Loading...
07-23-51 Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Delray Beach was held in the Council Chambers at 7:30 P.M. with ~layor Roth in the Chair, and City Attorney John Moore, City Manager Robert Lovelace, and the following Colmcilmen present: W. A. Jacobs, and Hobert J. ttolland. Councilman IIolland moved that W. C. ~-'Iusgrave be appointed to fill the vacancy created by Jack L. Saunders, said appointment to be effective until the next general election as provided by charter. The motion was seconded by Councilman Jacobs and was passed unani- mously u.~on call of roll. Oath of office was given W. C. Musgrave, after which a message of welcome to the Council was offered by Mayor l~oth. A letter from Joe )iartin, Delray Beach News, was read contain- ing a request for more li~e:~uard ~rotection at the beach: "July 16, 1951 Hon. Walter Roth, ~[ayor Delray Beo.ch City Hall Delray Beach, Florida Dear l~iayor Roth: Last Sunday, July 15, a reporter for the Delray Beach News called me and said that there were at least 200 people at the beach. I went to the beach and found this to be ture. I took a ?osition relative to the one taken by the lifeguard and found that one cannot possibly watch both North and South with ~my degree of accuracy. I speak with some qualification in that I hold the Water Ss. fety Instructor's rating at nresent. This newspaper, acting as a public servant, would like to see some- thing done in regards to ,roper public protection at the beach during the summer months, i~erhaps several PAttT TItlE lifeguards could be ~ired for the weekends, or afternoons. At any r~te, will you kindly place this matter on the agenda for the next meeting. I am sure that you find our fiowares correct. I think that Stephe~ Berry, the nresent lifeguard will tell you t~aat his ,job is all but impossi!~le. Thanking you, I remain /S/ Joseph C. i~tartin, Jr. Editor, Delray Beach i\ews" City Manager Lovelace stated a check on the number of bathers at the hours 10 - 12 - 2 and 4 o'clock had been made by the life- guard, and that as a result of th~ s check he did not feel there is a definite need for furt?'~er ?~otection to be offered by the City, in view of the ~ossihility that volunteer service may be sec~tred from local service clubs. Following discus-ion by the Council, Joe ~Iartin and the City ~lanager, a motion was made by Councilman Holland that the City Manager confer with the service clubs with the thought of nroviding volunteer lifeguards, and thereby enable the size of t~e protected area to be increased. The motion was secomd, ed by Councilmau ~usgrave and upon call of roll carried ,manimous ly. Councilman Jacobs made a motion that individual microphones be installed for each Council member, to ,complete the loudspeaker system. Z'he motion was seconded by Councilman: ltolland mad upon call of roll passed unanimously. Representing the Unity Church, bit. Paul Gringle appeared before the Council with a request the Church be exempted from taxes inasmuch as the laws of the State of Florida p~vides such exemption f~r religious organizstions. ~i~he second ~loor of the 5~cCabe building, he said~ was o~ed by this Church and the first floor is o~ed by ~icCabe. The second Floor was built by Thieme Construction Co. For the ~nity Church at the cost o~ ~15~000. ~i~he Ch~ch has cancelled checks showing they paid all expense in con- nection with the build~g of this second floor, according to ?Ir. Gringle, the roof of the first floor is leased to the ~nity Church for the auditori~ and offices. It was brou~t out the Ch~ch has leased the roo~ o~ this building upon ~ich the second ~loor ~as constructed ~or use by the Ch~ch For a period o$ fifteen years. The Florida State lsw he stated provides theft ~ 75~; o~ a ~ild~g is used ~or religious purposes it is tax exempt. At present~ it was asserted the County had allowed such an ex~ption. Assessment fop the $irst and second floor of the buil~ng are at present berg handled se~arz~tely by ~e City. )ir. Gr:]ngle stated, that it was not a matter o~ money~ but the Ch~ch wanted to ~eel the City was interested in ~urtbering religious organization and in harmony ~th our state laws in that direction. The City Attorney stated the amount o~ money in controversy would add up to ~3~000.00 over a period o~ 15 years~ which is ~e period covered by the lease as held by the Church. City Attorney was o~ the opinion that the se~nd floor was not owned by the Ch~ch but leased to them and at the end o~ a fifteen year period it would go