Plan process is not a public hearing process. It is conducted as
a public meeting, and that’s the difference. Code does require
that Council approve, if that’s Council’s desire. Whether it’s
done at this meeting or a separate meeting, it can occur either
way.” Councilwoman Berger asked, “Will it still go before the
Planning and Zoning Board?” Mr. Holbrook replied in the
negative. Councilwoman Berger asked, “Is it because it’s with
the state that they get a pass?” Mr. Holbrook replied, “Code
doesn’t require this to go to the Planning and Zoning Board due
to the size of the project.” Councilwoman Berger pointed out, “I
know we’re moving forward, because that’s where we need to go
and it’s mandated. However, from a perspective of a homeowner it
does concern me, and I would like to get in front of the
delegation next year to talk about putting larger groups of
properties together like this. To me, it becomes a compound.
It’s no longer just a residence that you’re trying to make sure
we make available within our City. If you’re a neighbor that
lives across the street from that, and all of a sudden we have
six or eight lots that are coming together, it would be a big
concern. Apparently, we have no say in that matter.” Mayor
Faiella remarked, “I will absolutely note that.” The City Clerk
restated the motion as follows: for approval of Ordinance 11-11,
and to include the request to maintain the fence. The motion
passed unanimously by roll call vote.
b) ORDINANCE 11-21, AMENDING SECTION 150.704.10 OF PORT
ST. LUCIE CITY CODE 150, “BUILDING REGULATIONS, CORRECTION OF
SCRIVENERS ERROR IN ORDINANCE, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
The City Clerk read Ordinance 11-21 aloud by title only. Mayor
Faiella opened the Public Hearing. There being no comments,
Mayor Faiella closed the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor Bartz moved
to approve Ordinance 11-21. Councilwoman Martin seconded the
motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: for
approval of Ordinance 11-21. The motion passed unanimously by
roll call vote.
c) ORDINANCE 11-24, PROVIDING FOR THE ABANDONMENT OF A
PORTION OF AN EASEMENT AFFECTING LOT 16, BLOCK 2192, PORT ST.
LUCIE SECTION THIRTY THREE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
The City Clerk read Ordinance 11-24 aloud by title only. Mayor
Faiella opened the Public Hearing. There being no comments,
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
15
Mayor Faiella closed the Public Hearing. Vice Mayor Bartz moved
to approve Ordinance 11-24. Councilwoman Berger seconded the
motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: for
approval of Ordinance 11-24. The motion passed unanimously by
roll call vote.
9. OTHER PUBLIC HEARINGS
There was nothing scheduled for this item.
10. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
a) ORDINANCE 11-18, ANNEXING A PORTION OF ST. LUCIE
COUNTY, FLORIDA LOCATED GENERALLY WEST OF RANGE LINE ROAD, SOUTH
AND EAST OF GLADES CUT-OFF ROAD, AND DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE C-23
CANAL (P09-66); PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, QUASI JUDICIAL
The City Clerk read Ordinance 11-18 aloud by title only. Mayor
Faiella asked that the vote for Ordinance 11-18 be held until
Ordinance 11-25 is heard, so the votes can be together.
c) ORDINANCE 11-25, PUBLIC HEARING, AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE TO INCLUDE A
LARGE SCALE AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR A PROJECT
KNOWN AS KENNEDY GROVES, INC., BAY HILL HOLDINGS, LLC, SOUTHERN
FRUIT GROVES, LLLP, AND MABEL GROVES, LLLP (P09-129), TO CHANGE
THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM A COUNTY DESIGNATION OF AG-
5 (AGRICULTURAL – 5) TO CITY FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
RESULTING IN APPROXIMATELY 5,079 ACRES OF HI (HEAVY INDUSTRIAL),
1,000 ACRES OF OSC (OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION), AND 1,060.13 ACRES
OF UTILITY, FOR A PARCEL LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A, AND
GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF RANGE LINE ROAD, SOUTH AND EAST OF
GLADES CUT-OFF ROAD AND NORTH OF THE C-23 CANAL AND MARTIN
COUNTY LINE; PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S URBAN
SERVICE BOUNDARY LINE; PROVIDING FOR TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE
INFRASTRUCTURE AND FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENTS; PROVIDING THE
INVALIDITY OF ANY PORTION SHALL NOT AFFECT THE REMAINING
PORTIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
P09-129
The City Clerk read Ordinance 11-25 aloud by title only. Mr.
Holbrook said, “I want to give everyone the information that
both Comprehensive Plan Amendments are First Readings before the
City Council, and if the Council elects to approve at First
Reading it allows staff to send both applications to the State
of Florida and other jurisdictions that will be impacted. This
is a preliminary step. Once the state issues their Objections,
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
16
Recommendations, and Comment report it will come back to the
City. The City will have to address those issues, and then it
will come back for a final public hearing. As part of it, one of
the state requirements does require that anyone who wishes to
speak, and this is for state record, that they do need to sign
in. We need to send this off for our Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. I encourage everyone to do that.”
A recess was called at 8:20 p.m., and the meeting resumed at
8:35 p.m.
PRESTON PERONI, Chief Financial Officer, Kennedy Groves, and
Project Manager for the Intermodal Campus, said, “The landowner
members of TCIC are Kennedy Groves, represented by the Kennedy
family in Vero Beach; Southern Fruit Groves and Mabel Groves,
the Caruso family in Orlando; and Bayhill Holdings controlled by
the Falcone Group from Boca Raton as their managing partner. The
principles of these companies and other strategic partners are
in attendance tonight. (Clerk’s Note: Mr. Peroni presented
background information on each of the landowner members,
referencing their companies and business operations).”
JONATHAN FERGUSON stated, “The First Reading is to annex 7,139
acres into the City. Of that, there is a proposal to change the
land use on 5,079 acres to Heavy Industrial, 1,060 acres to
utility, and 1,000 acres to Open-Space Conservation. The idea is
to develop it as the TCIC, which is an Integrated Logistics
Center, sometimes referred to erroneously as an Inland Port. An
Integrated Logistics Center is much more than an inland port.”
RICHARD PENSKY, Public Policy Manager and consultant to the Port
of Palm Beach, noted, “We’re at the tail end of the global trade
market, and we really don’t fit. That’s going to be changing in
the future. The South Florida market is from Orlando south.
That’s about 11 million people and that’s an attractive
marketplace. The Panama Canal is being expanded to get goods to
Florida faster and cheaper. The previous routes to the South
Florida market would take 24 days, and had to be handled three
or four times. In 2014 when the Panama Canal is opened, cargo
will arrive here in 19 days, and be handled only once or twice.
That increases a shipper’s bottom line, and that’s what they’re
looking for. There are some media reports that the Port of Palm
Beach has dropped out of this process. That’s not true. The Port
of Palm Beach started this process four years ago. Our role was
to enter into an MOU with the Panama Canal and promote the idea
that Florida was going to be receiving cargo like the rest of
the east coast. The only thing we dropped out of was in the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
17
selection process. We originally had selected a Florida Crystal
site along the Everglades, but we no longer choose to partner
with them.”
Mr. Pinsky continued, “Without landside warehousing logistics
facilities to compliment pier side terminal operations, major
ports of entry such as Miami will not be successful in
attracting the trade routes needed to preserve, let alone
increase, its market position. Several ports such as the
Virginia Port Authority have designated inland ports, which
allow far more effective sales and promotion of their port
system as a two-part solution. In the absence of an inland
counterpart to Florida’s port system, it’s felt by many in the
industry that Florida may find itself unable to effectively
compete in the long term with the other Atlantic ports of entry
despite South Florida’s geographical superiority to both the
Panama Canal and the emerging nations of Latin America. We would
encourage you take a leadership role in helping establish a
dedicated inland port, which would allow a more complete
logistic solution to be offered to the beneficial cargo owners
whose business can bring great benefit to your region. Right
now, there is nowhere in the South Florida region for cargo to
go. You have a ship that could potentially stop with no place to
unload their cargo. Our job is going to be to capture and keep
it here. That’s our goal. The Governor of the State of Florida
and the Port of Palm Beach were instrumental in creating a
Trade and Cargo Show Study, which the Florida Chamber of
Commerce Foundation just completed. The Governor, prompted by
that study, committed $50 million this year to take Miami to 50
feet to accept a ship. That’s wonderful except we have no place
to put the cargo when the ship stops. The cargo is either going
to South Carolina, New York, Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina,
or it could go to Florida. That’s depends a lot on having a
location.”
Mr. Pinsky stated, “Miami-Dade is totally built out. Miami’s
goal is to take the ship, and take the cargo by train. You have
the Everglades. There’s nothing going on. Broward is totally
built out. The homes go right to the edge of the Everglades. The
first chance you have an opportunity to put a logistics center,
a destination cargo area, is Palm Beach. That’s the Florida
Crystal site. I don’t know where Martin County would put it. The
first opportunity to take cargo off the port in Miami and take
it to a place to unload it is really effectively St. Lucie
County, because of the rail line. That’s what makes Port St.
Lucie such a unique, desirable, and attractive location. It is
certainly the hope of making this supply chain work. In 2015,
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
18
Florida has to be ready for cargo. If we’re not ready in 2015,
kiss it goodbye. The Panama Canal is going to open in 2014. For
the first time ever in the history of the United States, cargo
will be coming to the east coast of the United States. By 2013
the Port of Miami will be at 50 feet ready to receive a ship.
However, to plan for 2015 the shippers have got to know that
something has started, that Florida is ready to receive cargo.
They have to know that by mid-2012. In 2012, we have to have a
site selected. Phase 2 of the Trade and Cargo Study that will be
undertaken by the Florida Chamber of Commerce Foundation will be
where to locate a site. There are only two sites in the entire
state of Florida that are even close to being considered. One is
at the western side of Palm Beach County off the lake between
Bellglade and Southbay, and the other is in St. Lucie County.
One has rail, and one does not.”
Mr. Pinsky noted, “The Florida Chamber will come up with one or
two recommendations, and St. Lucie County and your City should
really want to be at the front end of that curve. Right now,
there’s a very small window of opportunity.” Councilwoman Berger
commented, “Under full disclosure, Mr. Pinsky and I have worked
together on some other statewide initiatives in the past. Do you
know if anyone other than this City and its representatives
received a similar letter from that organization?” Mr. Pinsky
replied, “I don’t know, but I’m 90% sure this is the only entity
to receive this letter in the state of Florida.” Councilwoman
Berger asked, “When you say the one that’s out west by the
western part of Palm Beach County, are these two sites solely
being considered for the Palm Beach initiative, Miami and Palm
Beach, or statewide?” Mr. Pinsky replied, “The Port of Palm
Beach will be receiving presentations from both Florida Crystals
and the TCIC team. They will be requesting an update. When they
do the next phase, I’m confident that the Port of Palm Beach
will be asked for our opinion. We are not with a particular
site. We didn’t drop out of the process. We just no longer
associate with that particular project. When I talk about two
sites, I’m referring to the Florida Crystal site and this
potential site in St. Lucie County.” Councilwoman Berger
commented, “This seemed to me to be a very important survival
piece for the Port of Miami in order for them to continue to
move forward on what success looks like for them after the
dredging. Tell me more about the survival of Miami and how we
now play a role in the state’s future.”
Mr. Pinsky pointed out, “I can’t speak for the Port of Miami,
but I know their port director would say that they’re very
successful, and they want to be more successful. The opportunity
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
19
to present itself to receive cargo for the first time will be a
new opportunity for Florida. Jacksonville may be another option
in the future, because permitting and dredging wise they might
be slightly ahead of Savannah. The Governor made a decision and
the legislature is following suit to pick Miami as the port of
entry. Yes, Miami will be depending upon a destination cargo
center. You have an opportunity tonight to become an
international brand.” Councilwoman Berger remarked, “There’s a
conference coming up, and I’m looking forward to seeing what
role we can play in that. Part of what I found in doing the
research is this information about basically a nationwide
initiative right now. I looked at Texas, and the fact that
they’re competing for the same thing right now as well. When
you’re saying that they’re going to be coming to the east side
of the United States, are those just the containers that are
meant to be shipped to this side, or are you saying that they’re
going to come here instead of going to Texas?” Mr. Pinsky
replied, “Texas is a different model, because they can’t come
into Long Beach and effectively get to the Dallas-Fort Worth
market. Huston’s Inland Logistics Center is rail based, and
they’re very successful.”
