Loading...
R-1567-15 RESOLUTION NO. 1 s6 -15 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE COUNCIL PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE LEVY OF NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS ON CERTAIN BENEFITTED PROPERTIES WITHIN THE VILLAGE BUSINESS DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING HIGH QUALITY DELIVERY OF POTABLE WATER AND WASTE WATER COLLECTION TO ALL BENEFITTED PROPERTIES WITHIN THE DESIGNATED AREA; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL REPORTS AND DATA; RECOMMENDING A METHOD OF LEVYING SAID ASSESSMENTS AND DETERMINING BENEFITS ARE IN PROPORTION TO EACH PROPERTY'S ASSESSMENT; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF ALL TESTIMONY AND COMMENTS OF OWNERS OF AFFECTED PROPERTIES; PROVIDING FOR LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Pursuant to Chapter 166, Florida Statutes and Sections 197.3631, 197.3632, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Miami Shores Village Council (the "Council") has the necessary statutory authority to levy and collect non-ad valorem assessments on benefitted properties within the Village's municipal boundaries for municipal improvements and services including potable water supply and wastewater collection; and, WHEREAS, the Council has convened a public hearing on the issue of considering the adoption of a non-ad valorem assessment roll to fund a capital improvements project providing more efficient delivery of high quality potable water and collection of waste water for transfer to an advanced waste treatment facility from a commercial center within the Village (See Exhibit "A"); and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, at a public hearing, the Council adopted Resolution 1255-14 determining to use the county tax roll to collect non-ad valorem assessments for the 00500529-2 described capital improvements project and for maintenance assessments as authorized by Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, et. seq. and applicable case law; and, WHEREAS, the Council directed staff and consultants to prepare a report for presentation to and consideration by the Council on the questions of whether the Council should adopt non-ad valorem assessment rolls to fund the proposed project and to maintain the water supply system and whether such a financing alternative was fair and equitable to all property owners to be assessed and was consistent with applicable Florida law; and, WHEREAS, staff and consultants have presented a report and recommendations to the Council entitled the Burton & Associates Report (the "Report," attached hereto as Exhibit "B") that includes a proposed methodology and assessment roll for the fair and equitable levy of capital improvements and maintenance non-ad valorem assessments on all benefitted properties described by Exhibit"A" hereto; and, WHEREAS, special legal counsel for the Village, Lewis, Longman and Walker, P.A., has reviewed the Report and concluded that the report and recommendations demonstrate they are consistent with applicable Florida case law approving legally valid non-ad valorem assessments in that the project will provide a special benefit to all properties to be assessed and that the assessments on specific properties are proportional to the benefits to be received; and, WHEREAS, the Council has considered all testimony and written comments of all citizens and affected landowners presented on this matter; and, WHEREAS, the Council has determined that providing a high quality, dependable potable water and waste water collection system to the properties to be assessed constitutes a 00500529-2 -2- special benefit including but not limited to providing a reliable source of potable water under all circumstances including tropical weather events and environmental protection of nearby surface and groundwater resources by collection of all untreated waste water in a secure, state-of-the-art system for transmission to a central, advanced waste treatment facility; and, WHEREAS, the special benefit described herein will substantially enhance property values on the assessed properties providing enhanced availability of permitted uses, thereby encouraging future investment in the area resulting in a more stable economy with the Village's commercial center. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA SERVING AS THE GOVERNING BOARD OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, TO WIT: SECTION 1. MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY A. The council has determined that the methodology proposed by the Burton Report, which is hereby incorporated as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto, to levy and collect non-ad valorem assessments for a capital improvements project and maintenance of the facilities which provide a high quality potable water service and waste water collection establishes a rational basis for the levy of said non-ad valorem assessments on all benefitted properties within the area designated by Exhibit"A." Exhibit"A" is hereby incorporated into this Resolution. 00500529-2 -3- B. The proposed methodology provides for equitable and fair apportionment of all non-ad valorem assessments among benefitted properties within the area designated by Exhibit "A." C. The assessments and assessment rolls are adopted pursuant to this Resolution and such assessments do not exceed the benefit provided to each assessed property by the proposed project. D. The assessments adopted pursuant to this Resolution shall be collected from year to year by the Miami Dade County Tax Collector as provided by law. E. Maintenance assessments may be increased annually by no more than the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index, all items. SECTION 2. CONFLICTS A. If there is any conflict between the provisions of the Resolution and any other resolution or ordinance or portion thereof, the provisions of this Resolution shall prevail to the extent of such conflict. SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY A. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. 