back to 5icCabe. Actually the ~o~t p~d ~ "~cCabe during this period would amour to ~1~000.00 per year~ ~i~ring the ¥15~000.00 investment made by the Chul~'ch in the bulling itself The Ch~ch also pays ~500.00 a year w~ch was~ ]~r. 6~ngle stated~ Sot the use o~ the stairway. The City Attorney stated there is no considerable difference in th:is case and in the case between Je~erson Standard L~e Ins. Co. vs. city o~ ~ildwo~, in ~ich case the Supreme Court ruled the Je~erson Standard Li~e Insurance Co. was not tax exempt on property leased to the Church. ~ihe Church was paying rent on the property so there$ore it was rental property and not tax exempt. Councilman Holland was o~ the opinion tha.t you don't own any- thing by lease. You have the use o~ it ~d he felt 5icCabe should be taxed on the second floor. ~Ir. G~n~gle stated the Unity Ch~ch has an agreement ~th ~icCabe to pay one th:ird of the tax on t]~is building bu~ he ~elt the Ch~ch should not be equired by ~e City to pay ~y tax. Councilm~ Jacobs stated that i~ the lease they have is sub- ject to reversion then the building belongs to l'icCabe ~d taxes should be ~aid. by ~4cCabe. Councilman 5I~grave asked ~ the Ch~ch owned the o~Fices on the ~econd floor, to which ~r. Gringle answered they do o~ and are renting them. ~ayor r~oth cited by way of example the si~nilar situation o~ the Luthern Ch~ch. The build~g just south o~ the Ch~ch was pur- chased and the downstairs was used ~or educational purposes. Rooms 7/23/ 1 1 1 on the second floor were rented and therefore the Church was taxed on the second floor. He sug,~ested that perhaps the auditorium of the ~,icCabe building should be tax exemp~ ~ut the office space on ~he second floor ~eing re~ed ou~ should ~e ~axed. City A~torney ~oore ~as of ~he opinion ~hat if one part is nontaxa,~le then i% all is nontaxable, si.nee our State law provides that ~aP% of property used fop Peligious purposes may be penned and still be %ax exempt. Mr. Gezelsch~p, Mr. Gringle's pprtnep, stated that ~ephaps the main noin% was being overlooked, that i% is not a question of o~ep- ship of %he nPoper%y but use of same which should be considered. ~e City Attorney asked if ]~ip. Gpingle would be willing %o accept declatopy jud~en% and was infor;ned by fqP. G~gle i% would be necessapy fop the la%reP to consult ~th his client before ~k- lng ~ answer. A motion made by Co~cilman llolland %o delay action on the case was seconded by Councilman Jacobs and ui~on call of ~11 passed ~animous ly. City Manager Lovelace reported that the alley wes% of the fo~eP Zook propeP%y was ordered cleaPed two meetings a~. Now i% develops that the homes west of the alley bordeP ~rectly on the dedicated ri~!-of-way, to the extent that back doors being opened would actually open onto the dedicated way. At law, the property owners have no recourse. They bou~t shallow lots and built flush to the back line. The alley is an old one, p;~.rt of the To~ of ~inton, so that the right-of-way antedated ~y of the buildings. The City Manager suggested ~ abandonm~t of not more than 9' on the west side of the alley. ~is would leave a steward 16 foot alley (25 foot alley set up in the plat). In return the property owners on the west side might offer to impure and pave the 16 foot alley at their o~ expense, so that the new p~perty owners on the e[:st side would also receive some benefits, if 9' were abandoned entirely on the west side, the parcels would revert to the property o~ers on the west side without cost. ~r. Gringle stated he represented most of the owners on the east side of the alley and he would be glad to cooperate ~th the City Manager on working out a satisfactory pl~ for the ,~roperty owners on both sides of the alley. Mr. }lichael, f~m the audience, asked the City blam ger if the property o~ers on the wes% side of the alley would be req~red %o Dave the entire alley. He was info,ed that nothing w~,uld be done ~til all parties were in agreement, after w~ch a public hearing would probably be held. Co~cilman Holl~d ~nade a motion ~e City ~ianager see what arrangements could be made %o the mu%ual beneS% of all parties concerned. Co~ci~man "acobs seconded the motion ~d upon call of roll the motion carried un~imously. City Manager Lovelace presented a proposed agreement ~th Mr. Totterdale, relative to supplying City water to ~is subdivision. He explained %he te~s as follows: (1) The City lays and pays for a 6" main f~m S~n%on %o 2nd Ave. on N.W. 15%h St. installing a fire hydr~t at ~a% corner. (2) Mr. Totterdale