05-20-85 v MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE ATLANTIC BEACH CITY
11/ COMMISSION HELD AT THE CITY HALL ON MAY 20, 1985 AT 7:30 P.M.
Mayor Howell called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of going
over the Stock Purchase Agreement and the Ordinance covering the purchase of
Buccaneer Service Co. , Inc. due to the fact there were a number of changes
made. Those present were Mayor Howell, Commissioners Cook, Gulliford, Morris
and Van Ness; City Manager Richard Fellows, and City Attorney Claude L.Mullis.
Mayor Howell mentioned that all Commissioners had received copies of the
amended documents. The Stock Purchase Agreement was discussed first.
Commissioner Gulliford moved that the Stock Purchase Agreement be approved.
Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. Discussion followed.
Commissioner Morris referred to page 2 (re Commissioner Gulliford's narrative
at last meeting) and asked if they were purchasing the stock or the assets.
Mr. Mullis replied they were purchasing the stock with the agreement that
certain properties would be conveyed out to the individuals of the Company
prior to the closing.
Commissioner Morris expressed concern of pledged revenues on page 4 - "Pledged
revenues shall mean the net revenues and available impact fees as defined in
the Ordinance." "Impact fees" and "available impact fees" were used extensive-
ly in the Stock Purchase Agreement and also the Ordinance. He commented a
• serious question had been raised as to the availability of impact fees and how
much of it could be used, if any, towards the payment of bond principal and
interest of the system. For the record, he read a letter addressed to him from
Mr. Robert Stubbs and is recorded verbatim:
Dear Mr. Morris:
Prior to the final vote of the Commission on the Ordinance providing for the
purchase of the Buccaneer Service Company, Inc. system, I recommend that the
Ordinance be revised appropriately to reflect the pledge of only those pro-
jected revenues of District I that are legally available for the purchase.
These: net operating revenues (user charges minus operation and maintenance)
and a portion of impact fees. The Dunedin decision of the Supreme Court of
Florida clearly compels that impact fee revenues must be used only for the
benefit of the future users of District I, not for existing users or other
purposes. Thus the only legal use of impact fee revenue is for the explicit
purpose of future District I users. In particular, no impact fee revenues
can legally be diverted to the City of Atlantic Beach for the benefit of its
citizens. More crucially, with reference to the projected financial feasi-
bility of the proposed purchase, the only portion of impact fee revenues that
can be legally used to pay the debt service of the purchase price of Buccaneer
is equal to that percentage of the purchase price that is allocable to
portions of the facilities which are available for the service of future users
of District I. This percentage should be determined by properly qualified,
objective and professional Engineers. I roughly estimate that this extra
capacity allocable percentage is approximately 20-25%. This means that 80 to
11/ 75% of debt service would have to come from the net operating revenue, that's
the user charges minus 0 & M. Again, a professional Engineer must be engaged
to determine this percentage before the Commission can responsibly determine
the financial prudence of the proposed purchase. Based upon generally accepted
principles of local government finance, an acquisition of the feasibility of
Page 2
Special Called
111 May 20,1985
which depends sensitively upon steep growth projections, must be
seriously evaluated under more conservative growth projections,
otherwise you are betting upon an eventuality that might not
materialize in the public interest. With good wishes, (signed)
Robert Stubbs.
Commissioner Nbrris asked what was available in tax figures and how
could they be used to the best interest of the citizens of Atlantic
Beach in paying off the system. Mr. Livermore expressed the opinion that
Commissioner Nbrris's concerns were legally covered in the Ordinance. It
was a provision that had been used many times in water and sewer systems
that had impact fees. He agreed with Mr. Stubbs' letter that the
percentages should be determined by the engineer. Mr.Mullis said the
City of Atlantic Beach was clearly protected under the Ordinance.
Commissioner Morris asked if the City had, in fact, determined the
impact fees were going to be locked away for use only for future plant
expansion. Mr. Mullis stated he was not sure we were limited to that.
Commissioner Van Ness questioned if the impact fees collected over the
past few years were in a special fund and Mr. Strayve explained they
had all been used for municipal construction in the area of expansion.
He added there were $322,000 obligated in agreements which will accrue
to the City in impact fees. A lengthy discussion followed regarding
•
repairs and expansion during the past years. Commissioner Morris asked
if there was anything projected in the six year forecast for maintenance
on the tank by Jax Utilities. Commissioner Gulliford replied there was
no specific breakdown. All operations were lumped together. Commissioner
Morris asked who paid for the Jax Utility Study. He was told the City
of Atlantic Beach paid for the study in the amount of $1,200, and was
authorized by the City Manager.
A lengthy discussion was held relative to Exhibit F: Plans and Specifi-
cations, and who will be responsible for verifying they are what they
are, where they are, and in what condition they are in. Mr. Mullis
said there was a provision in the agreement that any breach in the
condition of the contract, the city had the right to withhold the funds
due the seller from the bond proceeds or the interest due thereon.