Councilwoman Berger said, “I’m really trying to understand the
broader perspective. Who are we in competition with? My job is
to make sure that I look out for the best interest of the City
and to protect the City. In order to make that decision, I’m
trying to understand the scope of not only this project, but how
large it is nationwide, and how many other cities are out there
being given the same types of letters we received from other
agencies to try and promote their ports. The Texas port is very
big, and they plan on getting cargo from the Panama Canal as
well.” Mr. Pinsky stated, “It’s a different marketplace.
Virginia has one port. Florida has 14 ports. It’s easy for
Virginia to have a letter written to Virginia, because they only
have one inland port. New York, North and South Carolina, and
Georgia have one port. Florida has more of a challenge to decide
on how cargo is going to come in, and where is it going to go.
It takes a governor and legislature to say ‘We’re going to
settle the argument.’” Councilman Kelly noted, “I know you’re an
expert on all of this, but what you just heard is opinion and
speculation. I can’t go through every page of this backup
material. I relied on four or five other individuals that are
just as learned as this man. I was told, and what he left out,
is that most of this extra. . . . No one says there’s going to
be a lot of extra stuff coming through the Panama Canal.”
Councilman Kelly continued, “Right now, Walmart is down 25% in
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
20
their distribution. A number of places are down 25%. We have an
economic crisis, and one of the reasons is because we don’t have
jobs. It’s easy to yell jobs and try to get something like this
through. Whether he is right or not, it’s his opinion. I have no
paperwork to back up what this gentleman just said. I’m told
that the area in Florida who already has it in the works is
Tampa Bay. It’s closer, and they’re going to get most of this
cargo. From lobbyists I’ve talked to, the Governor is going to
be sympathetic to Tampa Bay, because they’re mad at him over the
bullet train. That’s speculation also. What he just gave you is
his opinion and speculation. A number of these ports are only
five hundred or six hundred acres. Just like this letter from
Jones, Lang, and LaSalle, no one writes a letter like this
unless they’re asked. It doesn’t make sense to have a letter
come from California. There’s nothing concrete on what you just
heard. I have no backup material about what this man said. The
people I’ve talked to disagree with what this gentleman just
said. I do not believe that time is of the essence, because the
economy is down. Quite frankly, it bothers me that I’m going to
have ships coming through the Panama Canal and bring me more
stuff from Japan, Korea, and every place else. If you want to
put money into something like this, let’s make something. I’m
all for the concept. I’m for the concept of 35,000 jobs, but not
this one.”
Councilwoman Martin stated, “In our e-mails that we’ve been
getting on the reports from the state legislature, one said that
the Governor didn’t commit $50 million, but $77 million for the
Port of Miami. That’s not speculation. That has been done.”
Councilman Kelly noted, “That’s Miami.” Councilwoman Martin
commented, “That’s right. You can’t say it’s speculation, that
there’s no concrete evidence when, in fact, there is evidence of
that. That money has been earmarked for that.” Councilman Kelly
pointed out, “I didn’t speak of the Port of Miami.” Mr. Ferguson
remarked, “There are a number of recent studies showing that
Florida can capture this trade if it improves its ports the way
they need to be improved. Tampa is not in the game, because they
will never be able to get to 50 feet, which is the depth needed
for the ports. They have too many environmental issues. They
will get some traffic, but not the traffic that we’re talking
about. The property is located in south central St. Lucie
County. It’s on the Martin County line, adjacent to the
southwest border of Port St. Lucie. It has just what it takes to
be an Integrated Logistics Center to serve South Central Florida
and the southeast United States regional market. The site is
uniquely situated in South Central Florida, because of the
traffic engineer’s planning deciding that St. Lucie County was
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
21
going to be where the two main north/south arteries in Florida
were going to converge as they headed south, and as they go
north where they would diverge.”
Mr. Ferguson continued, “It also has available vacant land close
to the existing railroads that go up the east coast of Florida,
unlike the counties to the south that are either built out or
too far away. This is not an inland port. An inland port is
simply that. It’s a port facility where you move the container
traffic away from the highly congested seaport areas where land
is limited and expensive, and move those container management
operations inland, and you have a port facility. It has customs
and all of those attributes that go with a port. We’re talking
about just that, a rail yard, an inland port, plus Integrated
Logistics Centers. It’s where the distribution and light
manufacturing centers can be located, because they’re close to
where the containers are handled. There have been comments that
the inland ports are only 300 to 1,000 acres, but this is not an
inland port. This is an Integrated Logistics Center. You want
all of your facilities to be able to operate in a relatively
enclosed area, so they are not impacting the neighboring
properties. As the trucks leave the containment yard and go to
the distribution centers, they are staying on site. We have
sufficient land and transportation road and rail. In the last
couple of years, the City of Port St. Lucie’s Comprehensive Plan
was amended to identify the fact that it has less than the
optimal amount of industrial land within its City boundaries.
There are general planning formulas where the City should have
somewhere between eight and twelve percent of its land area as
industrial land. The City currently has roughly 3%. You’re short
of adequate industrial land, and the industrial land you have is
scattered throughout. It will serve its purpose, but there’s no
way that it could serve the purpose of providing for an
Integrated Logistics Center.”
Mr. Ferguson asked, “What attributes can the City add to an
integrated logistics center? One of the key ingredients is a
workforce. You have a large, qualified, or trainable workforce
that is looking for work. Port St. Lucie probably has one of the
largest, diverse, available housing markets, if not in Florida,
in the United States. It has moderate, reasonably priced
housing, and high-end housing. It has approved plans for
additional housing to hit all of those markets. You need people
to fill that housing. The people who are filling that housing
need jobs. You have excellent universities and schools in this
area who have provided letters of support. You have an active
union leadership that has created apprenticeship programs. This
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
22
will provide jobs for those trained individuals. You have the
necessary infrastructure. Solid waste and other utilities are
available. You have that infrastructure in place to provide
those services to the TCIC site. Police and fire will be taken
care of as part of the detailed site planning. It’s available.
What do you get by annexing this property into the City? You get
to control the future of this property. This project has had a
cross-section of community support that is unparalleled by any
other project that I’ve ever worked on. We have support from
education, the workforce, and community leaders. If Miami is
going to be a player in the international game, they will find a
site and shoehorn it into the process and make it work. It won’t
be as good a site, and it will cost many more dollars to make it
work.”
Mr. Ferguson stated, “There’s an issue about taxes and benefits
to the City. If the City annexes the property this summer, and
it’s on the tax roles as of January 1, and nothing happens on
the property in 2012, it continues to operate as it’s currently
operating. Its values are as its values are today, and the City
adopts the same millage rate next year as it adopted this year.
The City in 2012 will receive approximately $42,000 from this
property. There will be no additional services provided to the
property next year over and above what the City is providing to
the property today, which is nothing. The projected build out in
five years is roughly 4.5 million square feet of distribution
center site, a large portion of the rail yard, and an
interchange hub. Based on conservative evaluations of the value
of those improvements, based on the current millage rate of the
City, the City would receive gross tax revenues of roughly $2.5
million. Moving out ten years, working on roughly 12 million
square feet of distribution center, based on conservative
values, using conservative land values, the gross tax revenues
to the City in 2021 would be roughly $4.8 million. Roughly, it
costs the City $.25 for every dollar of tax revenue that it
receives to provide services to industrial land.
Industrial/Commercial land is a money maker for local
governments. Of the $2.5 and $4.8 million, 75% of that goes
straight to your bottom line to pay for services for other
residents in the City.”
Mr. Ferguson noted, “We have heard lots of grumbling about jobs.
Everyone comes in preaching jobs. We understand that. We had to
identify with the Department of Community Affairs what the
ultimate build out on the site is. We have a policy that you
would be adopting that limits build out to 40 million square
feet. That’s a 30-year build out. The newspaper reported 36,000
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
23
jobs, and everyone is grumbling about that number. That’s a huge
number. That number came from build out in years, and simple
mathematics of 40,000 million square feet times 900, the upper
reach of the range jobs per million square feet, you get 36,000.
We have also said in everything that we provided to the City
12,000, which is the low end, which is 300 jobs per million
square feet times the build out of 40 million square feet. We’ve
broken the job growth down into a tighter time frame. When this
gets approved tonight and it goes forward, comes back to you and
you approve the land use, and it goes through the process,
realistically we are looking at two years for the construction
jobs, because that’s what it takes to get through the land use
approval, the rezoning, the permitting, and the site planning.
We wanted to make it understood that this was not creating jobs
tomorrow. You have two types of jobs, construction and
permanent. Construction jobs are going to ramp up starting in
about 24 months. You will have roughly 800 to 1000 jobs in the
first phase. Conservatively, we’re looking at 1.5 million square
feet of distribution center being constructed every year for the
next 30 years.”
Mr. Ferguson commented, “More important are the permanent jobs.
This is a ten-year projection based on 12 million square feet of
distribution center. It depends on the level of automation,
whether you’re at the 300 or at the 900 range. Walmart
Distribution Center is roughly 1.1 million square feet. It has
employed a high of 800 people. It’s currently employing about
600 people. It’s mid-range. Those are the direct jobs. Those are
jobs created by the facilities on site. We’re not making it up.
We’re not blowing smoke. The numbers can be crossed check with
the experts. They are real. We have the facilities to do the
retraining necessary for a broad range of jobs at these
facilities. This is a long-term project that can provide jobs
for the next generation. Your Utility Department is looking to
the future. They are looking for build out of the City and the
water supplies that they’re going to need. There is a draft
Annexation Agreement that’s not on the agenda tonight, but in
that agreement we have agreed to donate cost free 17 well sites
to your Utility Department to provide potable water to the City.
That water has a tremendous value. Potentially, it could be in
the millions of dollars.”
Mr. Ferguson pointed out, “There is also the added benefit of
the 7,139 acres. Over 2,000 acres are going to be set aside for
Open-Space Conservation and for Utility uses. The utility use is
to recharge lakes and the FP&L transmission lines that run
through the property. The Open-Space Conservation lands were
identified by staff, and they pushed that we set those aside now
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
24
up front as part of the land use process, because they are
primarily native habitat. They have not been disturbed as most
of the property has been disturbed by the ongoing agricultural
activities. Florida has a window of opportunity. Processes take
time and for Florida to be ready for the cargo that’s going to
come through the Panama Canal, it’s today folks. If Florida is
going to be ready for cargo, Florida needs to identify an
Integrated Logistics Center for the Port of Miami to take
advantage of, which means that TCIC needs to be open at the same
time that Florida is ready for cargo, which is the end of 2014
or the beginning of 2015. For TCIC to be open, it’s important
that the shippers be notified as to where the stuff is going,
which means that construction has to begin in mid-2013, so that
the shippers will know where to start planning to send the stuff
when the TCIC opens. For construction to begin, we need
financing. You can’t get financing without City approval. We
will need those by the end of 2012 or the first part of 2013.”
Mr. Ferguson remarked, “To get those, we need to start the
permitting and design phase. Before we do that, we need to get
our land use approved, which is what we’re here talking about
tonight. To get the land use approved by the end of this year or
early fall, we need to transmit the Department of Community
Affairs tonight. We are not pressuring the City Council to rush
into a decision. We are pressuring the City Council to make a
decision, so that Port St. Lucie can be the Integrated Logistics
Center open when Florida is ready for cargo. So yes, we are
asking the City Council to make a decision tonight, but it’s not
an arbitrary date. This is to make sure that Port St. Lucie is
out in front of any other potential site that is even thinking
about providing the services for the Port of Miami and Florida.
We urge you to vote yes on the First Reading of annexation, and
we urge you to transmit to the Department of Community Affairs
to get the state’s opinion on whether or not this site makes
sense for an integrated logistics center, or it makes sense to
change the land use to Industrial. We would respectfully request
an opportunity to very briefly address any comments raised
during the public hearing.”
Mayor Faiella said, “I want to recognize Commissioner Craft,
Commissioner Mowery, former State Representative Adam Fetterman,
and former Commissioner Charles Grande.” Councilman Kelly
stated, “I would like to refute what Mr. Ferguson just said.”
