FBCC ponders waterslide, Old Town gate, chickens and voluntary annexations

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm

Reporter – News Analyst

It was a long night for the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC), city staff, parties affected by the proposed voluntary annexation of the Gateway complex, and those commission meeting groupies who were determined to watch the April 15, 2014 Regular Meeting to the end.  Beginning at 6 p.m. with 8 proclamations and a presentation on a potential inflatable waterslide for the Main Beach Park, the FBCC moved on at 7:00 p.m. to unanimously approve the Consent Agenda and take Public Input. In the next half hour the FBCC unanimously approved two budget amendments, heard a proposed ordinance that would allow residents to keep up to 6 chickens on residential property under certain conditions, and approved an updated pay and classification plan to reflect position changes in Information Technology.

Mayor Ed Boner called a brief recess before the FBCC once again took up the contentious matter of a proposed annexation into the city of 24 acres of land at A1A/South 8^th Street and Gateway Blvd/Somerset Drive (Second Reading of Ordinance 2014-08).  This ordinance was introduced and discussed during the previous FBCC meeting on April 1, 2014 (See earlier article).  Commissioners spent three hours taking comments, asking questions and listening to lawyers present and rebut information in connection with the proposed annexation.  The meeting finally adjourned at 11:00 p.m. with a decision to revise Ordinance 2014-08 to exclude the Somerset Apartments parcel and return the revised ordinance for another public hearing on May 20, 2014.

Due to the late hour, commissioners postponed discussion of two agenda topics:  policy and procedure for processing Proclamation requests; and options to address the Old Town Bluff and Plaza. City Manager Joe Gerrity also pulled two agenda items relating to grant requests for marina improvements.  The FBCC appointed John L. Ramsey to the newly-formed Greens and Oversight Committee (Golf Course), thereby filling the last vacant position on that committee. 

Main Beach waterslide proposed

Mr. Brent Palmer of Oceanus Slides approached the city about setting up a 36-foot high waterslide that would occupy a 60×200-foot area south of the putt-putt green at Main Beach.  Palmer has proposed to operate the slide from 10 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily between mid May and Labor Day.  The slide would be inflated each morning and deflated each evening.  Palmer suggested that the city provide water and electricity in return for 20% of the slide’s gross revenue.  As part of his presentation to the FBCC, he played a promotional video that emphasized the slide’s popularity among children and families.

While many such waterslides are located on the beach itself, he emphasized that Fernandina’s would be located on grass.  That raised concerns for Commissioner Pat Gass.  She reminded Palmer and the commissioners that the grass areas at the beach are home to sandspurs, which are tough on bare feet.  She also asked how Palmer would prevent mud holes from developing from the continuous flow of water.

Palmer replied that water only flows when the slide is in use, not continuously, suggesting that there are only a couple of cups of water flowing per hour, likening it to a “giant Slip ‘N Slide.”  He said that the slide, which costs about $80K, is made of sturdy material.  He would surround walkways with rubber matting to minimize sandspur injury to slide patrons.  In response to Vice Mayor Sara Pelican, he replied that his company would assume total liability for slide operations.

City Manager Joe Gerrity asked for direction from the FBCC.  Commissioners Charlie Corbett and Johnny Miller expressed their desire to pursue the waterslide, while the remaining commissioners asked for further investigation before granting approval. Mayor Boner expressed concerns about the vertical impact of the slide on neighboring condo owners.  He also said that he believes the green space at the beach is valuable for the city’s many special events.

Gerrity asked commissioners to forward their questions to him, advising that he will bring back a resolution for their consideration at a future meeting.  Fernandina Beach Cay Association representative Joann Hurst reinforced the need for more information during Public Input, suggesting that the proposed location of the waterslide might also be a site for shuffleboard or petanque courts.

Gate to Nowhere?

During Public Input, Old Town residents Jennifer and Michael Harrison raised the ongoing concern over a gate that blocks access to city property on Estrada Street.  According to the Harrisons, the gate serves no purpose, since people can walk around it.  Jefferson Smurfitt erected the gate with city permission as a temporary measure while working on a mill well several years ago.  Recent letters from the city to Rock Tenn, the successor to Jefferson Smurfitt, have not brought about the gate’s removal, although Rock Tenn has offered to landscape the area.  Both City Attorney Tammi Bach and City Manager Joe Gerrity claimed that Rock Tenn is adamant about not removing the gate, claiming that it is located on their property per a deed from the 1930’s.  Commissioner Johnny Miller opined that since people can walk around the gate, it cannot serve any security purpose. Attorney Bach suggested that the 1939 legal description of the mill property was in error.  Mayor Boner requested a title opinion.  The consensus of the FBCC remains to remove the gate.