pays for a 6" main f~m 2nd Ave. and S.W. 15th to N.W. 15%h and 4%h Ave. He pays the difference between the cost of %he 2~" pipe now %here, and the cost of ~e 6" pipe plus installation. (3) He gets the salvage 2~" pipe on 15%h S%. - about 650' (4) The City will loan him, on a replacement basis, 1000' of 2" pipe and 840' of 2½" pipe. (5) He'll carry the 6" main down N.W. 4th Ave. and west on N.W. 14th St. approximately two blocks to "Totter Lane"~ in- stalling a fire hydrant there and~ generally~ lay the necessary mains all through his subdivision - all at his own expense. (6) TheCity will do the work as far as 15th and 4th Ave. and stop the re. Co~cilman Holland made a motion ~at the agreement as outlin' ed by the City Manager for getting water to hr. Totterdale's sub- division be approved. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mus- grave and carried ~animously upon call of roll. A petition si~ed by nineteen property owners on S.W. 6th Ave. requesting that S.W. 6th Ave. be graded ~d rocked between Atlantic Ave. and S.W. 1st St. waspresented. After discussion Co~cilm~ Musgrave made ~ motion that the City Manager be instructed to check the nercentage of nroperty owners favoring the improvement and also investigate the complete cost of the project, including the filling and improv~g the sluice. The motion was se~nded by Co~cilm~ Holland and passed ~animously upon call of ~ll. A change to the proposed "Dog" ordin~ce was co~midered with ronosed changes effecting the license fee upward from ~l.00 to 5.00 per yea~ for unspayed female dog and ch~ging the section of the ordinance requiring rabies shots by a veterinarian to state the shots may be given by ~ veterinarian, registered n~se or a medical technician. Co~cilm~ Jacobs disfavored the ~5.00 fee proposal and also voiced his objection against the section of the ordinance provid- ing For a charge of $2.~5 per day for dogs picked up ~d held at the nord. He cited two angles to the dog question. (1) People don't want dogs r~ning loose. (2) The State Board of Health re- ~lations providing rabies innoculation for all dogs. He went on to say that while hewas in complete agreem~t ~th enforcement of the State Board of ~lealth regulations he did not w~t ~ see a hardship worked on dog owners generally. Every step should be taken, he said, to avoid any horrible experience of rabies. Mr. J~cobs s,~ggested it would cost the City less in the long run if at City expense dogs were innoculated and allowed to go their way rather than being kept at the nord at the charge of ~.25 a day, which he believed ~rked an ~do hardship on dog owners. Co~lm~ Holland stated in~oculation is not the only pro- blem. He listed also as problems, crippled, diseased dogs and dogs rang~g in packs. Co~cilm~ Jacobs contended the higher charge for female than male dog was ~Cair. While voicing ~s high opinion of dogs generally he reiterated his belief the main problem is the prevention of rabies. Ilo reco~ended the fee for dogs being held at the po~d be redfaced. Co~cilm~ Holland red,ended the charge be c~nged to ~ .50 a day, after w}~ich Mr. Jacobs again offered ~s opinion the irS. 00 license fee for females was excessive~ Co~lman IIoll~d made a motion that the City attorney draw up a change to the "Dog" ordinance 0hanging the lic~se fee for mn ~spayed female dog f~m ~;~1.00 to ]~5.00 and changing t?,.e por- tion cC the ordinance providing for innocul~'ion by veterinari~ to read "Veterinarian, registered nurse or medical technician, ~d also to include the change of the fee for an enpo~ded dog from 14 2 ~2.25 to ~ .50 per day. Councilman ~iusgrave seconded the motion~ and upon call of roi1 the motion carried. Councilman iioth, Musgrave and Holland voted "yes" - Councilman Jacobs voted "no" to the in- crease in license fee for unspayed female dogs to ~5.00. · An amendment to Ordinance G-89 which contains specifications for concrete block construction was offered for consid:,eration. The present ordinance allows the use of Lintel Blocks and Concrete columns in one story residential struct,~res only. ~he amendment would strike out the word residential~ thus allowing the use of these devices in the construction of one story stores and other Buildings. Councilman Jacobs stated he wanted const]~uction to be as strong as possible in order to off-set the effect of hurric:~nes. In the opinion of City Hanager Lovelace and Building Inspector Hugh- son, the change would not weaken present construction requirements. Cotmcilman Holland asked