Mayor Faiella asked, “Can we wait, because I really want to get
through this?” Councilman Kelly replied, “It’s your call, but
they have had almost an hour. They have an entourage of people
here, and I have nothing. I’m against this. The man has said
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
25
things that are not true. I would like to refute some of those
things he just said that I think are important. I won’t take
long. If you remember when he started off, and I’m not looking
for a reply, because I’m speaking to my Council, he asked why
Port St. Lucie. He said we had the infrastructure, the roads,
the rail, water and sewer, and a great Utility Department. We do
not have the roads. We have one road, it’s in bad shape, and
it’s a two-lane road. Range Line Road is it. I understand we
have one rail, and I don’t know if there’s a place for the rail
to turn around. You know what we’ve been going through with
water and sewer with our plans for the next 15 to 20 years. We
are not going to have enough water in 20 years the way it is
right now. For him to show all of those wells, I’d be fighting
him if they were in the county, because it takes away from us. I
don’t want a lake that’s on their property. I want to own my own
lake. I don’t want to give that control to anyone.”
Councilman Kelly continued, “There’s no infrastructure like this
man said. He said the support is overwhelming. I don’t know what
you have, but all I have is 12 square miles. I should have a
volume of e-mails from the people in this City. I think I
received a half dozen. I know that most of the letters I
received were from people who were asked to write to us. I don’t
see the support. Then you go to the ‘ifs.’ I can’t believe he
said that if we annexed this next year we would have a windfall
of $42,000. It’s going to cost more for our people to answer the
telephones regarding questions about this annexation. It’s
$42,000 and he called it a windfall. I will go out the ten years
at $4.8 million. Walmart is not paying taxes for ten years, or I
think it’s on a sliding scale. If you want Target to come in
with a distribution center, they’re going to want all kinds of
incentives. They’re going to be looking for ten years of free
taxes. The other gentleman said that his wouldn’t cost the state
anything. That bothers me. We received millions of dollars for
Digital Domain and the biotechs. We’re getting nothing from the
state. There’s no funding. These are all ‘ifs.’ If this happens,
I will have 35,000 jobs. It’s nothing but ‘ifs.’ Regarding the
construction jobs, am I going to have people coming here from
Broward County building this, or am I going to get local people?
A $42,000 windfall? Wow.”
Mayor Faiella opened the Public Hearing.
LARRY PELTON, representing the Economic Development Council,
said, “We realize that this is a very complicated project and
all of the answers aren’t there. To answer those questions, they
need to get moving with it. We passed a statement of concept. We
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
26
conceptually support the project that you’ve seen tonight. We
don’t have a development plan or a finance plan that we could
scrutinize. We can say from an economic development perspective
that we would absolutely support the attraction of companies and
the types of jobs that would accrue to this project. We would
take an active role in trying to recruit companies that would
locate in this project, should this project become a reality.”
Councilwoman Berger stated, “I appreciate you said that you
conceptually approve it, because this goes beyond just tonight’s
conversation. How do you feel about how this project may work
with or conflict with the projects that we’ve already
established? The EDC, St. Lucie County, and Port St. Lucie have
really worked hard to make something special happen in that
region. Part of me is concerned about moving forward on a
project like this. Does it sabotage what we’ve already done?
Does it change it in any way?” Mr. Pelton replied, “There could
certainly be comparative conflicts, but the nature of the jobs
and the nature of the types of industry that they’re saying
they’re going to go after are not the kinds of companies that
would be attracted into the Tradition development.”
Mr. Pelton continued, “We’re trying to get companies that are
allied, that we can attract as a result of the investments that
we’ve already made. Those are in the science and technology
fields. I don’t think that’s going to be a competitor in any way
of the Intermodal Campus, nor do I think the Intermodal Campus
would be a competitor for the types of jobs it will attract in
Tradition.” Councilwoman Berger stated, “We had talked about the
fact that this would really round out nicely what we’ve already
started bringing here, offering a different type of job for a
more well rounded diverse group. How about for conflict of the
road system? How do you think that will work with new
conversations that are happening about the increased traffic on
Becker Road and possibly the addition of Crosstown Parkway being
built to go out west?” Mr. Pelton replied, “I don’t have a
professional opinion on the infrastructure. I would certainly
think that there would have to be infrastructure improvements.
Any DO for a project of this size would require that private
investors pay for those road improvements. I don’t know if it
would create an inconvenience, but I would think that would be
something that you settle with the developers going forward. My
opinion is that this is all going to come back to you, and
you’re going to control the destiny of this project. You’re
going to be given ample opportunity to make certain that you
minimize negative secondary impacts that might accrue as a
result of this project.”
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
27
COMMISSIONER CRAFT, St. Lucie County, said, “We have
agriculture, tourism, and the building trades. We’ve seen in the
latest economic times what that has done to our economy. We’ve
been hit harder than most areas of our nation, because of the
lack of diversity. Today, we have an opportunity, and something
we should consider. I’m not saying that there aren’t issues that
are going to come up, but it deserves its chance in front of us
to hear and find out whether or not we can be an international
competitor when it comes to the trade industries. I’m not
speaking on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. I’m
speaking on behalf of me. My Board has not taken a formal
position on this. Our staff did make some comments to the City
approximately two years ago on some of the concerns that we
have. There’s a community that’s adjacent to these properties
that needs great attention to make sure that proper buffering
has taken place. There are major concerns with the road
infrastructure as well as the utilities. However, all of those
things are worth the discussion, because of what this could
potentially mean to our economics in St. Lucie County. If we get
it right, it could be the biggest economic boost in St. Lucie
County’s history. If we get it wrong, it could be the exact
opposite. We’re putting this in your capable hands to make sure
that we’re looking at it from every aspect and doing what’s
right for our community.” Mayor Faiella asked, “Why isn’t the
county adopting this project?” Commissioner Craft replied, “The
only thing I can say is that they didn’t bring it before the
county. I’ve discussed the project with the land owners, and
these land owners are currently part of this. They’re in
agriculture. They understand the changing economics of our
state, and that we have to do something if we’re going to be
able to continue to be competitive.” Mayor Faiella noted, “I’m
hearing that the county doesn’t want it, it’s not a suitable
project, and it belongs in the City.” Commissioner Craft
commented, “The county has not taken a position on this one way
or the other. I think it’s worth the discussion, and I’m willing
to participate in any part of the discussion. This project is in
my district. I’ve had multiple conversations with the neighbors
out there. I will be before you to make sure that their issues
are being taken care of. I generally make it a policy to stay
out of your business, but this is of such great importance to
our community that I felt I should come and speak.”
Councilman Kelly pointed out, “I did speak to each Commissioner
about a year and a half ago, and I think that at that time you
and maybe one other are the only ones who would even hear about
it. They did not have the support. Since they have a new County
Commission, I don’t know what it would be now. Two of them were
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
28
even more offended than I am that they would even bring it in.”
Commissioner Craft remarked, “We didn’t have a public discussion
about this other than at one board meeting where Mr. Ferguson
asked for a letter of support. At that time, there was no
support, because we didn’t have enough information. You can
review the tape. That was the only discussion that I’m aware of
that the county had.” Vice Mayor Bartz said, “I know that you’re
saying you haven’t taken a formal stand at this point, but
certainly if we determine that we’re going to go forward with
it, this is going to have a very large impact on the county and
on your county roads. I really believe that we need to sit down
together as county and City. If you were doing it and it was
affecting my City, I would want to be involved.” Commissioner
Craft stated, “I would offer you my staff to make sure that we
are communicating those issues that the county has to make sure
that any impacts that the county would incur, we were at least
trying to make sure that we’re compensated for it. I think the
communication between our boards is better than it has ever
been, and it’s only going to improve. I fully expect to be
working with you on this project and every other project that
involves both of us.”
Vice Mayor Bartz noted, “I think there are so many things that
are going to heavily impact the county that all of the
Commissioners need to be involved, and their input needs to come
to the table. If we have a lot of truck traffic, where is that
going? Where are we going to fuel up? I would like to feel
confident that we can sit down, if this goes forward, and talk
about the real impacts that this is going to have, so that we’re
all protected.” Commissioner Craft commented, “If it does move
forward it should not just be St. Lucie County. The City of Ft.
Pierce should also be at the table” Vice Mayor Bartz pointed
out, “And Martin County as well.” Commissioner Craft remarked,
“If we want to take it one step further, all four governing
bodies met together for the first time, so there is a
willingness and we will work with you, but I wanted to make sure
that I spoke this evening for Chris Craft, and that it at least
deserves the discussion we’re having right now.” Councilwoman
Berger asked, “Can you give some idea of what the history looks
like on the area around the airport? Did you create that campus
area around the airport?” Commissioner Craft replied, “We have
two industrial parks there, Airport Industrial Park East and
Airport Industrial Park West, and there is approximately 2,000
acres north along Indrio Road. A great deal of that property is
being set aside for mitigation. We currently have plans of
placing one of our utility facilities out there for a water or
wastewater treatment plant. It could potentially compliment this
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
29
as a secondary use, but I don’t think it’s going to be able to
handle the kind of traffic that this would produce.”
Councilwoman Berger said, “I wrote a term down that Mr. Ferguson
used earlier and that was ‘shoehorn.’ Are we trying to shoehorn
it in somewhere? We have a lot of acreage out there so that’s
not a problem, but since we don’t have a lot of infrastructure,
I’m wondering if we’re trying to shoehorn this in between what
we do have. I believe that your district also encompasses Port
St. Lucie residents that are west of I-95. Is that right?”
Commissioner Craft replied, “It depends. It’s very scattered in
that area.” Councilwoman Berger stated, “It’s important to
continue to put that out there to our citizens who may not be
here tonight, because they don’t think it affects them. The
Crosstown Parkway from I-95 going west will be widened and have
24/7, 18 wheelers with this kind of project.” Commissioner Craft
noted, “I have not had the phone calls or e-mails from those
folks. They look to you to deal with City issues, and they look
to me to deal with the unincorporated issues, not that they
don’t sometimes overlap.”
AMBASSADOR NEIL L. SIEGEL said, “I’ve had a career in Florida of
building very large economic-driven developments. I’ve also
worked in government. This property is unique and it’s all about
location. It has the ability for it to provide access in a
manner in which other properties do not have. We’re here tonight
to have a debate, to create a healthy dialogue. However, that
dialogue needs to be a partnership, and not an adversarial
relationship. It needs to be a partnership that exchanges
information, so you as the governing body can make intelligent
decisions as to what is good for your City. Tonight, we ask you
to allow that process to continue, to allow you to vote. The
heart and soul of America was manufacturing and we’ve lost that.
How do we bring that back to this country? We bring it back with
projects like this. You will have offices, distribution centers,
industrial, and manufacturing. We talked about how this will be
financed. I’m already dealing, because of my relationships of
doing large-scale developments like this, speaking to large
financiers who want to be part of this project. There’s
uncertainty, because it’s not defined. However, we work with
them as we go along, because it’s about the entitlements and
approvals. We feel we have worked well with your staff. Our
focus tonight should be about vision. If you vote no tonight,
you deny the ability to have that dialog to see whether it is
good for the City or not. It’s about all of you that have a
fiduciary responsibility to your City to determine where you
want to be ten years from now.” Councilman Kelly stated, “Your
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
30
resumé is excellent. You did use words like ‘if’ and ‘vision.’
Are you being compensated for being here this evening?”
Ambassador Siegel replied, “No, I’m not compensated at all. I’m
an investor in this project. I’ve been allowed the opportunity
from the land owners to be part of what I think has to be one of
the most important initiatives in the State of Florida. I
understand free trade agreements. I understand that I’m not
being paid, and I hope to be a responsible owner with the land
owners in making sure that we’re responsible to you, if we have
the ability to go forward.”
BOB SCHAFER, St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce, read a
Resolution of support from the St. Lucie County Chamber of
Commerce into the record.
ADAM FETTERMAN said, “I come to you tonight as a resident of
Port St. Lucie, and as someone who did have the honor of
representing the people in the State Legislature. I’m in support
of this project and ask that you transmit it to Tallahassee for
review, because that’s the responsible and proper thing to do
for the people that you represent. I’ve seen the faces of
families who are having a hard time making ends meet, that are
without jobs, and that have seen from the federal government on
down handouts to corporations to get jobs created. I have
supported many of them, because that’s what you need to do to
get the job done. The one we’re talking about today of job
creation is one that has a number of shiny moving parts. You’re
being presented an opportunity to create jobs. All that’s being
asked of you is a land use change to give agricultural folks an
opportunity for a project to go forward for further review,
discussion, and debate. I have supported Torrey Pines, VGTI, and
Digital Domain, and believe those were necessary for the future
of our community, for the jobs that my six year old may have
some day. Once again you’re being asked to be visionaries, but
this time I don’t see the cost to you. I don’t see the downside
to you, when you will continue to control how this project
evolves. We miss the economic diversity of folks who are looking
for blue collar work. In the audience today supporting this
project are union members, developers, school teachers, and
washed up politicians. Where else do to you pull together that
kind of group except when the idea makes sense? I’m here
tonight, because I’m urging you to do what’s right for the
people you represent, and give them an opportunity at a living
wage in a real job right in their backyard.”