00500529-2 -4- SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE A. This Resolution shall take effect upon approval by the Miami Shores Village Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 8`h day of September, 2015. ATTEST: *U; 6wjv-- 1.AA, . Alice Burch, Mayor Barbara A. Estep, MM Village Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Richard Sarafan Village Attorney SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT"A" THIS I$ NOT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGAL DESCRIPTION; PROPERTIES ENCOMPASSED IN THE SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT, "DbWNT6WN VILLAGE'OF MIAMI SHORES FOR SANITARY SEWERS AND WATER MAIN PROJECT". LYING IN SECTION 1', TOYVNSHIP 53 SOUTH, RANGE 41• EAST AND j IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 53 SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST, VILLAGE OF MIAMI SHORES, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; (N.E, 101ST STREET) PARCEL 1, LOTS •1 THRU 5, BLOCK 15, PARCEL 8, LOTS 10. THRU 14, BLOCK 34, j TOGETHER WITH TOGETHER WITH (N.E. '100TH STREET) E PARCEL 2, LOTS 1 THRU 5, BLOCK 16, PARCEL '9, LOTS 10 THRU 14, BLOCK 33, TOGETHER WITH TOGETHER WITH (N.E.. 99TH'STREET) PARCEL 3, LOTS 1 THRU'5, BLOCK 17, PARCEL 10. LOTS 10 THRU 14, BLOCK 32, TOGETHER WITH TOGETHER WITH (N.E. 98TH-STREET) PARCEL 4, LOTS 1 THRU 6, BLOCK 18, PARCEL 11, LOTS 10 THRU 14, BLOCK 31, TOGETHER WITH fOQETHER WITH (N.E. §7TH STREET) PARCEL 5, LOTS 1 THRU 5, BLOCK 19, PARCEL 12, LOTS 10 THRU 14, 13LOCK.30, " TOGETHER WITH TOGETHER WITH (N.E. 96TH STREET) PARCEL 6,. LOTS'1 THRU 6, BLOCK 20, PARCEL .13, LOTS 10.THRU 15, BLOCK 29, TOGETHER WITH TOGETHER WITH (N.E. 95TH STREET)- PARCEL 7,• LOTS T THRU 5, BLOCK 21, PARCEL 14, LOTS 13 THRU 17,13LOCK 28, TOGETHER WITH TOGETHER WITH (N.E. 94TH STREET) ALL THE ABOVE PARCELS 1. THRU 14. ARE A PART OF THE PLAT KNOWN AS "AN AMENDED PLAT OF, MIAMI SHORES, SECTION NO, 0 ACCORDING'.TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 10 AT PAGE 70 OF I THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DAQE COUNTY, FLORIDA, A,pt TOUSS-AINT & ASSOCIATES, INC.- LAND NC.•LAND SURVEYORS FLORIDA CE(TFiCATE OF•AUTHORI%nON LB.27,3 620 N.E. '126th STREET NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA. 33161 BY., GG��• PRES. ALBERT R. •TOUSSAINT REGISTERED ENGINEER NO. 8939 REGISTERED SS7ATE OOF FLORIDA PER NO. 907 SECTION 1-53-41• . SECTION 6-53-42 NOVEMBER 17; X014 ORDER No. 14959 SHEET 1 OF 2 • i SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1 EXHIBIT"A" t THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION U_i 9 NE 101st Q STREET 8 8 1-1 6 5. 4 1"171 1 �or�il is 18 17 18 19 z0 21 22 23 4 to 10 17 18 19 2021 122 23 W f~ NE i 00th STREET 9 W Z[I- 14 12 11 to •3 @ 7 a N' O1 9 8 7 a 5 4 3 2 1 z . W gm W Q1151+1171118 118 2D 21 22.23 0. 16 16 1T 18 19 20 21 22 2J Q I C 9 NE 99th STREET a^ I 14131211[10LO.1 6 7 6 M q 9 8 7 6 @ 4: 3 2 1 a 15 18 i7 18 i9 20 21 22 23 4' a 15 16 1718 19'20 21 22 23 a; NE .98th STREET' 1e 41-31211 11110 .9 a 7 6 `t +� 9 11 7 I-J5 4 7 2 1 -� V U 1� 16 19 17 ifelio[201;11221 23 � 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 9 NE 97th, C• STREET •cl 14 Mil 11 10 9'8 1-7 9ll ll M 9 8 7 LS 6LEI Gt 13 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0. 15 16 17Ela 19 20 21 22 2J NE 96th STREET 8 W W Z 15 14 1312 1t l^l I I 10 9 8 7 9 8 7 6 5 4 1.3 2 1 2 16 17 18 1 1920 21 22 ?3 24 4 a 16117111819 2012122 23;2+ $ NE 95th STREET $ t 14 13 12 11 to 9 a 7 a V R21' 6 7 0 5 . o� 2212324 ?5 a NE 94th Z STREET A.R. TOUSSAINT & ASSOCIATES, INC. BY, PRES. LAND SURVEYORS ALBER R. TOUSSAINT REGISTEREI ENGINEER NO, 8939 FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION LB-273 REGISTERED.SURVEYOR AND MAEiPER NO. 907 620 N.E. 126th STREET NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA 33161 STATE'OF Fl0PIDA ORDER No. 14959 SHEET 2 OF 2 .NOVEMBER 1.7, 2014 t BURTON & ASSOCIATES UIRITY RATFS• A$sessMer:Ts• FlNANCIAI PLANNING TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Burton&Associates 200 Business Park Circle,Suite 101 Telephone:(904)247-0787 St.Augustine, FL 32095 Facsimile:(904)241-7708 DATE: September 2, 2015 TO: Tom Benton, Village Manager, Miami Shores Village FROM: Michael Burton, President—Burton &Associates RE: RESULTS OF THE FY 2016 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY INTRODUCTION: The residents and businesses in Miami Shores Village receive water service from Miami- Dade County through 2" -8" water mains. The Village does not have sewer service; the residences and businesses currently use septic tank systems and drain fields. However, a portion of the downtown business district is limited in its ability to redevelop existing structures or allow tenants with greater daily rated gallonage than existing tenants due to Miami-Dade County requirements regarding sewer service and the size of the water mains to which the businesses must be connected. The Village, business owners, and the local Chamber of Commerce would like to encourage this walkable downtown area to feature more restaurants and cafds so that local residents will be less likely to travel elsewhere when dining out. However, Miami-Dade County requires a 12" water main or greater for businesses, such as restaurants and cafes, with higher expected water consumption than other commercial uses. Currently,only two of the 27 identified parcels have access to water service that meets this standard, through a connection to another street. The Village intends to replace the existing smaller water mains with a 12"main,construct Low Pressure Sewer Systems (LPSS) on each of the identified parcels, and connect them to the existing Miami-Dade County sewer infrastructure. Upon project completion,the water and sewer lines will be conveyed to Miami-Dade County, but the Village will continue to own the wet wells and grinder pumps and incur annual maintenance costs. The Village recently retained Burton & Associates to conduct a Water and Sewer Infrastructure Funding Study(Study)to 1)develop a methodology to assess each benefitting property for the capital costs based on level of benefit, 2) develop a schedule of annual assessments assuming a 30 year debt financing consisting of a 5-year municipal bridge loan refinanced in the sixth year with a 25-year municipal bond to fund the capital costs of the infrastructure and connection to the existing systems, and 3)develop a benefit allocation for annual sewer maintenance and recommended methods of assessing the benefitting properties. OBJECTIVE Miami Shores Village (Village) retained Burton & Associates to perform a Water & Sewer Infrastructure Funding Study (Study), with the goal of developing a plan of water and sewer special capital assessments and annual sewer maintenance assessments for the group of properties benefitting from the above described project. The objectives of this Study were to: Burton&Associates Page 1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY 1. Develop a methodology to determine the allocation of the capital costs to the benefitting properties within the defined benefit area, 2. Calculate the annual water and sewer capital assessments that would be paid by each benefitting property based