about Southern Building Gode requirements and Ruilding inspector Hughson replied, there is not a copy of this code at hand. Co]mci. Imam }lolland suggested no action be taken on this matter until Curt},er investigation could be con pl et ed.' TheCouncil de~ffed a request from Mr. Lewis Singleton to chase one lot of five acre nlot owned by the City. City Manager Lovelace advised the Council of a requ6t by the C ' Seacrest Field Om,lxttee that the City make available a dump truck for the nurpose of filling the athletic field. It w:~s requested the truck be made available free of charge or at a very low cost. Councilman Jacobs and. ~olland asserted ]tore Hatch and Boynton might also denote trucks to assist at the school since it serves the en- tire area. 9ot~ Councilmen were willing to partake of the matter on a cooperative basis. Councilman l,ius.grave made a motion the City ~,.lanager determine whether tl,e donation could be carried out on a student 9ercentage basis and if so ~nke necessary arrangements. C ' The motion was seconded by ~ouncxlman Holland and. upon call of roll passed unanimously. It was determined that the tax roll could not be certi£ied and closed until the ,groblem of taxation on Unity Church could be cleared up. Uity Attorney Moore stated the quickest way to clarify the matter would be by declatory judg~nent, which should enable set- tlement to be completed in about two we~ks. Counciman Jacobs in- quired as to the City Attorney's fee in connection with this ac- tion and was informed by the City Attorney there would be practi- cally no expense if the City lost the case and a very nominal fee if the case were won. Councilman Musgrave made a motion the City Attorney be in- structed to ~,repare declatory judgment on the Unity Church tax mat- ter. Councilman Jacobs seconded and upon call of roll the motion carried unanimously. 7qae Cotmcil was informed by the City lianager of discussions E.E.:~obinson, ~ssistant District Supervisor of the State Beverage Department re~garding the problem of legal hours for the sale of intoxicatinz beverages for consumption either on or off the nre~nises. Mr. ilobinson holds our present ordinance is am- Biguous and unenforceable m~d has requested a clarifying amendment. Councilman Jacobs made a motion the City Attorney draw up an amendment to t~,e present Liquor Control Ordinanc% in cooperation with the State Bevera?e Control Department~ clarifyir~g the hours for legal sale of intoxicating beverages. Councilman Holland seconded the motion and upon call of roll carried unanimously. City },lanager Lovelace reported on a reply from the State ~oad Department to our rec~uest in ~{esolution No. 801 that the State take over maintenance and improvement of certain streets. The State f{oad Department will not take the roads over directly but informed the City that they micht be improved and serviced t~ough the County's share of the $0~ Seventh cent gas tax Iklnd, and sug- gests the City co, tact the County. Councilman Hollmud made a motbn the same letter and i{esolu- tion No. 801 tie sent to the County Commission. Councilman Jacobs seconded the motion and upon call of roll carried unanimously. City Attorney Moore stated he had confered with John Adams pertaining to the Nichols drainage assessment case and it is in- dicated by present negotiations that a satisfactory agreement will be reach ed. City Attorney ~ioore announced lnis intention of resignation. He stated it became ~ore and more difficult to devote enough time to the City busines~ and to his private !~ractice~ and he had re- cently accepted the position as attorney~ to the Boca Eaton Club. He would like this resignation to become effective at the end of this fiscal year. Councilman Holland asked the City }ianager if the money the City p~anned on using for the new jail, now in a special account (Golf Course Certificates) had been made available to the City by the bank. The City Manager reported that the bank would have a board meeting the follo~hg day (July 24th) and the money should be made available at that time. City Attorney ~oore said the bonding attorneys are prepared to state that such action will not effect the legality of the bonds. The City Manager was instructed to advertise for bids in connection with the constrq~ction of the new jail. Tax Assessor & Collector Worthing was commended on the tax report handed t~ the Council. There being no more business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned. Acting City Clerk APPROVED: Mayo r