SANDRA LESTER, resident, said, “We had a home in the area of
Twylite Terrace where a land use change went about. We
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
31
petitioned to change the land use, so we ended up with a
convenience store across the street. Our property values went
down and crime went up. We moved out of the City as a result. We
invested money in the Treasure Coast Airpark to get away. We had
two and a half acres in a controlled area. We’re in an
agricultural area and we love it. We’re very disappointed to see
that, again, the City of Port St. Lucie is going to annex land
right next to our property that we invested in and that we are
now upside down in. To do this again to us is a personal thing.
I have to respect Councilman Kelly. He has hit the nail on the
head, but there’s also something else. We have people who have
been in the agricultural business here forever, they’ve been
doing a good job, and we need that. We are losing farms rapidly.
Where are we going to get food if we keep changing all of our
good agricultural land into industry? That’s a point that needs
to be brought up. I’m disappointed that this is what you want to
do, and it’s all for the almighty dollar. It isn’t to be good
for us. It isn’t to make Port St. Lucie better. It’s for the
almighty dollar. I’m hoping that you can see through it, that
you can see through all of the infomercial techniques that you
have had thrown at you. I’ve watched your faces as you’ve been
enthralled by the presentation. Get through that and look at the
facts. Miami is a sensible place to have a port. It makes
absolutely no sense at all to transport those containers this
far. If you talk to anyone at the Port of Miami you will start
to realize that this is the case. I’m not an economist, but I do
think that’s something that needs to be brought up. You need to
see through the smoke and mirrors. There will be a major impact
on Tradition. It’s destroying the lifestyle here.”
JAMES RICH, resident, stated, “I’ve just completed eight years
on the City’s Planning and Zoning Board. I took the job very
seriously as an unpaid volunteer, and I think I made some very
good decisions on the Planning and Zoning Board in helping to
shape the City. Are there some decisions I would like to take
back? Absolutely, when you find out things after the fact. This
project is one of those unique opportunities that doesn’t come
around very often. It’s not a done deal. There are baby steps
that have to take place. I’m asking to go to the next level.
Let’s approve this tonight. You will have plenty of opportunity
to object to it if you feel compelled to. When we looked at this
in February at the Planning and Zoning meeting, we had letters
from the Stuart/Martin County Chamber of Commerce in favor, and
they passed a resolution. I have James Neill who is a property
owner out there in favor of the project. Workforce Solutions and
the Marine Industry Association are also in favor, as well as
the Indian River State College Board of Trustees. I take their
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
32
advice and recommendations. I look at the possibility down the
road in the not too distant future of possibly exporting
American made goods. I don’t know if it’s part of the plan, or
they are able to do that legally, but I would like to see the
reverse of not so much coming in, but maybe a number of our
goods going out. Let’s take it to the next level.” Councilwoman
Berger asked, “Are you speaking for yourself or the Planning and
Zoning Board?” Mr. Rich replied, “I’m a former member. I just
finished my eight years, so this is on my time. I’ve never been
before the City Council on any project. That’s how passionate I
feel about this project.”
KAREN HAROLD, resident, commented, “I’m relatively new to Port
St. Lucie, but I’ve come with 11 years experience in the Chicago
Land Planning and Zoning. We had a project like this proposed to
us, and we voted no. Another city came along and voted yes. We
lost all control of the Site Plan and the county roads. We had
nothing to say, because another city voted yes. I urge you to
take control and vote yes tonight. You will have further
opportunity to view the Site Plan, look it over, and make
changes. You won’t have it if you vote no.”
FRED COOK, resident, pointed out, “I also served almost nine
years on the Planning and Zoning Board. Do we take one step
forward and do something that’s worthwhile for this City, or do
we take three steps back, because it may or may not work? Let’s
do the right thing for the City, the county, and for the
citizens of this community. Say yes to this request. Send it on
to Tallahassee. Let them look at it and come back with whatever
they want.”
JAN CHINNERS, resident, remarked, “My home backs up to what you
want to annex. This is taking away my dream. Right now, we are
already affected by bad roads. What kind of impact would
thousands of vehicles have? You’re talking about $42,000. My
home would depreciate more than that. I think that when all
things are considered at the end of the day, we are an area of
people and people should come before all else.”
WILLARD LESTER, resident, said, “I to live in the Treasure Coast
Airpark, and it’s pretty hard to come up against all of these
mirrors and smoke. I heard things here that are absolute
baloney. When they’re talking about this wonderful Intermodal
Campus, it’s a filthy pit. I’ve been in several intermodal ports
that have become hubs for crime, the air is filthy, because
diesel locomotives and trucks do nothing but spew pollution into
your air. If you think this is going to be a wonderful and
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
33
pretty place, give it up because it’s not. I have spent hours on
the phone with the Associate Director of the Port of Miami, and
he told me in no uncertain terms that it’s too far to send
cargo. We would not consider sending cargo to Port St. Lucie. He
also told me that 90% of this proposed increase in cargo is
slated to be distributed south of Lake Okeechobee. He pointedly
said, ‘Why would we want to move it north of Lake Okeechobee to
distribute it south of Lake Okeechobee?’ I haven’t heard any of
these things come out of these guys. All I’ve heard here is a
lot of guys who want to get their property from the value of Ag-
5 land to the value of Heavy Industrial. They haven’t mentioned
any of these other little points. Also the rail here is totally
incapable of handling what they’re talking about. You’re going
to have to have massive rail work done. They’re too far from the
highway entrance, and you’re talking millions of dollars to
connect to the highways. This is not a good location. Another
thing that the Port of Miami gentleman told me was that they
would not consider shipping cargo much more than 20 miles to a
distribution hub, because it’s too expensive, and rail is not
the primary way to move cargo. It’s by ship. It would be much
cheaper for them to move cargo north by ship rather than to let
it off in Miami, move it by rail to Port St. Lucie, and then
redistribute it backward. That is absolute nonsense. You’re not
hearing the truth, and I want you to understand that. When you
make a decision, can you go back on that decision? I think
Councilman Kelly said that you can’t undo what you do. Before
you make that decision, you need to take into consideration
what’s going to happen to your western development for
Tradition. Do they want to be across the street from an
intermodal port? I don’t think so. That’s going to have a
tremendous impact on that. Those people went forward with the
idea that they would be supported, but now all of a sudden
they’re going to be back stabbed. I know you don’t care much
about us tucked out there at Treasure Coast Airpark, but we will
be in the middle of this. They showed us buffer plans. Well the
buffer plans were what they had to give us by law. They could
not land lock us, so they had to buffer us all the way to Glades
Cut-Off Road. They allowed no distance between our community and
the west or the south. They were constructing buildings to our
south border. Before you make this decision that may be
irrevocable, talk to these people in the cargo business.”
DANNA SMALL said, “I thought Commissioner Craft said it well.
Take the next step forward in the process. There are a number of
concerns, but you’re not giving anything away yet. If you don’t
move forward, you don’t know what’s going to come back. This is
something that needs to move forward and be given the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
34
opportunity.”
PASTOR BRYAN LONGWORTH said, “If this project were coming to the
Council and asking for millions of dollars in tax money, I would
be the first to oppose this. However, this is a project where
they’ve said they’re going to pay for the costs. As long as
they’re willing to pay for the impact that this is going to
cause, I would ask that this would be put forward and that a
vote of yes would happen tonight. The #1 driving factor in
growth and economic development, investment, and the value of
property is jobs. Without jobs you have Detroit. With jobs we
could have a haven where even in an economic downturn we could
have some positive things happening. With the biotech jobs, I
heard that our people aren’t qualified for these types of jobs.
Yet the jobs that we’re talking about with this project are jobs
that out of work construction workers can do. People are selling
everything they can possibly sell to see if they can pay their
rent. These people need jobs. This could turn our City around,
and it could provide extra revenue for the City, which is much
needed. The investors are smart people, and they’re going to be
investing millions of dollars here. If they didn’t think this
was going to work, they wouldn’t do it. If this doesn’t work, I
see little harm that’s going to happen from this. I would
encourage you to move this forward to the next step.”
JEANNE REID, resident, stated, “I have looked at all the papers
in your notebooks, and my interest was in the rail line traffic.
They were not in those papers. I requested to see the traffic
analysis of the rail lines, and I didn’t get any response. I’m
still interested in where those reports are, because this is
serious if they’re going to use these rail lines. I’m interested
in how long the cars are going to be, how many daily trips there
are going to be, and how the fire and rescue is going to get
across those tracks. There’s a school there that has nine
grades. What if they need rescue and fire? They said there was
going to be fire and rescue in the port. Well, they’re not going
to take care of the community. I see in the report that there
are going to be 12,000 daily trips of trucks and cars. I can’t
even phantom that. I know that Tradition, Indian River, and the
Becker Road area have not been notified. Neighbors I know
haven’t been notified. If they weren’t touching the border of
where this is taking place, they weren’t notified. They don’t
have a clue, and that includes the Torino area. Anyone that
crosses railroad tracks is going to be affected, and they don’t
even know it yet.”
JORGE ARRIZURIETA, resident of Miami, noted, “I’m here in my
capacity as the former US Executive Director at the Inter-
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
35
American Development Bank. Think of it as a world bank for Latin
America and the Caribbean. I also served as the President of the
Florida FTAA, which is ex-Governor Bush’s initiative to bring to
Florida the permanent secretary of the Free Trade Area of the
Americas. The reason why I begin my comments by citing those two
roles is because they’re totally relevant to the decision you’re
making tonight. In the case of the FTAA, Florida’s trade reality
of Latin America and the Caribbean speaks for itself. We are the
largest trading partner with every country in Latin America and
the Caribbean. That trade reality isn’t going to change. It’s
going to continue to grow and will be a significant part of the
economic development of our state. (Clerk’s Note: Mr.
Arrizurieta read excerpts into the record from an Opinion
Editorial he wrote that was published in papers throughout
Florida over the weekend). I recognize the decision here tonight
is a difficult one. All I suggest is that you make the decision
tonight to consider the opportunity you have to be part of the
process as this moves forward by allowing your City to
participate. The state will make a decision on which locations
to actually identify. If you as a municipal body support the
initiative, you will be able to influence how that project may
move forward, and you will be able to place your City in a
significant opportunity for the future.” Councilwoman Berger
said, “In your article you had referenced multiple cities as
options. I know that Port St. Lucie was one of three in your
article.” Mr. Arrizurieta stated, “The reality is that the
interest for these distribution centers for this opportunity is
way beyond this community. The interest exists because of the
reality of Florida’s economic and trade reality. We will be
competing, if you allow yourself to compete, in that process.
This land has qualities that the others who are competing do not
have, especially those competing from this part of the state.”
Councilwoman Berger asked, “Did you submit your article to the
newspapers in those cities as well? I’m guessing it was a press
release type of situation where you submitted it to the local
news organization.” Mr. Arrizurieta replied, “The article was
actually distributed statewide as an opportunity for the state
to accept the policy initiative of Governor Scott, and,
specifically, for this community to accept that reality and try
to support something that will be of significant benefit.”
Councilwoman Berger noted, “You being the champion of the
statewide initiative from Governor Scott, the same article was
statewide so that it would influence those other locations that
we may or may not be competing with should this move forward.”
Mr. Arrizurieta commented, “I saw it published in the Miami
Herald, as well as in your local papers. I’m not sure where else
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
36
it was published, but the purpose of me writing the article was
to place on the table a very significant economic development
opportunity the state is embarking on that will be of
significant value potentially to a couple of different cities
around the state. I think it was an effort intended to put the
issue on the table in a way that helps your residents appreciate
the significance of this vote tonight.”
A recess was called at 11:00 p.m., and the meeting resumed at
11:10 p.m.