upon a 30-year debt financing consisting of a 5-year municipal bridge loan refinanced in the sixth year with a 25-year municipal bond and the annual assessment amount that would be paid by each benefitting property, or alternatively properties could choose to pay the capital assessment in full up front, and 3. Determine the allocation of costs based upon the benefit to each property for the purpose of assessing the annual sewer maintenance and recommend methods of assessing the benefitting properties. BASE DATA The analysis was performed using a list of 27 properties provided by the Village based on data from the Miami Dade Property Appraiser (MDPA) and the Village Planning & Zoning Director. The following data items were relied upon in the conduct of the Study: 1. Folio numbers, owner names, parcel addresses, developed square feet, number of buildings and number of floors for each benefitting parcel from MDPA data,as provided by staff 2. MDPA property use codes,corresponding Department of Revenue (DOR)use codes,and business descriptions, as provided by staff 3. Parcel square feet from MDPA data,adjusted for alley/roadway easements, as provided by staff 4. An interest only 5-year municipal bridge loan at an interest rate of 1.50%, with annual principal payments amortized over 30 years, through the Florida Association of Counties' and a 25-year municipal bond through the Florida League of Cities at an interest rate of 5.50%, as provided by staff 5. Capital Project costs and an estimate of annual sewer maintenance costs, from a study completed for the Village by TY Lin International,dated July 2012. Updated project costs from selected contractor, as provided by staff on November 18, 2014 6. Estimated closing costs and other fees as provided by staff KEY ISSUES Miami-Dade County provides water service to the residents and businesses of Miami Shores Village via 2" - 8" water mains. The Village does not have sewer service; all of the residences and businesses currently use septic tank systems and drain fields. The downtown businesses, with the support of the local Chamber of Commerce and the Village government, would like to have more restaurants and cafes in this walkable downtown area. However, the property I This note may be renewed in five year increments if advantageous to the Village and approved by the Florida Association of Counties. Burton&Associates Page 2 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY owners are limited in their ability to redevelop existing structures or allow certain tenants due to Miami-Dade County requirements regarding sewer service and the size of the water mains to which restaurants, cafes, and other businesses with greater daily rated gallonage than existing tenants must connect. Miami-Dade County requires a 12" main or greater for such uses, and currently only two of the 27 identified parcels have access to water service that meets this requirement, through a connection to another street. The Village intends to replace the existing, smaller water mains with a 12" main and construct Low Pressure Sewer Systems (LPSS) on each of the developed parcels and connect them to the existing Miami-Dade County sewer infrastructure. It should be noted that the individual property owners will be responsible for the costs associated with abandoning their existing septic system and installing the lateral gravity pipe and electrical service required to connect to the LPSS. It should also be noted that one of the parcels is vacant and currently serves as the parking lot for another benefitting parcel. This vacant parcel will not have a LPSS installed but will benefit from the availability of the other components of the sewer system to be installed. Should development occur on this vacant parcel in the future the owner will be responsible for the costs of purchasing and installing the LPSS and connecting to the system. Upon project completion, the water and sewer lines will be conveyed to Miami-Dade County, but the Village will continue to own the wet wells and grinder pumps and will incur annual maintenance costs. As a result, the upgrade to the water main will be a capital assessment, as the conveyance to the County means that the Village will not incur costs to operate and maintain the water main. However,the sewer line will be conveyed to Miami-Dade County, but the wet wells and grinder pumps for the LPSS will be owned by the Village and will be operated and maintained by the Village under contract with a certified maintenance contractor. Therefore, it has been assumed that the Village will fund the capital costs of the system with a capital assessment similar to the capital assessment for the water main improvements and that the ongoing costs of operating and maintaining the wet wells and grinder pumps will be funded either with a service assessment or with a utility rate. These options will be evaluated in this Study. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS The development of a special assessment for any capital improvement or municipal service requires that 1) the property assessed must derive a special benefit from the improvement, service or facilities provided, and 2) the assessment must be fairly apportioned among the properties that receive the special benefit. Simply stated, there must be a logical relationship between the service provided and the benefit to real property assessed for the service. In order to satisfy this requirement, the costs associated with providing the service must be fairly and reasonably apportioned to the properties that receive a benefit from the service Burton&Associates Page 3 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY provided in proportion to the benefit received. Therefore,the recommended water and sewer assessments calculated in this study were developed such that the costs of providing water and sewer service will be recovered through assessments to properties in proportion to the benefit received by the availability of water and sewer service to those properties. ANALYSIS This section describes the analyses conducted during the Study. The study was conducted in two work elements. Work Element I consisted of allocating benefit among benefitting properties and assigning water and sewer capital costs or debt service to pay for water and sewer capital costs accordingly. Work Element II consisted of allocating benefit for annual sewer maintenance among benefitting properties and considering methods for assessing the portion of the annual cost assigned to each benefitting property. A more detailed description of the analysis conducted in these work elements is described below. Work Element