Will chickens come home to roost in Fernandina Beach?

In response to commission direction, city staff prepared Ordinance 2014-13, amending Section 18-2 of the City Code pertaining to the regulation of chickens on private property.  This item reflects recent trends toward citizen interest in organic farming and consuming food locally grown or raised.  The proposed ordinance would require permits, fees and annual inspections for up to 6 chickens per residence.  Commissioner Gass questioned why chicken coops needed to be two feet off the ground and how chickens could be confined to a small coop without creating additional problems.  Mayor Boner expressed reservations about keeping fowl within the city limits based on personal experience with neighbors keeping chickens.  Local resident Chris Hill addressed the FBCC to share his experiences and concerns with keeping chickens in the city.  He suggested that the city needed to consider the size of the residential lot before granting a permit.  He confirmed Boner’s statement about the relatively short egg-producing life of a chicken (2-3 years) and the noise factor.  Attorney Bach advised that any community deed restrictions against allowing domestic fowl on residential property would take precedence over the city ordinance.

The Commission advised City Manager Gerrity that they wanted to move forward with the ordinance provided that many of the points raised were fully addressed.  Gerrity agreed to rework the ordinance and return it for consideration on May 20, 2014.

Proposed voluntary annexation of Somerset and Gateway properties

When residents and/or businesses outside city limits request and receive provision of city water and sewer, the city requires them to execute a voluntary annexation agreement in which the city agrees to provide such services providing that when/if the subject property becomes contiguous to city boundaries, the property owners agree to be annexed into the city.  Ordinance 2014-08 proposed to enforce these agreements with respect to two properties:  Somerset Apartments and Gateway to Amelia. Property owners have retained counsel to formally oppose this action.

City Manager Joe Gerrity began discussion of this topic by advising commissioners that city staff was recommending separating out the Somerset property from consideration at this time.  City Attorney Tammi Bach, noting the presence of the court reporter, stated that the public hearing on the voluntary annexation (Ordinance 2014-08) should be considered a legislative hearing, not a quasi-judicial hearing.  Neither city staff nor the 10 people who had signed up to speak would provide testimony under oath.

Mayor Boner recognized local resident Lynn Williams as the first speaker.  Williams, referring back to arguments made on the First Reading of this item on April 1, 2014, said that those people objecting to the annexation make use of the city but don’t want to pay their share.  He advised the commissioners to dismiss arguments that the voluntary annexation agreements were signed under duress as specious at best.

Local attorney Harrison Poole, representing the Gateway to Amelia Association, spoke next, advising commissioners that the proposed annexation does not meet the statutory requirement because it would prevent access to county land without traveling through city limits.  City Attorney Bach countered, stating that the Amelia Island Parkway, a county road, is not included in the annexation proposal; therefore connectivity is not blocked.  The county provision of services to residents is not blocked or interrupted.  She added, “It’s about services, not technicalities.”

Mollie M. Garrett, local attorney representing both Ron Flick, owner and stakeholder in Gateway to Amelia Property, and Andy Alexander, owner of Somerset Apartments, presented her clients’ case against what they claim is falsely termed “voluntary annexation.”

Garrett told commissioners that her clients would be adversely impacted and receive material injury should the FBCC approve the annexation.  Specifically, her clients claimed their tax bills would increase 32%, and Flick’s development rights on the Gateway property would be adversely impacted by city regulations that are more stringent than county regulations.  She also cited technical deficiencies relating to interpretation of contiguity, creating enclaves and access to other county property through the city.  She said that the voluntary annexation agreement had not been recorded or indexed so that future property owners could be on notice that they were subject to annexation into the city.  She added that the executed voluntary annexation agreements did not clearly state that the agreement runs with the land, not the owner, and that the agreements had not been witnessed.

Gateway property owner/stakeholder Ron Flick followed Garrett, emphasizing some of the points she made while claiming that the “voluntary annexation” had been in fact an ultimatum.  He said that with the impending failure of existing sewage treatment works at Gateway, he had no choice but to sign the annexation agreement.