SEAN MITCHELL, resident, said, “This is the worst economic
downturn in my lifetime. We have unemployment in this county of
over 14%. I don’t speak on behalf of the Workforce Board. I sit
on the Workforce Board, the Contractors’ Licensing Board for the
county, and I also represent thousands of apprentices and
journeymen, their building and construction trades of the
Treasure Coast. I support this concept. I’m not saying that I
put my rubber stamp on it. There are many questions. Looking
forward, if everything is done in its proper perspective, I
support the idea. There are a number of things you have to do to
make sure that this is done properly, but if it’s done properly
it can be a great thing for everyone. Not everyone who lives in
this City is college material. There’s still a middle class,
what’s left of it. We’ve spent so much time and effort on
different things that have been built in this City. If we do
this properly, it could be a shining beacon.”
LYZA HEFFERNAN, resident, stated, “I’m a construction manager
and my husband is a truck driver. Last week my husband worked 12
hours. That’s through no fault of his own. We could use a few
almighty dollars. What is the risk to the City for what’s on the
table tonight? What is the negative result of tonight’s
decision? It sounds to me like what we’re risking is a fairly
large number of tax dollars in property taxes for this area. The
worse possible case scenario is that this falls through, and we
end up accepting a lesser tax rate for this property. We
shouldn’t focus on the best possible case scenario, but we
shouldn’t focus on the worse-case scenario either. We need these
jobs. It sounds like it’s going to happen somewhere. I’m asking
that you to make it happen here.”
PHILIP DIMARIA, resident, noted, “I’m here to speak against
Ordinance 11-18 and its companion Ordinance 11-25. I would urge
this Council to do the same. This is more than a smoke screen
for a land use change. This intermodal center is not going to
happen here or anywhere. It’s all about a land use change to
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
37
make that land more valuable to the landowners, so that
subsequently they can sell it off. It’s out of character with
the area. All of the other issues have been addressed. We know
nothing about what’s going to happen with the rail lines. Where
are the representatives from the Port of Miami? How come they’re
not here to speak in favor of this? I would urge this Council to
reject these ordinances and the make-believe jobs that aren’t
going to happen anyway.”
ADVAN K. ALGHITA commented, “This is a very meaningful project
and deserves all the time you are giving to it. I’ve been in the
engineering/planning business for 40 years. I was involved in
the Everglades Restoration project. I agree with the
presentation and all of your questions. I have no problem with
the zoning change.”
JOHN AULD, SLC Commercial, said, “Florida and the City are
lagging behind the nation in our recovery. The rapid growth of
the population in the City and the tax base in the last decade
is attributed to the housing boom. That’s how we got to where we
are. Cheap lots and available housing attracted buyers,
builders, developers, speculators, and many trades’ people. The
boom is over and we’re in a bust. Jobs are the answer. We need
jobs now and in the future to ensure that the City continues to
develop and evolve. I’m speaking from a mega view of the city.
As a former president of the St. Lucie County Economic
Development Council, I confirm that we have been and continue to
be very competitive in seeking and developing jobs. But we’re in
competition. The Treasure Coast Intermodal Campus promises to
bring jobs to the City. That’s what we need. This City Council
has a history of courage to make the tough decisions that are
important to the future growth and welfare of this City, and I
encourage you to have that same courage tonight, and vote yes on
both of these propositions.”
APRIL PRICE, resident, said, “I understand transportation. I
understand what this campus could mean to this region. This
could be huge. Will it be huge? I think it will be. If we don’t
move forward on it tonight, we won’t have the opportunity to
know. We need jobs. I ask you to seriously consider the positive
impacts that this project can bring to this City, and continue
to move forward on it. We need this project to be successful. I
encourage you to continue the process.”
NICK MANCIE, resident, “I work in Boca Raton in the
transportation industry, and I don’t represent anyone here.
Because my mom was single and on welfare, I went to work on a
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
38
dock. I drove a truck to the point where I became the Vice
President of Operations after college by going through the
transportation industry. I made something of myself as many of
you have here. I was given the opportunity at an entry level. It
would be nice to have something in my community to drive to. I’m
driving over 160 miles a day. We’re talking about a simple vote
to learn more. It’s learning more about what this is going to
bring. I know there are a number of ‘ifs,’ but as many of you
have said when you’re running your campaigns, ‘If I were elected
I will. . . .’ Whatever it may be, let’s bring this to a vote.
Forget the 36,000 jobs or the 12,000 jobs. If it brings 1,000
jobs isn’t that worth it, especially with the number of people
who are out of work in this City? Even if it isn’t all Port St.
Lucie employees, residents being employed, there’s still an
effect from this county, and the residual effect is positive. I
urge you not to make a decision on what’s going to happen ten
years from now, but make a decision as far as let’s learn more,
and let’s make that vote yes to consider annexing it.”
JANICE DI IANNI, resident, “Wherever you go in Port St. Lucie,
it says to Keep Port St. Lucie Beautiful. I was for this project
when I first walked in. I understand that jobs are very
important to people, and we need to have things motivated.
However, when I saw those canisters I think of the New Jersey
Turnpike. I see those canisters on that Turnpike. They are
filthy. The entire place is disgusting. Granted it looks
beautiful. It all nice and new, and we’re going to have all of
these jobs. What happens in 20 years or 30 years? What happens
when things start to get dirty, and those canisters start lining
up? Who’s going to maintain those roads? Is it going to be
turned over to us? They will put the money out, and they will
pay for this and that. Eventually it’s going to come back to us.
Be careful what jobs you bring into the area. Port St. Lucie is
beautiful, and I want to keep it that way.”
STEPHEN MELESKI, “I have training in economics and in the late
70’s and 80’s I worked at the US Department of Transportation.
One of the things we learned back then was the concept of the
intermodal, and this concept has been kicking around for 30
years or more. There’s only one inland port operating today in
Virginia. The Panama Canal is going to be enlarged. No one
really knows how much new traffic is going to flow through
there. In international shipping, more of the tonnage is in oil
tankers and dry bulk carriers. The container shipping industry
is way down in volume. If they’re going to double the capacity
through the Panama Canal, it doesn’t mean container traffic is
going to be increased at double the rate. The Economic
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
39
Feasibility Study that so much of this is based on needs to be
questioned. A lot of the data in that study that’s driving
everything tonight is probably data coming before 2008 and the
world economic implosion, so a lot of these numbers need to be
looked at. Another big issue will be China. China has been
producing so much. What’s on the horizon for our Chinese trade
is them changing their currency and putting it in a floating
capacity. When the Chinese start to float a relative to the US
dollar, the trade is not going to be so great. It’s all going to
be reduced by currency issue. I hope our Council doesn’t annex
so much land and provide a few people the economic benefit of
changing from AG-5 to Heavy Industrial zoning for thousands of
dollars. When you vote tonight, think about all of these people
who have all the data, but there’s no one from the railroads.
How is the traffic going to get from Miami to Glades Cut-Off
Road? That’s a crucial link in this concept.”
NICK PREBLE, stated, “Mr. Pinsky said that the Port of Miami
gets all of their cargo from the Middle East, Europe, or
whatever. I used to boat down there, and there’s a lot of cargo
coming in with these funny symbols on the side. It looked like
Chinese to me. Secondly, it was said that the community is for
this. I thought I read that we didn’t want it, and that the
Planning and Zoning Board voted against it. To me that’s the
community. Although I’m against this, we should go to the next
step. I would like to see you add to the vote that these guys
will guarantee they will combine these four properties, so they
can’t get your approval, rezone it, split it up, and do what
they want with it. There’s no guarantee that these guys are
going to build it and they’re going to come. This isn’t a
corporation.I wouldn’t put this kind of money into something
without some guarantees. They’re saying that they’re going to
put millions of dollars into this, and we know they’re coming.
However, they’re not here tonight. If they wanted it so bad,
they would be sitting next to these guys. You’re being shammed.
Have any of you called Miami, and asked if they’re coming? Does
this make sense to you? This might be the biggest project to
ever hit this county, and I’m asking if you have done your
homework.”
GEOFF KENWORTHY said, “I really have newfound respect for you.
If this is a typical day at the office, my hat is off to you. We
have some pretty large guns here tonight, and they have
definitely been impressive. I would like to bring this
discussion down to the local every day level that I would like
to operate at. The four landowners would like to change the
zoning. To that I would say ‘Why not. Why not do it.’ Why
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
40
shouldn’t these men have the ability to gain as much value from
their investment? And by moving this from Agricultural to Heavy
Industrial you would certainly be giving them that ability to
sell to any bidder to use that land in any way they saw fit.
What is the cost to the City, the residents, and to the growth
and future of this City? Are the City Council members willing to
make that sacrifice for the benefit of a few landowners, so they
can benefit a maximum profit from their holdings? I ask each of
you to consider since the inception of this elaborate and costly
marketing scheme, what, if any, benefit has the City realized
thus far. Have you personally received assurances that this
project is real and viable? How many years will it take before
the tangible positive revenue will flow into the City treasury?
I heard it was two years away, and for $42,000 a year that’s not
a whole lot. These landowners have requested concessions from
you from its inception. They have asked for concessions and
fees, and yet, they’re only going to return $42,000 a year in
taxation. Why have the landowners requested these concessions?
Perhaps it is a grand scheme. Perhaps that’s all it ever was and
ever will be.” By changing the zoning to Heavy Industry,
initially, the City will inherit 7,000 acres of absolutely
nothing. There will be no increase in revenue for your coffers.
There will be no increase in jobs. There will be no increase in
property value, and quite honestly the opposite will occur.
Those homes that are adjacent to this project will lose. There
will be an immense impact on Tradition. I’m surprised the
presentation tonight didn’t discuss the minimum projected
traffic in and out of that area through Gatlin and Becker. Over
9,548 minimum is what they projected at the Planning and Zoning
Board meeting. This has tremendous impact in that vicinity and
throughout the City. Please don’t lose sight of the future. The
economy will recover.”
STAN DZIEDZIC said, “I would like to request that you table this
vote, because it doesn’t seem like you have all of the
information that has been discussed by the people who oppose
this. The people in the Tradition and PGA areas have not been
notified. They’re getting shortchanged by this being rushed
through. Who’s going to pay for the roads? I don’t see 36,000
jobs coming. I think there’s a lot of speculation, and the
carrot for you is bringing jobs. What’s the downside? Are you
going to have real jobs, or is this just some smokescreen where
they’re going to split this property and sell it for something
else? I think you should look at all of the alternatives.”
GLEN COLLINS stated, “I think that land should remain
Agricultural. I’m all for jobs, but this is just smoke and
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
41
mirrors for a last ditch effort to save their investment. They
paid too much for it. I don’t think any of this industry is
going to come here. It’s too far out and doesn’t make sense. I
would urge you to table this and research it more.”
JENNIFER WHITING read a list of organizations throughout St.
Lucie County and the Treasure Coast who have given their support
for the project in written form, and said, “It’s highly unusual
to have your constituents stay this long in support of
something, and there are a number of people here tonight who
want to support this project.”
STEVEN CARROLL, said, “The Planning and Zoning Board defeated
this twice five to two. If you’re shipping cargo, are you going
to go to Miami, put it on a train, and then a truck to take it
somewhere else? You’re going to go up the coast as close as you
can. The Governor, when asked how 30,000 jobs would be created,
he didn’t have an answer. Tonight, they told you about the port
in Texas. That port has a direct railroad to Mexico and truck
traffic. It’s a watermelon to an orange. No one showed up at the
Planning and Zoning meetings to support it. I’m shocked to see
all of these people tonight. Now all of a sudden it’s a Savior.
It’s not a Savior, it’s a scam. If you bring it into the City
you’re stuck with it. We heard the roads won’t take the traffic.
Are we going to build new roads? Who’s going to pay for that?
When you look at it all, the Planning and Zoning Board summed it
up when they said it wasn’t viable.”
There being no further comments, Mayor Faiella closed the Public
Hearing.
Councilman Kelly said, “I do not support definite maybes. They
put the City at risk, especially one of this magnitude that
guarantees no benefits to the City, and only expounds wishful
thinking. All of the things we buy from Korea and Japan and
everywhere else come to California. There are three major ports
there, and it serves all of the United States. We have five or
six ports on the east coast that serves the east coast of the
United States. There are ports in Canada that are virtually
going out of business. Do you think we’re going to be moving a
lot of things by truck if diesel fuel is $6 a gallon? The Port
of Miami is going to help a lot. What are we charging these
folks to come into the City? Nothing. There are no guarantees.