I—Water&Sewer Capital Assessment Methodoloev and Calculation In this work element, the requirements for development of a special assessment were considered. First, as the parcels to be assessed require sufficient water and/or sewer service to support a variety of new commercial uses, there is a special benefit conferred upon all of the properties by construction of a water main and LPSS to bring water and sewer service to the identified parcels in a manner that will meet the Miami-Dade County water and sewer standards to support businesses such as restaurants and cafes. Next was the consideration of fairly apportioning benefit. For the capital assessment, the apportionment methodology used is based upon parcel size. Larger parcels benefit more from water and sewer service as they can support larger developed square footage and, therefore, more potential usage. Once the benefit apportionment was complete, two scenarios were calculated: the capital costs that would be paid if each parcel was assessed its total share of the capital cost upfront, and the annual debt service that would be paid by each parcel if the capital costs were financed over 30 years with a municipal bridge loan for five (5) years and municipal bond for the remaining twenty five (25) years of the 30 year assessment period. We then met in several interactive work sessions with Village staff to review the preliminary results and made appropriate adjustments based upon input from Village staff. Work Element 11—Annual Sewer Maintenance Cost Recovery In this work element,we considered the most reasonable apportionment methodology and the best method of recovering the ongoing costs of sewer maintenance. The apportionment methodology applied to this maintenance assessment is based upon developed square footage because the benefit from annual maintenance is proportionate to use, which is better approximated by the size of existing structures than by parcel size. Next, the Study considered the method of recovering these costs from the benefitting parcels. While the allocated portion of sewer maintenance could be added to the sewer utility bill,the billing and customer service Burton&Associates Page 4 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY would be contracted to Miami-Dade County and would require annual updates according to the actual cost of sewer maintenance (subject to a maximum annual increase) and any change in developed square footage in that year. This would require a complicated and administratively burdensome and costly relationship with Miami-Dade County. Therefore, it was determined that an annual sewer maintenance assessment would be a more appropriate method of cost recovery. RESULTS This section presents the results of the Study. The results are presented for Work Element I — Water & Sewer Capital Assessment Methodology and Calculation and for Work Element II — Annual Sewer Maintenance Cost Recovery in the two following sections. Work Element I—Water&Sewer Capital Assessment Methodoloey and Calculation In developing a schedule of water and sewer special assessments for the Village, this work element considered 1) whether all of the identified parcels to be assessed will have a special benefit conferred upon them by the upgrade to a larger water main and construction of a LPSS to bring water and sewer service to these parcels, and 2) the most reasonable assessment methodology to apportion the assessment according to benefit. All of the identified parcels benefit from the availability of water and sewer service. Even for parcels that may not be developed and/or intending to connect to the system, the availability of these utilities benefits these parcels, as they have the ability to connect to the system in the future. It was determined that the apportionment methodology which would best reflect availability benefit is based upon parcel size. Larger parcels benefit more from water and sewer service as they can support larger developed square footage and, therefore, more potential usage. It should be noted that Village staff removed from the parcel size any portion of the parcel square feet that were allocated to public alley or roadway easements, leaving the developable square feet of the parcel for the apportionment. As mentioned earlier, one parcel is undeveloped and is currently used as a parking lot for another benefitting parcel. This parcel will not have a LPSS installed and would only incur the costs to install a LPSS and connect to the system if it is developed in the future. Consequently, the sewer assessment includes two tiers of benefit. The first tier is comprised of the project costs applicable to all benefitting properties, regardless of development. The second tier is comprised of only the costs to purchase and install a lift station on each developed parcel. This second tier applies to only developed benefitting properties. The capital costs for installing a new water main and LPSS could be prohibitive to most parcel owners if assessed upfront because the estimated total project and project related costs are about $4.62 million. As a result,Village staff chose to consider two scenarios as follows: Burton&Associates Page 5 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY • One-time payment if each parcel was assessed its total share of the capital cost upfront • Annual debt service that would be paid by each parcel if the capital Costs were financed over 30 years, assuming a 5-year municipal bridge loan and a 25-year municipal bond for the permanent financing. The total project costs were divided by the total parcel square feet for all benefitting parcels to determine a cost per square foot, representing project costs if paid up front. The water assessment per square foot is shown in the table below. Water Capital Assessment: Water Capital Project Revenue Requirement Project Costs &Other Fees $ 1,078,586 Contingency F-2-0_00% _zoao% t $ 215,717 Total Capital Requirement $ 1,294,304 Total Capital Requirement $ 1,294,304 Total Parcel Square Feet 468,007 Cost per Parcel Square Foot $ 2.7656 As mentioned, sewer upfront capital costs were assessed in two tiers. The Tier 1 is comprised of the project costs applicable to all benefitting properties, regardless of development. Tier 2 is comprised of only the costs to purchase and install a lift station on each developed parcel. This second tier applies to all developed benefitting properties. The total square footage of the vacant parcel is excluded from the assessment calculation for the second tier because it will not be immediately connected to the system, but will benefit from the availability of the system. Should this