Commissioner Morris commented on page 14 -middle of the page- "City
shall have 5 days after the execution of this agreement to inspect the
same and within 3 days thereafter shall advise the Company of any
claimed deficiency". Commissioner Norris moved to amend Section H to
read: 30 days after the execution of this agreement to inspect the same
within 15 days thereafter. After discussion, Commissioner Morris
withdrew his motion.
S
Page 3
111 Special Called
May 20, 1985
Commissioner Gulliford moved to amend Page 14, Section H
starting with: "that the condition of the property plant and equipment
of the company and service on the closing date, will be in good and
operable condition. Then starting with: "and" Strike, starting with
"and acceptable as mutually agreed by the parties following such
investigation and inspection made prior to closing by the City". Start
again with: "City shall have 30 days after the execution of this
agreement to inspect the same and within 10 days thereafter shall advise
the company of any claimed deficiency. . .etc, etc and the company shall
have 30 days after receiving a written notice of claimed deficiencies to
either,"and then it gives the remedies. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Morris and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Morris then raised a question relative to the third sewage
tank cost listed not to exceed $425,000. He asked if it was going to be
bid out, and Mr. Mullis responded it would be with competitive proposal,
subject to Commission approval, which would be submitted to the
Commission.
Commissioner Morris presented another question, this in reference to
page 6 relative to the interest rate being 9% instead of 7.5% originally
proposed.
Commissioner Norris moved to amend the 9% rate of interest on page 6 to
read 7.5% The motion was seconded by Commissioner Van Ness. During
discussion, Commissioner Gulliford noted during the process of
negotiations with Mr. Strayve it appeared to him that it would in the
best interest of the city to have a lower principal amount with a higher
rate of interest. The savings would be approximately $30,000. The
question was called and the motion failed with a 3-2 vote. Mayor Howell,
Commissioners Gulliford and Cook voted no. Commissioners Morris and Van
Ness voted yes.
Commissioner Gulliford inquired if the pressure taps and TV testing
reports to be included in Exhibit F were on video tapes or did Mr.
Strayve just have paper results. Mr. Strayve replied the results were
actually in the form of paper, and it runs from manhole to manhole. It
tells the condition of each section of pipe and the location of every
service between each manhole. At Commissioner Gulliford's request, Mr.
Strayve agreed to specifically add the results to Exhibit F.
Commissioner Gulliford referred to page 17 to insert "the City has the
right to terminate prior to the expiration of this with 30 days written
notice." Mr. Strayve had no objections.
Commissioner Gulliford moved that whatever legal terminology necessary
to establish the intent that the City has the right to terminate the
services of Mr. Braid and Mr. Strayve prior to the expiration date with
five (5) days written notice. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Cook and carried unanimously.
•
Page 4
Special Called
May 20, 1985
Commissioner Gulliford moved a substitute motion to approve the Stock
Purchase Agreement as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Cook and carried with a four to one vote. Commissioner Van Ness voted no
Action on Ordinance No. 80-85-26
AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING THE OFFER OF THE STOCKHOLDERS OF BUCCANEER
SERVICE COMPANY, INC. TO SELL ALL OF ITS ISSUES AND OUTSTANDING CAPITAL
STOCK TO THE CITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING THE WATER AND SEWER
SYSTEM OWNED AND OPERATED BY BUCCANEER SERVICE COMPANY, INC. DESCRIBED
IN SAID OFFER FOR THE PURCHASE PRICE SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED STOCK
PURCHASE AGREEMENT; ESTABLISHING THE BUCCANEER WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
OF THE CITY WITH WHICH THE CITY WILL PROVIDE WATER AND SEWER SERVICES
THROUGH THE SYSTEM PURCHASED; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BUCCANEER
WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT REVENUE BONDS FOR PAYMENT OF THE PURCHASE PRICE
OF THE STOCK; AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF THE BONDS FROM THE NET REVENUES AND
AVAILABLE IMPACT FEES OF THE UTILITY SYSTEM SERVING BUCCANEER WATER AND
SEWER DISTRICT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN OFFICERS OF THE CITY
TO EXECUTE THE STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS, AND TAKE
CERTAIN ACTION IN CONNECTION THEREWITH; DIRECTING THAT BUCCANEER SERVICE
COMPANY, INC. BE COMPLETELY LIQUIDATED AND DISSOLVED IMMEDIATELY AFTER
• PURCHASE AND PROVIDING FOR ALL NECESSARY ACTION THEREFOR; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Said Ordinance was presented in full, in writing, by Mayor Howell on
second and final reading.
Commissioner Cook moved for passage of Ordinance No. 80-85-26. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Gulliford.
A lengthy discussion followed, including why so much attention was
devoted to the sections on additional bonds . Mr. Livermore explained
that was a standard set of provisions. Also discussed on page 21 how the
percentage of 110% of the Bond Services requirement is becoming due on
such fiscal year on the outstanding bonds was arrived at. Mr. Mullis
explained that' s what they had negotiated. It minimizes the coverage
necessary to have before you can issue additional bonds.