Nowhere in the backup do they promise jobs. All they promise is
wishful thinking. There’s no funding for anything. When you run
for office or whatever you do, you better make sure you have
credentials. We look at the credentials of the people we put on
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
42
Planning and Zoning. Where are the credentials here? I’m not
putting anyone down. We grow and make more food than any other
country. That’s a commodity that you can’t lessen. The people
who live in the Airpark have nothing to worry about, because
it’s not going to happen. If they annex this tonight, you’re
never going to see this.”
Councilman Kelly continued, “If we did bring this in, there
would be no benefit, because it’s not going to happen. If you
bring in Target, you have to give them ten years tax free. Where
does the $4.5 million in tax money come from? It’s not there,
because we’re going to give it away to bring them in. I have
been trying to get rail information for two weeks from someone
and he can’t get it. Who’s going to build that extra rail?
Where’s the loop going to be? Just the rail alone is going to
cost millions of dollars. Who’s going to pay for it? We received
millions of dollars from the state for Digital Domain and those
other jobs. Where’s the money for this? There is none. I don’t
want to table this. This started in September 2009. That’s when
they applied for their petition to come into the City. It
already went to DCA. A number of people don’t come here for
support or against, because they think we’re going to do the
right thing. DCA is not the same as they used to be. They don’t
live here. It’s not their decision. It’s the City Council’s
decision. Is this good for the community? This is not good for
the community. It’s wishful thinking. There’s nothing there.
These folks, if they come into the City, are going to sell it
and they’re going to be gone. There’s no Unity of Title. Three
months after you do it, one of them can decide they don’t want
to be part of the Intermodal Campus and skip out. They could put
a gasoline refinery in there. It’s Heavy Industrial. Be careful
what you wish for.”
Vice Mayor Bartz stated, “I’m also concerned about the Unity of
Title and that there is no commitment by the landowners that
they’re willing to commit to the City that they’re going to stay
in this together. I’m also concerned about the residents who are
near the railroads and have not even been thought about. I know
there were a lot of numbers thrown around tonight, but I’m going
to take the average of 9,000 projected trips. That’s a truck
every 9.6 seconds. That’s a big impact. That doesn’t just impact
the City. It impacts the county, both to the north and south. It
was explained to me that rather than pay taxes, there’s a
vehicle out there where you can let your taxes be paid through
tax certificates, and, therefore, you save your money.
Unfortunately, I feel it’s a loophole to get out of paying. If
you can find one loophole, how many others are we looking at? I
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
43
want jobs here, but I want to do it right. This is an
opportunity for it to go to DCA and have them take a look at it.
I feel strongly that if that’s the way it goes then we need to
make a concerted effort as a Council to talk with our
neighboring city and county to see what the impact is. I don’t
think the impact has been touched, and the dollars that are
involved in taking care of that impact. We have no place for
these trucks to fuel every day. We don’t have the proper road
infrastructure. We obviously have a problem with the rail system
as well.”
Vice Mayor Bartz continued, “Everyone keeps saying that it’s not
going to cost the City anything. Bet me. Someone has to pay for
those roads, and so far I have not seen anyone prepared to step
up to the plate and truly pay for those impacts. We are with
residents who are unemployed, and if I understood correctly
we’re not putting anyone to work for at least two years. In the
meantime if we have to pay for the infrastructure, who’s paying
the taxes to pay for that? That’s us, and that’s every one of
you. I know there’s a rush to get this done, but I’m not
convinced that this is the ‘know all, end all.’ I’m worried
about the impact on Tradition, the roads we have out there, and
the things that we’ve worked so hard to get. I really believe
that looking to the future is a big part of our job. If we
always look at the here and now and never look at the future,
I’m afraid of what we would become.”
Councilwoman Martin stated, “I’m going to support this going
through for transmittal to DCA. I do believe it would be
irresponsible of us as a Council not to let this go forward and
not to see what the ORC report would come back with. You can say
that the devil is in the details. Maybe while we’re waiting for
the report to come back from DCA, we can have that conversation
with the county, with other Councils, with the landowners, the
residents, and do some workshops with staff to look at the
impacts and the concerns more closely. We need to look at every
aspect. Although there are considerable impacts, the risks are
low considering what the potential possibilities could be. I’m
going to support going through with transmittal process.”
Vice Mayor Bartz said, “I don’t disagree with you, and I
certainly understand where you’re coming from. I just want to
make sure that if we go through with this that we do address all
of those issues. I want to set a definite date to meet with the
counties and allow them to talk to us about what’s missing and
what the impacts are to their areas. If this goes through and I
support it, it doesn’t mean that it’s a done deal. All it does
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
44
is give us an opportunity to follow up with all of those
people.”
Councilwoman Martin stated, “I agree with that. I also have a
concern that if we don’t look at it and let them go to the
county, what are our impacts going to be. We’re going to have
impacts as the City of Port St. Lucie and it goes back to
control. Through this process and us having the control,
everything has to come back to Council through Planning and
Zoning, through the PUD process. We maintain those controls on
what happens. If we’re getting impacts and we have no control
over what’s going on, I don’t think that’s a good thing to
have.”
Vice Mayor Bartz noted, “If the shoe was on the other foot and
it was the county taking care of this, I would want to be at
their meeting asking about our residents, our roads, our
impacts, and our interchanges. I just want to make sure that we
have all of those things on the table, and that the landowners
understand that if this goes through tonight this is not carte
blanche for you go ahead. We all have our concerns. There are a
number of details to be worked out, and some of them are not
small.”
Councilman Kelly commented, “This has been to DCA, it got
rejected, and came back with six major points. The No. 1 point
was that there’s no need. That land isn’t going away. It’s
always going to be there. You’re not going to have any control
if you don’t have Unity of Title whether you do it in the City
or in the county. They can split up and do whatever they want.
We should have talked to Martin County before tonight.”
Councilwoman Martin pointed out, “They already put a half
million dollars into it. We didn’t let them come back and do it
for free. They paid the money in order to do it.” Councilwoman
Berger remarked, “I realize that the agreement for the
annexation is just a draft, but I do have a question about Page
6 of 27 under Property Development and Intended Uses. Under
Intended Uses, you’d think that it would speak directly to the
Intermodal Logistics Center, and it does. However, it says that
the property ‘may’ include an Intermodal Logistics Center, with
an intermodal transfer facility, including an interchange hub
and associated administrative facilities, and a distribution
center, including distribution warehousing, manufacturing
facilities, and associated support services. Such uses shall be
consistent with the heavy industrial utility.’ The only definite
under that property development piece is that they ‘shall’ be
Heavy Industrial. I’m wondering why we allowed the word ‘may’ to
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
45
be in there, when the whole time we’ve been talking about this
project that previous Councils and this Council has said that
this is something we would entertain if it were for this
specific type of project. Putting the word ‘may’ in the
Annexation Agreement is carte blanche. My question is about
‘may’ versus ‘shall,’ and I’ve been on here long enough to know
that makes a big difference.”
The City Attorney said, “The ‘shall’ is dealing with consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Once it has
that land use designation anything that goes on that property
must be consistent with that land use designation. I believe the
‘may’ language is the indication of what they intend to put
there, which would be consistent with that language.”
Councilwoman Berger stated, “I understand the ‘shall,’ but I
don’t understand the ‘may’ when we said from the beginning that
it’s going to be the Intermodal Logistics Center.” The City
Attorney noted, “The ‘may’ indicates what they intend to put
there. The bottom line is that once they’re annexed, once
there’s a Comprehensive Plan land use designation on it, they
legally can develop it not any way they want, but they can
develop it other than the Intermodal, as long as it is
consistent and complies with the land use designation. There is
no guarantee that’s what it will become.” Mr. Holbrook
commented, “There are a number of items before the Council
tonight. Obviously, the ordinance that annexes the property in
the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is both a map amendment and a
text amendment. As part of the text amendment under the second
policy, it actually goes through the uses which are included and
defined for this Heavy Industrial project. That’s giving you the
scope of uses that can be included. I think that if it’s the
Council’s desire, it’s a draft agreement. If that’s something of
concern, the applicants are here and I think they hear it. Staff
is here as well, and those changes can be made.”
Councilwoman Berger pointed out, “We have these very successful,
very credentialed businessmen that come with a history of doing
great projects. We are in a position to make a decision that may
make this project go away. It doesn’t mean that these
businessmen don’t have a great concept. The concept itself and
the conception of this concept has the potential. As the EDC
says, ‘Conceptually, this is a great idea.’ I don’t have the
luxury of saying that this is a good concept. This is the
easiest thing to vote on since I’ve been elected. Do you know
why? Because in ten years or fifteen years from now if this is
screwed up, we’re all going to be gone probably. However, it’s
the citizens who will still be living here, and possibly some of
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
46
the staff who will have to deal with these issues. These are
ongoing decisions. How do we pay for this? We’re talking about
maybe two years out before jobs start rolling in, two years out
before we see our $4.2 million. In the meantime that’s a lot of
acreage that our police are going to have to patrol, and I’m
sure $4.2 million is not going to go very far operationally for
making sure that people can patrol these areas. I sat on a
committee not too long ago where we were discussing that we were
going to pay for maybe 12 resource officers in schools. If we
can’t pay for protection within the schools, how are we going to
pay for the services that need to go out on 7,000 acres outside
our boundaries? The money is not going to come in right away, so
we’re going to have to make that payment. That doesn’t have
anything to do with the infrastructure that has to be put in
place. Will Miami be contributing?”
Councilwoman Berger continued, “I know the Annexation Agreement
is not in front of us now, but it’s just not together. It’s as
good as it’s going to get, and I’m not sure it’s good enough.
I’ve been a proponent of moving forward in the past, but as
Councilman Kelly said, we have heard from DCA. Commissioner
Craft said that it’s not the same agency it used to be. We don’t
have the enforcement arm that we could look to for help to make
us understand what the impacts are going to be. Commissioner
Craft also said that the intensity of this project is going to
be too big to be next to the airport. When is the last time
you’ve been out there? It’s pretty industrial. My district does
go out west, north of Crosstown, but out west. Who knows if that
will change in the future? We do have new redistricting
happening. Councilwoman Martin’s district is to the south of
Crosstown, so you and I will be sharing, at least for the next
two years, the concerns that will be building out there. It’s
going to be a completely different City when this is done. My
concern is at what cost. I still have to represent the people
who live here, and I’ve been to cities to get an idea of what
this looks like. I tried to find an intermodal area that is
around the first ten years of development that might resemble
us, but I couldn’t find one that I could visit. I’ve made the
phone calls. If you get someone on the phone, they’re not going
to let you use their name as Councilman Kelly had stated. Trying
to get an elected official from any of these outside cities to
call you back is not easy either. These are all things that
concern me, because as elected officials you know that if you
put your name out there it’s going to end up in a newspaper
article somewhere.”
Councilwoman Berger continued, “I don’t know how the success
stories got submitted as our backup, but it was very good. The
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
47
success stories all have something in common, and that’s how
these things originated. Where did this concept come from? What
was the driving force that created a successful intermodal
agency? In just about every one of them, it was a local need for
railroad. It was driven by needs locally to expand the railroad.
For instance, the Dallas area rapid transit system needed some
expansion, so from there it moved into the next level of how to
make that better, and that idea expanded. It’s the same thing
everywhere else. It was either conversion or a redevelopment
agency. There are no examples that say it’s a success and
started because some landowners thought it would be a good idea
to change the land use and possibly create some jobs. It’s a
great idea. I just wish it was next to the airport. I’m not a
county commissioner, so I have to deal with what’s in front of
me and what’s with the City. I have to consider how I’m paying
for the agency that I have now. I’m trying to keep a sustainable
City. There has been discussion on police versus sheriff’s
deputies. We have been doing this for years. This City can’t
continue with these kinds of stretches unless you’re talking
about actually raising the taxes, or eliminating some part of
the agency that can then free up some revenue. I don’t want to
do either of those. I don’t think we can afford to do this. I’m
not convinced that there are 36,000 jobs. I’m pretty sure I
heard there were 12,000 that may come in two years. We created
this industry that’s so localized, because we were building.
When that went away, now we’ve got this problem. Are we going to
create a problem in the future that’s bigger than we can handle
to fix the problem from the last decade? I keep hearing Doug
Coward saying that growth doesn’t pay for itself. I won’t
support this to move on tonight. I came in here tonight not
knowing which way I was going to go, and I have been swayed very
heavily back to this side. I don’t see a win after tonight, and
I really fear we won’t be able to back out.”