parcel develop and connect to the system in the future its owner will be required to fund the purchase and installation of a lift station. The sewer capital assessments for both tiers are shown in the tables below. Burton&Associates Page 6 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY Sewer Capital Assessment: Tier 1 Capital Project Revenue Requirement Project Costs & Fees(excluding lift stations) $2,149,509 Contingency zo.00�o $ 429,902 Total Capital Requirement $2,579,410 Total Capital Requirement $2,579,410 Total Parcel Square Feet 468,007 Tier 1 Assessment per Parcel Square Foot $ 5.5115 Tier 2 Capital Project Revenue Requirement Lift Station Project Costs _ $ 624,000 Contingencyio.W% ; $ 124,800 Total Lift Station Capital Requirement $ 748,800 Total Lift Station Capital Requirement $ 748,800 Total Parcel Square Feet 461,507 Tier 2 Assessment per Parcel Square Foot $ 1.6225 Next, the analysis considered the costs per square foot if the project costs are financed. For FY16, this calculation assumes a debt service payment of$65,993 and $169,7062 for water and sewer respectively, for the payment on a municipal bridge loan through the Florida Association of Counties with an interest rate of 1.5%amortized for 30 years and equal principal payments. The costs per square foot for water are shown in the table below. 2 The sewer debt service is comprised of$131,517 for tier 1 costs and$38,179 for tier 2 costs Burton&Associates Page 7 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY Water Capital Assessment: Water Capital Assessment Revenue Requirement FY16 Debt Service $ 62,693 Prepayment Discount 4.00% ( $ 2,640 Tax Collector Expense �l.00% _ $ 660 Total FY16 Revenue Requirement $ 65,993 FY16 Billed Assessment $ 65,993 Less: Prepayment Discount 4.00% $ (2,640) Less: Tax Collector Expense 1.00% $ (660) Estimated Revenue Collected $ 62,693 FY16 Revenue Requirement $ 65,993 Total Parcel Square Feet 468,007 Cost per Parcel Square Foot $ 0.1410 As with the upfront capital costs,the sewer capital costs assuming debt financing were assessed per square foot in two tiers. The first tier is comprised of the project costs applicable to all benefitting properties, regardless of development. The second tier is comprised of only the costs to purchase and install a lift station on each developed parcel. This second tier applies to all developed benefitting properties. As there is one vacant parcel,the total square footage of this parcel is excluded from the assessment calculation for the second tier. The assessments for both tiers are shown in the tables below. Burton&Associates Page 8 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY Sewer Capital Assessment: --Tier 1 Capital Assessment Revenue Requirement FY16 Other Project Costs Portion of Debt Service 1 77.50% $ 124,941 Prepayment Discount 4.00s% I $ 5,261 Tax Collector Expense 1.00xi $ 1,315 Total FY16 Other Project Costs Revenue Requirement $ 131,517 FY16 Billed Other Project Costs Portion of Assessment � $ 131,517 Less: Prepayment Discount a.00�o $(5,260.68) Less: Tax Collector Expense 1.00 $(1,315.17) Estimated Revenue Collected $ 124,941 FY16 Other Project Costs Revenue Requirement $ 131,517 Total Parcel Square Feet 468,007 Other Project Costs Debt Service Cost per Parcel Square Foot $ 0.2810 Tier 2 Capital Assessment Revenue Requirement FY16 Lift Station Portion of Debt Service 22:.5�� $ 36,270 Prepayment Discount 4.00% ) $ 1,527 Tax Collector Expense 100•x, $ 382 Total FY16 Revenue Requirement $ 38,179 FY16 Billed Lift Station Portion of Assessment .,� $ 38,179 Less: Prepayment Discount 4.00% ! $(1,527.17) Less: Tax Collector Expense _LOOP/ $ (381.79) Estimated Revenue Collected $ 36,270 FY16 Lift Station Revenue Requirement $ 38,179 Total Parcel Square Feet 461,507 Lift Station Debt Service Cost per Parcel Square Foot $ 0,0827 The assessments for each parcel assuming up-front payment and annual payment of debt service are shown in the following table. Burton&Associates Page 9 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING STUDY Water and Sewer Capital Assessment Allocation to Properties: Capital Assessment Allocation Water&Sewer Capital Assessments Can N Assessment Paid In Fsilmated Totsal Cost If Mrnt Paid In Costi4Asussmentpaid Upfront Annual Pa ns-Years AnnualPsyments over30Years Water i Capital Capital Tool Water Water Sewer FY16 FY16 Annual' Annual Annual Annual Parol Asmtper Sewer Asmt Cost Cost ASewer Asmt per Asmtper Water Sewer Water& Water Sewer Waters Business Address Ft Sp Ft per Sq Ft Water Sewer CMftl Cost Sq Ft Sq Ft Payment Payment Sewer P n Payment Sewer 10050NE2NDAVE 31,850 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 98,084 $227,217 $ 315,301 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 4,491 $ 11,584 $ 16,075 $ 166,270 $ 447,585 t$-.613,854 9990NE2NDAVE 13,775 $2.7656 $ _ 7.1340 $ 38,096 $ 98,270 $ 135,366 $0.1410 $0._637 $ 1,942 $ 5,010 $ 6,952 $ 71,911 $ 193,579 $ 265,490 None-Vacant nl 6,500 $2.7656 $_` 55115 $ 17,976 $ 35,824 '$ 53,800 $0.1410 .$02630 $ 917 $ 1,827 $ 2,743 $ 33,933 $ 91,344 5.125,276 9900 NE 2AVE 13,000 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 35,952 $ 92,742 $ 128,699 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 S 6,561 $ 67,865 $ 182,686 S 250,553 ISDNE99ST 5,850 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 16,178 S 41,733 $ 57,911 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 825 $ 2,128 S 2,952 $ 30,539 $ 82,209 ,$ 112,749 9830 NE 2AVE 13,459 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 37,222 $ 96,016 :$ 133,238 $0.1410 $0.3637 S 1,898 $ 4,895 $ 6,793 $ 70,261 $ 189,138 $ 259,399 9806 NE2AVE 12,541 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 34,683 $ $9,467 .S 124,150 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,768 $ 4,561 $' 6,329 $ 65,469 $ 176,237 ,S- 241,7063 9734 NE 2AVE 12,216 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 33,784 $ 87,148 $ 120,932. $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,722 $ 4,443 $ 6,165 $ 63,772 $ 171,670 �$ 235,442! 