Vice Mayor Sara Pelican reminded Flick that when he approached the city asking for sewer service on an emergency basis, the city moved quickly to accommodate him.  “When it benefits you, it’s right,” she said, “but when it benefits the city, it’s wrong.”

Flick said that he “didn’t think we would ever face annexation” based upon his assessment of the situation.  City Attorney Bach jumped on that statement asking, “So you signed the agreement but you never intended to honor it?”  She also took issue with Flick’s assessment that he had no other choices.  She said, “You could have built your own [sewage treatment] facility.”  Flick claimed time was of the essence in order to avoid state action.

Following a ten-minute recess, Mayor Boner resumed taking public input.  City resident Judith Lane addressed both the commissioners and Flick.  She said, “When you (Flick) ask why the commission is taking this action, they are doing it to represent me.” She said that she expects the city to enforce agreements.  She said, “We trust the city will be well managed in our name.”  As a member of the city’s Planning Advisory Board, she took issue with Flick’s assertion that there had never been a staff report prepared.  She asked the FBCC to “move us forward” and approve the annexation.

Andy Alexander, the other client represented by attorney Garrett, requested that his property, Somerset Apartments, be excluded from the annexation.  He claimed that elevating his taxes reduced the value of the asset.  While he expressed gratitude that the city was considering removing annexation of his property at this time, he was concerned that the matter would resurface following the Gateway annexation.  City staff assured Alexander that their decision to recommend backing off annexing Somerset Apartments was not a tactical maneuver.  Rather it was based on a re-evaluation of the existing situation.  Although a voluntary annexation agreement had been executed, this property has not yet connected to city water and sewer.

Drew Scott, owner of Scott’s Jewelry property, said that he had had no choice but to sign the voluntary annexation agreement.  “You’ve gotten your pound of flesh from me,” he said, referring to hook-up and impact fees.  He claimed that the city has a tremendous amount of assets and said, “We can’t resolve your spending issues.  Don’t bring it all back on small businesses.”  Vice Mayor Pelican emphasized that the city’s financial health is sound.  She also said that the city’s financial position has been improving steadily and that city reserves have increased to 27% while staffing has been cut dramatically.  “We expect people to honor their side of agreements,” she said.  “You are now contiguous to the city.”

City Utilities Director John Mandrick refuted some of Scott’s claims that the city had told him he could not drill a well on his property.  Mandrick said that the city has no jurisdiction over wells, which are permitted by the state.

Scott then turned the issue to one of emergency response time asking, “Are you [the city] prepared to respond as quickly as the county to police and fire emergencies?”  The commissioners and the city manager replied affirmatively.

Three other speakers touched on their concerns regarding lack of notice, costs already incurred in the form of impact fees and hook ups, and problems allegedly created for Marsh Cove residents when Gateway commercial sewage tied into their residential system.

At 10:15 p.m. Deputy Manager Marshall McCrary presented a series of slides with staff findings on the proposed annexation.  He reported that the proposed action was compliant with state and municipal codes, the annexation area is contiguous to the city boundary, and the area is compact and does not create an enclave.  He also said that adequate availability of city services is in place at the present time.

Attorney Bach also weighed in, responding to points raised by annexation opponents.  She said that the annexation meets the requirement of substantial contiguity, it does not create an enclave and that the development regulations of the city are generous.  She said that notice and recording requirements had been met and that the city has honored its side of the agreements by providing access to city water and sewer.  With respect to claims of material injury to annexed property owners, she suggested such claims would need to be sorted out in court.

City Manager Gerrity said, “I think the city bent over backwards to accommodate you in 2008.  I don’t want the city painted as someone out to gouge you guys.  That’s not the case at all.”

Upon advice of staff and legal counsel, the FBCC agreed to remove Somerset Apartments from the proposed annexation at this time.  The city will re-advertise the amended ordinance, now covering only the Gateway parcel, for an additional public hearing on May 20.

Despite the length of the hearing and the contentiousness of some of the discussion, both Flick and Alexander complimented city staff on meeting with them to answer their questions and allay some of their concerns.  City Commissioners actively followed the discussion, raising questions for clarification throughout what could be termed intense, sometimes adversarial proceedings that lasted 3 hours.