Councilman Kelly said, “I’m not signing off on anymore municipal
bonds for anyone. The City can’t afford to go into debt or co-
sign on anymore loans, and that’s what we would have to do. We
would have to co-sign municipal bonds. We would have to find
money, and we would have to give that ten-year freebie to bring
Target here. There is no $4.6 million. There’s no business plan,
because there’s no money. There’s no funding.” Councilwoman
Berger stated, “We have had quite a number of good business
plans in front of us over the last couple of years. We have had
some very smart business people in front of us who presented the
plans, and they were solid plans. We are seeing some good
results from some of them, but we know we have some issues
coming up. When we voted for many of these things, such as the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
48
Southwest Annexation issues, that may be an additional couple
million dollars that we may be absorbing and more millage. Those
were great business plans. They were backed by Tallahassee. They
were backed by the state. We have some of the same players
involved.” Councilman Kelly noted, “But there’s no business
plan. When we built the Crosstown Parkway and went out for the
vote and got 89% of the voters who voted, the critics asked why
we didn’t get the permits first. That’s not the way it works
with the state. The state says that you have to have the
funding. I don’t want them to put us through this. They don’t
have the funding. There’s no business plan and no money, and I
move to deny Ordinance 11-25. Councilwoman Berger seconded the
motion, and commented, “I was hoping to hear your comments as
well.” Mayor Faiella pointed out, “Ever since this came up, I
have investigated, did my analysis, talked to people, and
investigated myself. We do need a well balanced job corridor in
Port St. Lucie, and I’m in agreement with Vice Mayor Bartz. If
we do pass this, we should go to the next level. Five years down
the line, I don’t want someone else getting this project and us
kicking ourselves, or the county getting it and we’re in a mess.
I just feel that I would give it a chance, as long as later on
we all sit down. Again, it has to come back to Council. If the
annexation falls through, what’s the protocol? I know we can’t
de-annex land, but does it fall back to Agricultural land?”
Mr. Holbrook replied, “If the annexation is approved, it will be
in the City limits. If the Comprehensive Plan as proposed with
the policies that are in there is approved, the second to the
last policy is one that the applicants haven’t enjoyed, but
that’s what was known as the reverter clause. It does two
things. If by 2020 this project hasn’t moved forward, then staff
is going to do two things. It will prepare a text amendment to
create an Agricultural land use and that will be a map amendment
to change the subject land back to AG. With that policy, it
would bring it back to Council for their consideration in 2020.”
Vice Mayor Bartz asked, “If nothing happens, doesn’t it stay as
AG land? Even though it has the designation of Heavy Industrial,
it is taxed as AG land.” Mr. Holbrook replied, “I can’t speak to
the taxing issue.” The City Attorney responded, “It would be
taxed as long as it remains in Agricultural use.” Councilwoman
Martin stated, “It’s AG in the county now, and there’s not much
service required. If it’s AG in the City, what more service is
going to be required than what’s already out there?” Councilman
Kelly replied, “I don’t think the Sheriff would agree with you.”
Councilwoman Martin noted, “Maybe that’s a conversation I need
to have with the Sheriff, but I still don’t see where the
service would change considering it’s AG land.” The City Manager
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
49
said, “The motion was for Ordinance 11-25, and we should
probably deal with Ordinance 11-18 first.”
a) ORDINANCE 11-18
Councilman Kelly said, “I will withdraw my motion, and move to
deny Ordinance 11-18.” Councilwoman Berger seconded the motion.
The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: to deny Ordinance
11-18. The motion passed by roll call vote, with Councilman
Kelly, Vice Mayor Bartz, and Councilwoman Berger voting in
favor, and Mayor Faiella and Councilwoman Martin voting against.
c)ORDINANCE 11-25
Councilman Kelly moved to deny Ordinance 11-25. Councilwoman
Berger seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the motion
as follows: to deny Ordinance 11-25. The motion passed by roll
call vote with Councilman Kelly, Vice Mayor Bartz, and
Councilwoman Berger voting in favor, and Councilwoman Martin and
Mayor Faiella voting against.
b) ORDINANCE 11-23, PUBLIC HEARING, AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE BY AMENDING
FIGURE 7 AND FIGURE 8 AND THE ASSOCIATED TEXT OF THE STATUTES;
PROVIDING THE INVALIDITY OF ANY PORTION SHALL NOT AFFECT THE
REMAINING PORTIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE, P11-014
The City Clerk read Ordinance 11-23 aloud by title only. Mayor
Faiella opened the Public Hearing. There being no comments,
Mayor Faiella closed the Public Hearing. Councilwoman Berger
moved to deny Ordinance 11-23. Councilman Kelly seconded the
motion. Councilwoman Berger stated, “I withdraw my motion.” Mr.
Holbrook noted, “This ordinance is very important. It’s a staff-
initiated ordinance that is generated from the Engineering
Department and it’s dealing with Crosstown. This is coming from
comments that have been received by the feds, the state, and
other agencies where we need to take out specific route
crossings and show a generalized study. Staff does recommend
approval of this application.” Councilwoman Berger moved to
approve Ordinance 11-23. Councilwoman Martin seconded the
motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: for
approval of Ordinance 11-23. The motion passed unanimously by
roll call vote.
COUNCIL RULES: SECTION 9. CONDUCT OF MEETINGS (J)
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
50
The City Attorney asked, “Can we have a motion waiving the
Council Rules regarding the Witching Hour? We have been
consistent with the rule, because the rule said that if you
complete whatever agenda item you’re on, if you go past 11:00
p.m., the other agenda items would be tabled to another meeting.
The last section of the Council Rules allows that you may waive
the rules, but it does require a motion.” Mayor Faiella stated,
“That was the last public hearing, so if we want to table d) and
the rest of them to the afternoon Council meeting next week, we
could do that if it was a consensus of the Council.” Vice Mayor
Bartz noted, “If we’re going to do that, the only thing I would
request is that we look at Item 13 e), because we’re talking
about the City’s 50th Anniversary. By waiting until next week, we
may be cutting it too close.” The City Attorney commented, “The
clerk also pointed out that Item 10 d), Ordinance 11-27, has
been scheduled to advertise.” Councilwoman Berger remarked,
“Let’s just power through.” The City Attorney asked, “For the
record, can we have the motion to waive the rules?” Councilman
Kelly moved to waive the Council Rule for the 11:00 p.m. curfew
for this meeting. Councilwoman Berger seconded the motion. The
City Clerk restated the motion as follows: to waive the
Council’s rule on the 11:00 p.m. curfew. The motion passed
unanimously by roll call vote.
d) ORDINANCE 11-27, AMENDING CHAPTER 153: LANDSCAPING;
LAND CLEARING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF PORT ST.
LUCIE, FLORIDA; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
The City Clerk read Ordinance 11-27 aloud by title only. Vice
Mayor Bartz moved to approve Ordinance 11-27. Councilwoman
Berger seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the motion
as follows: for approval of Ordinance 11-27. The motion passed
unanimously by roll call vote.
11. RESOLUTIONS
There was nothing scheduled for this item.
12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) DISCUSSION REGARDING THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE’S
DIRECTION AND MEMBER STATUS, MAYOR FAIELLA
Mayor Faiella said, “The Budget Advisory Committee is looking
for direction, and I wanted to put it out there for discussion
on what to do next.” Councilwoman Berger stated, “I did speak to
my representative. I’m glad she didn’t resign. When this
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
51
committee came together, I wanted a cross section of the
community to be represented. My thought was that they could look
at something more than just the numbers part of it. I wanted to
gain their insight as to what they wanted from a livability
standpoint. In the beginning I did voice that.” Councilwoman
Martin noted, “They do need some direction and scope, and I
would like to ask Council, if not tonight, to at least think
about it as to what kind of scope we can give them. In the few
meetings that I’ve been to, I’ve noticed a lot of redundancy.
I’ve noticed that staff has been doing a lot of the things that
they have suggested, and some things that we have already been
working on. Although we do have a good cross section and there’s
a lot of knowledge on the HR end, what I’m not seeing is that
these members don’t understand the difference between public and
private, or they’re not getting the concept. They don’t
understand or they don’t want to understand that whatever
happens in the private sector can’t always funnel through to the
public sector. I’m really seeing that more and more as I attend
these meetings. They’re of the mindset that you can just set
these policies and guidelines, and that things don’t have to be
negotiated, and bargaining unit contracts don’t come into play.
They’re kind of all over the place.”
Councilwoman Martin continued, “I just read the minutes that
came out today, and several of them said that they want some
kind of direction and scope. I think that we as a Council need
to come up with what the direction is. The resolution was very
vague. I understand why Council put it in place as a
transparency issue, but when you don’t have a scope and
direction you tend to go all over the place and have that
redundancy. Maybe that redundancy is because they got wind of
some of what staff was working on, so they decided to take it
upon themselves to work on it. We really need to think about
where we want them to go from here.” Mayor Faiella noted, “They
did a great job the one time I watched them, and staff has put
things in place when it came to the insurance plan. They were on
target on quite a few things, which the City had already put in
place. They want to know what we want them to look into.”
Councilman Kelly pointed out, “I agree with Councilwoman Martin
and Councilwoman Berger, but what we told them is vague. I was
under the impression that each member we appointed was going to
meet with their appointee. What did we do with the two At-Large
members? Do they meet with the Mayor?” Mayor Faiella remarked,
“I was told the Chair.” Councilman Kelly said, “I met with the
fellow I appointed, and I told him about the one thing I wanted
him to look at. I asked him what happened to that, and he said
they had the chairman of that department come and speak to us,
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
52
and he said it wasn’t viable, and that we couldn’t do that idea.
I asked him if he could see if it would save us money, and all
he said was that it wouldn’t just by speaking to the head of
that department. It’s probably one of the best committees we’ve
ever formed, and I wouldn’t change my appointment.”
Councilman Kelly continued, “For example, if you tell them we
have this vehicle that serves us well, but the cost of gasoline,
the maintenance of it isn’t right. What should we do to make it
run better and more efficiently? They say that we should tune it
up more, buy cheaper tires, or whatever. That’s what I want. But
when they come back and tell me to sell the vehicle or lease
one, I know that if I lease that vehicle I lose control of the
vehicle. It doesn’t belong to me. Do you want them to look at
selling the vehicle? If you want them to look at everything,
that’s fine. I want them to look at making the vehicle run more
efficiently, because I want to own the vehicle. If it’s serving
me well and I want to be more efficient, that’s the way I would
like them to look at things.” Councilwoman Berger stated, “If
there’s a consensus that there was a thought process where we
should be meeting with our respective representatives or
appointees, and we basically tell them what we want them to do,
then in my mind it takes away from the concept of having a cross
section of the community, and having their own mind. I don’t
want my representative to say everything that I say. Why bother
having a committee? If we’re saying that we’re empowering them
as a citizen of the City of Port St. Lucie to be part of this
process, and to really dig in and give us some advice, then I’m
all for it. I just don’t want to be telling everyone what to
say.”
Vice Mayor Bartz stated, “When we put this committee together,
we told them or asked them to take a look at everything, and
that nothing was off limits. I think they’ve done that. They put
a lot of work, time, and dedication into that. We don’t have to
take their suggestion and make it policy. We don’t have to agree
with everything they say, but I think we have to applaud them
for taking that job seriously. That committee can be very
valuable. We just need to remember that they’re working hard.
They should be getting some direction. We can all go to those
meetings when time allows, but I think they’re doing the job we
asked them to do.” Councilwoman Martin commented, “I agree
they’re doing the job, but in doing the job the tone becomes
very negative. When I witness what goes on and the negativity
toward staff, and what has been done in the past, it seems like
there’s a lot of rhetoric that goes on about what has been done
in the past, but there’s not much acknowledgement as to what we
are doing or have done as a City to try and change things, and
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
53
to try to change the disparity. From what I’ve seen, they are
continuously focusing on that. I think there are other agendas
out there, and that maybe the agenda is making it more of a
political issue or self-serving purposes other than doing what’s
there for the overall good of the City and the community. When
you have a board that has continuously asked for direction and
scope, I’m not saying that I want to tell them what to say. I
like free thinking and getting ideas from other people, because
we all know we can’t come up with great ideas all the time. With
the absence of scope and direction, we’re going to continue down
the same path. I know that it takes a lot of time from staff,
and when I say a lot I mean hours and hours. We’re talking hours
out of a department head’s day when they could be doing their
normal jobs.”