9710 NE 2 AVE 19,500 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 53,929 $139,113 $ 193,042. $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 2,750 $ 7,092 $ 9,942 $ 101,798 S 274,032 -$ 375,829' 9636 NE 2AVE 11,850 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 32,772 $ 84,537 $ 117,309 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,671 $ 4,310 '$ 5,981 $ 61,862 $ 166,527 +$ 228,388 9600 NE 2AVE 19,500 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 53,929 $139,113 $ 193,042 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 2,750 $ 7,092 S 9,842 $ 101,798 $ 274,032 $ 375,829 9534 NE 2AVE 19,500 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 53,929 $139,113 S 193,042 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 2,750 $ 7,092 $ 9,942 $ 101,798 $ 274,032 $ 375,829 9500 NE 2AVE 19,366 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 53,558 S 138,157 $ 191,715 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 2,731 $ 7,043 $ 9,774 S 101,098 $ 272,148 $ 373,246 9400 NE 2AVE 35,425 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 97,971 $252,721 $ 350,692 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 4,995 $ 12,884 $ 17,879 $ 184,933 $ 497,824 $ 682,756 10021 NE 2 AVE 31,850 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 88,084 $227,217 S 315,301 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 4,491 $ 11,584 $ 16,075 $ 166,270 $ 447,585 $ 613,854 9999 NE2AVE 31,850 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 88,084 $227,217 $ 315,301 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 4,491 $ 11,584 $ 16,075 $ 166,270 $ 447,585 S 613,854 9899 NE 2AVE 12,350 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 34,155 $ 88,104 $ 122,259 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,741 $ 4,492 '$ 6,233 $ 64,472 $ 173,553 $ 2mmS 9855 NE 2AVE 6,500 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 17,976 $ 46,371, $ 64,347 $0.1410 $0.3637 S 917 $ 2.364 $ 3,281 $ 33,933 $ 91,344 $ 125,276 9801 NE 2AVE 13,000 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 35,952 $ 92742 S ]7$694 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,833 $ 4,726 $. 6,561- S 67,865 $ 182,688 S,250,553; 9723 NE 2AVE 12,350 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 34,155 $ 88,304 $ 172,259 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,741 $ 4,492 $ 6,233 S 64,472 $ 173,553 $ 238,025' 9713 NE 2 AVE 6,500 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 17,976 $ 46,371 S 64,347 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 917 $ 2,364 $ 3,281 S 33,933 $ 91,344 .$ 125,276! 9705 NE 2AVE 13,000 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 35,952 S 92,742 S 128,694 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 $ 6,561 S 67,865 $ 1112,688 $ 250,553 9699 NE 2AVE 5,850 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 16,178 $ 41,733 .$ 57,911 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 925 $ 2,128 $ 2,952 $ 30,539 $ g2,209 -$ 132,749 9601 NE 2AVE 26,000 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 73,905 $185,484 .$' 257,389 $0.3410 $0.3637 $ 3,666 $ 9,456 $ 13,172 $ 135,730 S 365,375 _$ 501,106 9537 NE 2AVE 13,000 $27656 $ 7.1340 $ 35,952 S 92,742 $ 12$694 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 S 0563 S 67,865 S 182,688 $ 250,553 9501 NE 2AVE 26,000 $2.7656 $ 7.1340 $ 71,905 S 185.484 $ 257,399 $0.1410 $0.3637 $ 3,666 $ 9,456 $ 13,122 $ 135,730 S 365,375 5 507,106 9475 NE2AVE 35,425 1$2.7656 $ 7.134015 97,971 $252,721 1$ 350,692 1$0.1410 50.3637 S 4,995 $ 12884 $ 17,979 $ 184,933 S 497,824 $ 682,756 Burton&Associates Page 10 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY Work Element II—Annual Sewer Maintenance Cost Recovery During this work element, the Study considered 1) the most reasonable apportionment methodology for annual sewer maintenance costs to be incurred and 2) the best method of recovering the ongoing costs of sewer maintenance. The benefit derived from annual sewer maintenance is a function of use, which is better approximated by the size of existing structures than by parcel size. It was, therefore, determined that the benefit apportionment methodology applied to this assessment should be according to developed square footage. The Study next compared alternate methods of recovering the costs of annual sewer maintenance. First, it was considered that the costs could be included on the sewer utility bill. However, there are two variables in the calculation and apportionment of these costs that make this method difficult. Annual maintenance costs will vary from one year to the next, and the developed square footage on any parcel is subject to change. Since the sewer utility billing and customer service would be contracted to Miami- Dade County, it would be an additional burden and cost to the County to update the billing only for these benefitting parcels every year. This would require a complicated and administratively burdensome and costly relationship with Miami-Dade County. Alternatively, the Village could recover these costs through an annual sewer maintenance assessment. This method was chosen because it would make the cost recovery less complicated and eliminate any administratively burdensome and costly relationship with Miami-Dade County. This maintenance assessment should either include an inflationary annual increase to cover these costs as they increase over time, or the assessment will need to be adjusted from time to time to recover increased costs. The calculation of apportioning costs per square foot for the sewer maintenance assessments and estimated assessment for each benefitting parcel are shown in the following tables. Burton&Associates Page 11 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY .�Sewer Maintenance Assessment Revenue Requirement FY16 Estimated Maintenance Expense $ 12,000 Prepayment Discount 4.00% i $ 505 Tax Collector Expense 1.00% ` $ 126 Total FY16 Revenue Requirement $ 12,632 FY16 Billed Assessment $ 12,632 Less: Prepayment Discount 4.00% 1 $ (505) Less: Tax Collector Expense 1.00% $ (126) Estimated Revenue Collected $ 12,000 FY16 Revenue Requirement $ 12,632 Total Developed Square Feet 307,208 Cost per Parcel Square Foot $ 0.0411 Burton&Associates Page 12 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY Annual Sewer Maintenance Assessment Allocation to Properties: Assessment Allocation Sewer Based on Dev Sq Ft X11 Developed FY 2016 Business Address Sq Ft Assessment 10050 NE 2ND AVE 11,890 $ 489 9990 NE 2ND AVE 8,070 $ 332 None -Vacant(3) 0 $ - 9900 NE 2 AVE 8,853 $ 364 180 NE 99 ST 2,494 $ 103 9830 NE 2 AVE 16,735 $ 688 9806 NE 2 AVE 13,575 $ 558 9734 NE 2 AVE 2,008 $ 83 9710 NE 2 AVE 13,544 $ 557 9636 NE 2 AVE 11,065 $ 455 9600 NE 2 AVE 23,108 $ 950 9534 NE 2 AVE 19,229 $ 790 9500 NE 2 AVE 4,423 $ 182 9400 NE 2 AVE 12,717 $ 523 10021 NE 2 AVE 8,092 $ 333 9999 NE 2 AVE 47,771 $ 1,963 9899 NE 2 AVE 3,235 $ 133 9855 NE 2 AVE 4,680 $ 192 9801 NE 2 AVE 10,803 $ 444 9723 NE 2 AVE 9,459 $ 389 9713 NE 2 AVE 3,000 $ 123 9705 NE 2 AVE 15,885 $ 653 9699 NE 2 AVE 2,306 $ 95 9601 NE 2 AVE 4,276 $ 176 9537 NE 2 AVE 5,116 $ 210 9501 NE 2 AVE 24,807 $ 1,020 9475 NE 2 AVE 20,067 $ 825 Burton&Associates Page 13 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER &SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY CONCLUSIONS& RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the analysis presented herein, we have reached the following conclusions and recommendations regarding the Village's water and sewer assessments and annual sewer maintenance costs: Conclusions: 1. The benefit from the construction of the proposed water main is derived from the availability of water service to each parcel, and is best allocated according to parcel square footage. 