Mr. Livermore explained monies on deposit on page 17 at the request of
Commissioner Gulliford. Available impact fees on page 5 were also
discussed-the formula they had discussed relative to establishing some
assessment or allocation of impact fees to the existing plant. Mr.
Livermore assured Commissioner Gulliford he had no legal problem with
it. Commissioner Gulliford asked Mr. Gordon if he had talked to anyone
using that formula as to what kind of dollar amount might be allocated
out as to impact fees to that system. Mr. Gordon said he would call a
S representative in Palm Beach the next day and report to Mr. Mullis . He
had talked with the Engineer and told him they wanted some real numbers
because it was going to be used in connection with the Ordinance.
Page 5
Special Called
May 20 , 1985
Mr. Strayve said if they were talking in unused capacity, they would
come up with 46% is utilized. They worked their numbers off the present
customers who are using 46% of what is available in capacity. He added
that was approximately minus 5% . Commissioner Gulliford said according
to the Ordinance we would have the capability in that fund,that Mr.
Strayve distinguished as available impact fees ,to accumulate up to a
million eight in that particular fund in order to utilize it to debt
service. Mr . Strayve said that was correct. Commissioner Gulliford
expressed the opinion the only place we had a problem was in the
remainder of 1985 because we have potential negative cash flow of about
$8 ,700 and beyond that you fund the whole thing, including debt service,
strictly off gross revenues from your operation and you don' t touch
impact fees but it' s still to some benefit to have them in reserve and
that reserve could be something allocated to that fund called available
impact fees.
Mayor Howell had a question for Mr. Livermore: On page 4 , Section 5 -
Establishment of Buccaneer Water and Sewer Districts: "upon the
acquisition of the stock of the company by the City" , Mayor Howell
suggested they strike "of the City" and insert "the area described in
Exhibit J" . Mr. Livermore agreed.
110 Page 19 , Section 4 - The renewal and replacement account. Mr. Fellows
asked why Mr. Livermore felt the city needed to accumulate $500 ,000.
Mr. Livermore explained that was a Commission decision, and Commissioner
Morris said he thought they should earmark that amount for renewal and
replacement. Mr . Fellows said you could use impact fees for extensions
and additions to the capital assets of the Buccaneer system. You use
renewal and replacement to renew something that was already there. Mayor
Howell noted that if something came up, replacements or such, you could
use the money as long as you put it back in until such time as it
reaches $500 ,000 . Mr. Fellows commented in his experience in 17-18 years
was a renewal and replacement fund of $100 , 000 was usually fairly
sufficient to take care of renewal and replacement of existing problems.
The impact fees would take care of extensions and additions to the
system. Commissioner Gulliford said they wanted to be
ultra-conservative. Commissioner Morris added he had a concern with Mr.
fellows on using the impact money.
Commissioner Gulliford moved to amend the figure of $500 , 000 on page 19
to $250 ,000 , and the monies of renewal and replacement fund shall be
used only for the purpose of the cost of replacement and renewal of
capital assets . In other words we are striking "extensions, enlargements
and additions , to "OR" . The motion was seconded by Commissioner Morris
and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Gulliford moved a substitute motion to pass Ordinance No.
S 80-85-26 as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cook and
carried with a three to two vote. Mayor Howell, Commissioners Gulliford
and Cook voted yes. Commissioners Morris and Van Ness voted no.
Page Six
Minutes
May 20, 1985
Discussion was held on the procedure of securing an Engineer.
Commissioner Gulliford said he had no problem leaving it to the
discretion of the City Manager, but he wanted an Engineer totally
independent from any involvement with the City of Atlantic Beach.
Commissioner Gulliford moved to request the City Manager to seek
an independent Engineering firm to evaluate, investigate and inspect the
Buccaneer System to seek out any deficiencies that might exist that
might have been overlooked in accordance with the Stock Purchase
Agreement. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Morris. Following a
lengthy discussion, the question was called and the motion carried with
a three to two vote.
Commissioner Gulliford mentioned that at the last meeting, they asked
the City Manager if he would prepare specifications for the operation
and maintenance of the Buccaneer System. He suggested if the
specifications were prepared that they request the City Manager to
solicit bids. Discussion was held on whether to obtain a price on both
the Buccaneer system and ours.
Commissioner Gulliford moved the City Manager be authorized to advertise
and receive competitive bids for the operation of the Buccaneer Sewer
and Water System and report back to the Commission. Commissioner Morris
seconded the motion. There was no discussion, and the motion carried
unanimously.
Commissioner Morris asked the City Attorney if we would be
discriminating against the Engineers if we exclude them from the bid.
Mr. Mullis stated not unless it comes within the pervue competitive
consultant negotiations. You can discriminate if you so choose.
There being no other business to come before the Commission, the Mayor
declared the meeting adjourned.
S