Councilwoman Martin continued, “Then you have members of the
committee, who most recently started saying that the City
Attorney didn’t have to come, the City Manager didn’t have to
come, nor Mr. Collins, as well as Mr. Pollard. In essence, what
they were saying was, ‘Although you’ve been doing the budget for
the City of Port St. Lucie for X number of years, maybe you’re
not doing it right. Maybe you should look at this.’ We have
these professionals in place that have been doing their jobs and
are professionals. We as a Council rely on them for their
professionalism. I’m not saying that their ideas are not good
ideas to look into, but the constant negativity and the way that
they conduct themselves a lot of time, I don’t believe is in the
best interest of our citizens. I really do think that we need to
think about what kind of direction and scope they need to be
given, and not in the sense that I want them to say what I want
them to say.” Vice Mayor Bartz pointed out, “I don’t disagree
with you at all. We need to set that up. Initially, we told them
that nothing was off the table, and having been on the county’s
budget committee, I can tell you that also got very contentious
at times, because you have a number of strong opinions, and a
number of business people that think you can do everything in
the public sector the same way you do it in the private sector.
There’s a learning curve there. Should we have a lot of staff
there? We need our City Manager there. Occasionally they’re
going to ask for a department head. Overall, they’re there to
give those suggestions, and their questions should be able to be
answered then. Certainly those suggestions should be coming
back. I don’t have a problem with giving them direction, but I
do think it’s a big learning curve for them.”
Mayor Faiella remarked, “Just keep in mind that they’re an
advisory committee. It still comes back to us. We vote on it.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
54
They were geared to give advice and give both sides of the
story.” Councilman Kelly said, “Let them look at everything. Let
them look at selling the car. I still would like them to meet
with us individually, and report at the last meeting before the
Retreat. They should bring their ideas to us twice a year for
consideration at those Retreats.” Councilwoman Martin asked,
“Are they going to revisit the same things they’ve been looking
at?” Vice Mayor Bartz replied, “Yes. They’re going to revisit
what they have looked at, because they’re going to be able to
tweak those things. I would agree to table this and think about
it.” Mayor Faiella commented, “It’s on the table again for them
to look at the Police Department. If we say they can look at
everything, that’s something that will come back on the table.
They feel they weren’t given ample time to show the PowerPoint
presentation.” Councilwoman Martin pointed out, “They gave the
presentation.” Mayor Faiella remarked, “Not the way they wanted
to do it.” Councilwoman Martin said, “If they want to change
what they want to do. . . .” Mayor Faiella stated, “We have a
couple of members who are upset about it.” Councilwoman Martin
noted, “I understand that. They may have been upset that day,
but I had one of the members call and say that they felt they
were going beyond their scope with certain things and that they
needed direction.” Vice Mayor Bartz commented, “We talked about
tabling this until Monday in order to talk about what scope and
direction we wanted to give.”
Councilwoman Berger remarked, “I haven’t been to a meeting in
about four or five months. If you have any recommendations, I
would be happy to look at them. I don’t think we handled what
happened before appropriately. If we would have handled it
differently we may not be where we are now. I know you spoke
with them, and I read the minutes. I didn’t see anything crazy
or compelling that would make it so ugly for them to have to
take out a slide. I wish they would have just come and given the
presentation they were going to give, and then we could have
just moved forward on making a decision. They feel as though
there’s a story that hasn’t been told, and they want to get
their time out in front. If it’s not something that we want to
move forward on, let’s be honest with them. If you choose not to
take their advice, be ready to defend your position as to why.”
Mayor Faiella asked, “Are we going to table it?” Councilwoman
Berger replied, “Yes, but you’re going to bring back
recommendations as to what we want.” Mayor Faiella asked, “Do I
have a motion?” Councilwoman Berger replied, “So move.” Vice
Mayor Bartz seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the
motion as follows: for approval to table Item 12 a) to the
Council Meeting of April 18. The motion passed unanimously by
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
55
roll call vote.
13. NEW BUSINESS
a) BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE REAPPOINTMENTS, DISTRICT 3
REAPPOINTMENT REQUEST FOR DIANE BRYANT; DISTRICT 4 REAPPOINTMENT
REQUEST FOR CHARLES D’AGATA; AT-LARGE MEMBER REAPPOINTMENT
REQUEST FOR DANIEL KUREK, ALL TO SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS, BEGINNING
APRIL 19, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 19, 2013, CITY CLERK
Councilwoman Martin moved to approve the reappointment of Diane
Bryant. Councilman Kelly seconded the motion. The City Clerk
restated the motion as follows: for approval for the
reappointment of Diane Bryant, District 3 representative to a
two-year term beginning April 19, 2011 through April 19, 2013.
The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.
Councilman Kelly moved to approve the reappointment of Charles
D’Agata. Councilwoman Berger seconded the motion. The City Clerk
restated the motion as follows: for approval of the
reappointment of the District 4 member Charles D’Agata to a two-
year term beginning April 19, 2011 through April 19, 2013. The
motion passed by roll call vote, with Councilman Kelly, Vice
Mayor Bart, Councilwoman Berger, and Mayor Faiella voting in
favor, and Councilwoman Martin voting against.
Councilman Kelly moved to approve the reappointment of Daniel
Kurek. Vice Mayor Bartz seconded the motion. The City Clerk
restated the motion as follows: for approval of reappointment of
At-Large member Daniel Kurek to a two-year term beginning April
19, 2011 through April 19, 2013. The motion passed unanimously
by roll call vote.
b) CITY WELCOME SIGNS, APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AND INSTALL
ENTRY FEATURE WELCOME SIGNS COMPLETE WITH LANDSCAPING,
IRRIGATION AND SOLAR LIGHTING, $10,000 OF KPSLB FRANCHISE FEE
FUNDS AND $750 FROM ST. LUCIE NORTH HOA FOR THE SELVITZ ROAD
PROJECT, PUBLIC WORKS/KEEP PORT ST. LUCIE BEAUTIFUL
The City Manager said, “This is a proposal for Keep Port St.
Lucie Beautiful to erect Welcome Signs at four locations in the
City. The accompanying memo indicates Selvitz Road and Midway,
East Torino and Midway, Gatlin Boulevard east of I-95, and
Tradition Parkway west of I-95. The approximate total is
$10,000, and we request authorization to use the Keep Port St.
Lucie Beautiful funds to do this project.” Councilwoman Berger
moved to approve Item 13 b). Councilwoman Martin seconded the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
56
motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: for
approval of Item 13 b). The motion passed unanimously by roll
call vote.
c) NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS)
EMERGENCY WATERSHED PROTECTION PROGRAM, E-8 CANAL DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT AGREEMENT #69-4209-11-1768, PROJECT COST
APPROXIMATELY $2,000,000, FUNDING COST MATCH 75% NRCS AND 25%
CITY, PUBLIC WORKS
The City Manager stated, “We have received an NRCS grant, which
is a 75%/25% match. We need to match 25% for approximately $2
million worth of drainage work. The accompanying memo explains
that there are nine subprojects. This should take that E-8 Canal
to I-95. We have been working through a variety of grants to
upgrade the E-8 Canal, and we do recommend approval.” Vice Mayor
Bartz moved to approve Item 13 c). Councilwoman Martin seconded
the motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: for
approval of Item 13 c). The motion passed unanimously by roll
call vote.
d) WAIVER OF BID PER SECTION 35.04 (C), FOR GOOD CAUSE
SHOWN, HECTOR TURF, INC., PURCHASE EQUIPMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF
THE SAINTS GOLF COURSE, #20110047, $50,042.97, FUND 421-7250-
5644, PARKS AND RECREATION
The City Manager said, “This is the replacement equipment at the
golf course. These bids are from the National IPA Cooperative
Purchasing Organization, and we do recommend purchasing the
equipment in the amount of $50,042.97.” Councilwoman Martin
moved to approve Item 13 d). Vice Mayor Bartz seconded the
motion. The City Clerk restated the motion as follows: for
approval of Item 13 d). The motion passed unanimously by roll
call vote.
e) REQUEST TO WAIVE FEES FOR THE USE OF THE CIVIC CENTER,
FOR THE TREASURE COAST INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL, WHICH WILL
RUN CONCURRENTLY WITH THE CITY’S 50TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION,
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
Mr. Oravec stated, “This is a request and it came via letter
from both Mr. McAfoos and Vice Mayor Bartz serving on the
Executive Committee of the 50th Anniversary Celebration. It
requested the City’s consideration to assist the Treasure Coast
International Film Festival to conduct their International Film
Festival during the same time as the 50th Anniversary
Celebration. I asked if it was concurrent or part of the
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
57
celebration. Mr. McAfoos told me it was part of the celebration.
As you know, we have been very selective about providing any
type of fee waiving at the Civic Center, and that’s why it’s
really an issue for the Council. There is no staff
recommendation on this. I can only recall two instances of a fee
waiver, and that was for the celebration itself and for the Law
Enforcement Games.” Mayor Faiella asked, “What is the amount of
the fee that we’re talking about?” Councilwoman Berger replied,
“It’s $1,790.” Vice Mayor Bartz noted, “It’s not normal for us
to waive fees. This is a group that has worked with the
Celebration Committee, and has done the docudrama. This will
just be an added feature of the celebration.” Councilwoman
Martin commented, “In essence, we have already waived the fees
for this.” Mr. Oravec pointed out, “Because the weekdays are
off-peak times, staff does provide a discount to anyone during
those times in order to garner additional business. However,
this rental includes a Saturday, and that’s traditionally peak
time. Staff does not give any break off the normal rental rate.”
Councilman Kelly asked, “How many days are we talking about?”
Mr. Oravec replied, “You’re talking Thursday, Friday, and
Saturday.” Councilman Kelly said, “I don’t have a problem with
it.” Mr. Oravec stated, “Mr. McAfoos’ letter stated that a
certain number of tickets would be provided to residents.”
JOE GARAFALO said, “We’re going to have two screening rooms. You
can hold 100 seats per screening room, so we’re going to give at
least 30 seats per screening. We’re going to have 22 showings.
We’re talking about giving approximately 660 tickets to the
public. The other thing that we’re going to have is seminars,
and they’re free. We’re bringing film makers and film production
company representatives from around the country. The whole idea
of us coming together is so we could showcase the City.”
Councilwoman Berger moved to approve Item 13 e). Councilwoman
Martin seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the motion
as follows: for approval of Item 13 e). The motion passed
unanimously by roll call vote.
f) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE
AND RANGER CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES, INC. FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT
OVER THE CONSTRUCTION OF BAYSHORE BOULEVARD, LEGAL
The City Attorney stated, “We held a meeting with the
representative from Ranger Construction. The City Manager was
present, and in the course of the conversation an offer and
acceptance was made to resolve this case. We are recommending
settlement, which brings that litigation to an end. The City
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2011
58
Manager has identified the funds for the settlement, and that
will also make them eligible to bid on City work pursuant to the
settlement. The settlement is for $1 million.” Councilwoman
Martin asked, “If we didn’t, what would be the continued cost of
litigation?” The City Attorney replied, “I don’t know. The
complaint was filed a year plus ago. I believe the most direct
answer to your question is that our own people would say that
they’re entitled to an amount that is not very far south of this
number. We did try to mediate it, but we were unable to get
there. They were stuck on an issue regarding the importation of
fill that we were unwilling to settle on. Essentially, this
settlement recognizes that the issue came out of a lawsuit, and
they were settling on a number that was very close to what our
own people said they would have been entitled to, but for that
other fill issue.” Vice Mayor Bartz moved to approve Item 13 f).
Councilwoman Berger seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated
the motion as follows: for approval of Item 13 f). The motion
passed by roll call vote with Vice Mayor Bartz, Councilwoman
Berger, Mayor Faiella, and Councilwoman Martin voting in favor,
and Councilman Kelly voting against.
14. DETERMINATION OF EXCUSED ABSENCE
a) VICE MAYOR, LINDA BARTZ, MARCH 28, 2011
Councilman Kelly moved to approve Item 14 a). Councilwoman
Martin seconded the motion. The City Clerk restated the motion
as follows: for approval of Item 14 a). The motion passed
unanimously by roll call vote.
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
There were no comments or discussions for this item.
16. ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:45
a.m.
________________________________________
Karen A. Phillips, City Clerk
________________________________________
Carol M. Heintz, Deputy Clerk Supervisor