2. The benefit from the construction of the proposed LPSS has two tiers. The first tier is the availability of sewer service to each parcel. This availability benefits both developed and undeveloped parcels. The second tier is the provision of a lift station on each developed parcel, but does not benefit undeveloped parcels. The two benefit tiers are best allocated according to parcel square footage, with the parcel square footage for the vacant parcel being excluded from the calculation for the second tier of benefit. 3. The total allocated water and sewer capital cost is more than most parcel owners could likely pay upfront. Therefore, establishing the assessment as the annual debt service payment on a 30-year financing of the capital costs significantly reduces the annual burden on the benefitting parcels by allowing them to pay only a portion of this cost each year. 4. The benefit from annual sewer maintenance is derived by users of the system. The usage benefit is best allocated according to developed square footage and recovered in an annual sewer maintenance assessment. Recommendations: 1. Allocate the water and sewer capital assessments according to parcel size, adjusted for public roadway/alley easements. 2. Assess the benefitting properties their allocated share of water and sewer capital costs based upon the assessment schedule below: Burton&Associates Page 14 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY Capital Assessment Allocation Water&Sewer Capital Assessments Cost if Assessment Paid In Cost if Assessment Paid Up Front Annual Payments-Year 1 Capital Capital Total Water FY16 FY16 Annual Parcel Cost cost &Sewer Water Sewer Water& Business Address Sq Ft Water Sewer Capital Cost. Payment Payment Sewer 10050 NE 2ND AVE 31,850 $ 88;084 $ 227,217 $ 315,301 $ 4,491 $ 11,584 $ 16,075 9990 NE 2ND AVE 13,775 $ 38,096 $ 98,270 $ 136,366 $ 1,942 $ 5,010 '$ 6,952 None-Vacant 6,500 $ 17,976 $ 35,824 $ 53,800 $ 917 $ 1,827 $ 2,743 9900 NE 2 AVE 13,000 $ 35,952 $ 92,742 $ 128,694 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 $ 6,561 180 NE 995T 5,850 $ 16,178 $ 41,733 $ 57,911- $ 825 $ 2,128 $ 2,952 9830 NE 2 AVE 13,459 $ 37,222 $ 96,016 $ 133,238 $ 1,898 $ 4,895 $ 6,793 9806 NE 2 AVE 12,541 $ 34,683 $ 89,467 $ 124,150. $ 1,768 $ 4,561 $ 6,329 9734 NE 2AVE 12,216 $ 33,784 $ 87,148 $ 120,932 $ 1,722 $ 4,443 �$: 6,165 9710 NE 2AVE 19,500 $ 53,929 $ 139,113 $ 193,042 $ 2,750 $ 7,092 $, 9,842 9636 NE 2 AVE 11,850 $ 32,772 $ 84,537 $ 117,309 $ 1,671 $ 4,310 $ 5,981 9600 NE 2AVE 19,500 $ 53,929 $ 139,113 $ 193,042 $ 2,750 $ 7,092 $ 9.842 9534 NE 2AVE 19,500 $ 53,929 $ 139,113 $ 193,042 $ 2,750 $ 7,092 $ 9,842 9500 NE 2 AVE 19,366 $ 53,558 $ 138,157 $ 191,715 $ 2,731 $ 7,043 $ 9,774 9400 NE 2 AVE 35,425 $ 97,971 $ 252,721 $ 350,692 $ 4,995 $ 12,884 $' 17;879 10021 NE 2 AVE 31,850 $ 88,084 $ 227,217 $ 315,301 $ 4,491 $ 11,584 $ 16;075 9999 NE 2 AVE 31,850 $ 88,084 $ 227,217 $ 315,301 $ 4,491 $ 11,584 ,$ 16,075 9899 NE 2AVE 12,350 $ 34,155 $ 88,104 $ 122,259 $ 1,741 $ 4,492 I$ 6,233 9855 NE 2 AVE 6500 $ 17,976 $ 46,371 $ 64,347 $ 917 $ 2,364 $ 3;281 9801 NE 2 AVE 13,000 $ 35,952 $ 92,742 $ 128,694 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 $ 6,561 9723 NE 2AVE 12,350 $ 34,155 $ 88,104 $ 122,259 $ 1,741 $ 4,492 ,$. 6,233 9713 NE 2AVE 6,500 $ 17,976 $ 46,371 $ 64,347 $ 917 $ 2,364 ($, 3;281 9705 NE 2 AVE 13,000 $ 35,952 $ 92,742, $ 128,694 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 $ 6,561 9699 NE 2 AVE 5,850 $ 16,178 $ 41,733 $ 57,911 $ 825 $ 2,128 $. 2;952 9601 NE 2AVE 26,000 $ 71,905 $ 185,484 $ 257,389 $ 3,666 $ 9,456 $ 13,122 9537 NE 2AVE 13,000 $ 35,952 $ 92,742 $ 128,694 $ 1,833 $ 4,728 $ 6,561' 9501 NE 2 AVE 26,000 $ 71,905 $ 185,484 .$ 257,389 $ 3,666 $ 9,456 $' 13;122. 9475 NE 2AVE 35,425 1 $ 97,971 $ 252,721 1 $ 350,692 1 $ 4,995 $ 12,884 $; 17;879 3. The recommended annual capital assessments are based upon the debt service assumptions in year 1 of the bridge loan described herein. That loan has a very advantageous interest rate. If that loan cannot be renewed in five year increments, and must be replaced with permanent financing at a higher interest rate, the assessment will need to be recalculated and adjusted based upon the annual debt service associated with the permanent financing. 4. Allocate sewer maintenance costs according to developed square footage and recover the costs in an annual sewer maintenance assessment. The benefit allocation should be updated annually, when the actual costs of sewer maintenance are determined and should include any changes in developed square footage reflected in the Miami-Dade Burton&Associates Page 15 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY Property Appraiser database. The recommended schedule of sewer maintenance assessments is presented below: Assessment Allocation Sewer Based on Dev Sq Ft (11 Developed FY 2016 Business Address Sq Ft Assessment 10050 NE 2ND AVE 11,890 $ 489 9990 NE 2ND AVE 8,070 $ 332 None -Vacant(3) 0 $ - 9900 NE 2 AVE 8,853 $ 364 180 NE 99 ST 2,494 $ 103 9830 NE 2 AVE 16,735 $ 688 9806 NE 2 AVE 13,575 $ 558 9734 NE 2 AVE 2,008 $ 83 9710 NE 2 AVE 13,544 $ 557 9636 NE 2 AVE 11,065 $ 455 9600 NE 2 AVE 23,108 $ 950 9534 NE 2 AVE 19,229 $ 790 9500 NE 2 AVE 4,423 $ 182 9400 NE 2 AVE 12,717 $ 523 10021 NE 2 AVE 8,092 $ 333 9999 NE 2 AVE 47,771 $ 1,963 9899 NE 2 AVE 3,235 $ 133 9855 NE 2 AVE 4,680 $ 192 9801 NE 2 AVE 10,803 $ 444 9723 NE 2 AVE 9,459 $ 389 9713 NE 2 AVE 3,000 $ 123 9705 NE 2 AVE 15,885 $ 653 9699 NE 2 AVE 2,306 $ 95 9601 NE 2 AVE 4,276 $ 176 9537 NE 2 AVE 5,116 $ 210 9501 NE 2 AVE 24,807 $ 1,020 9475 NE 2 AVE 20,067 1 $ 825 5. The recommended annual maintenance assessments are based upon an assumed annual maintenance costs as provided by Village staff. This assessment is established to create a working capital reserve during the early years when little maintenance is required and to cover the actual annual maintenance costs in later years as the Burton&Associates Page 16 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FY 2015 WATER&SEWER ASSESSMENT STUDY maintenance requirements increase. The actual maintenance costs may vary from the assumed costs and this maintenance assessment may need to be adjusted in the future to reflect actual costs. Therefore, it is recommended that in the adoption of the sewer maintenance assessment the Village establish a maximum annual adjustment amount equal to 10% of the prior year's assessment. This adjustment will not be made unless needed and expressly approved in the year to be applied by the Village. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this Final Technical Memorandum, please do not hesitate to call me at(904) 247-0787. Sincerely, Michael E. Burton President Burton&Associates Page 17 l LEWIS LONGMAN & WALKER P.A. A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W Reply To: West Palm Beach MEMORANDUM TO: Miami Shores Village Council FROM: Kathryn Rossmell �� DATE: September 2,2015 SUBJECT: Non-Ad Valorem Assessments for Potable Water and Waste Water Collection Purpose: The purpose of this informational memorandum is to provide the Council with a brief synopsis of the background, purpose, and statutory requirements for adopting the proposed f resolution approving anon-ad valorem assessment and assessment roll for funding potable water i and wastewater collection (the "Proposed Resolution"). The Proposed Resolution is on the agenda for the September 8, 2015 Council Meeting. s 4 Background On December 4, 2014, the Miami Shores Village Council (the "Council") passed f Resolution 1255-14 declaring the Council's intention to use the uniform method of collection of non-ad valorem assessments to finance and construct sanitary sewer facilities and water line upgrades within Miami Shores Village (the "Village"). The Council retained Burton & Associates to perform a Water and Sewer Infrastructure Funding Study ("Burton Study"), t' y ), which resulted in a recommended assessment schedule. The law firm of Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A. reviewed the Burton Study to provide a legal opinion as to whether the recommended i c 0055131D-1 Y assessment may be legally imposed and collected by the Village, and determined that the Burton Report and the recommendations therein are consistent with Florida case law approving legally valid non-ad valorem assessments. Purpose The Proposed Resolution, if adopted, will approve of the methodology outlined in the Burton Report, adopt the assessment and assessment rolls, provide for the collection of the assessments, and allow for an annual increase in maintenance assessments in an amount limited by the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index. Statutory Requirements Section 197.3632 provides that local governments adopting a non-ad valorem assessment roll for a non-ad valorem assessment that is being levied for the first time (as is the case here) must do so at a public hearing held between January 1 and September 15. The public hearing for the Proposed Resolution will take place at the September 8,2015 Council meeting. The required notices for the public hearing were sent on August 17,2015. At the public hearing, all interested persons may submit written comments and provide testimony. If the Council adopts the non-ad F valorem assessment roil, the Council must specify the unit of measurement for the assessments 1 and the amount of the assessments. By adopting the Proposed Resolution the Council would also approve the Burton Report, which includes the unit of measure and the amount of the assessments as well as data and analysis to support the rational basis for the levy of the assessments. If the Council adopts the Proposed Resolution, the Council must then certify the non-ad valorem assessment roll to the tax collector by September 15. z s Conclusion The Proposed Resolution, if adopted, will provide the final authorization for the levy and collection of a non-ad valorem assessment for potable water and waste water collection for certain specially benefitted properties. This adoption of the assessments and assessment rolls is a necessary step in order to finalize the proposed funding methodology for the project as contemplated in the Council's prior Resolution No. 1255-14. t 3 00551310-1 t %04 LEWIS LONGMAN & WALKER P.A. A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W Terry E. Lewis tlewis@llw-law.com Reply To: VIA ELECTRONIC AND REGULAR MAIL West Palm Beach Office September 2,2015 Tom Benton,Village Manager Miami Shores Village 10050 N.E. Second Avenue Miami Shores,FL 33138 RE: Miami Shores Village Water and Sewer Infrastructure Funding and Maintenance Assessment Opinion Dear Mr. Benton: The Firm of Lewis,Longman& Walker, P.A. has consulted with Burton&Associates in the development of two proposed non-ad valorem assessments which, if adopted, will fund the installation of a 12" water main and low pressure sewer systems (capital assessment) and the subsequent maintenance of the sewer system (maintenance assessment) for 27 parcels within Miami Shores Village (the"Village"). We have been asked to provide an opinion as to whether the assessment recommended by Burton & Associates may be legally imposed and collected by the Village. tasks: In order to provide the requested opinion, we have undertaken the following preliminary 1. Consultation with Burton&Associates assessment specialists and Village Staff in the development of an assessment methodology and program. 2. Review the proposed Water and Sewer Infrastructure Funding Study developed by Burton&Associates. 3. Review the draft Village resolution scheduled for final adoption September 8, 2015. See Things Differently* TAMPA BAY JACKSONVILLE TALLAHASSEE 101 Riverfront Boulevard 245 Riverside Avenue WEST PALM BEACH 315 South Calhoun Street 515 North Flagler Drive Suite 620 Suite 150 Suite 830 Bradenton,Florida 34205 Jacksonville,Florida 32202 Suite 1500 Tallahassee,Florida 32301 West Palm Beach,Florida 33401 p X941-708-4040 - f1941-708-4024 p 1904-353-6410 - f1904-353-7619 p1850-222-5702 - f1650-224-9242 p1561-640-0820 0 f1561-640-8202 Tom Benton,Village Manager September 2,2015 Page 2 4. Legal research and review of applicable Florida Statutes and case law relating to the imposition and collection of non-ad valorem assessments. Our opinion is based upon the following legal analysis: A. General Background. Non-ad valorem assessments are distinguishable from taxes (though both are mandatory) in that a legally valid assessment: Must confer a specific benefit on the land burdened by the assessment; and It is imposed upon the theory that that portion of the community which is required to bear it, receives some special or peculiar benefit in the enhancement of value of the property against which it is imposed as a result of the improvement made with the proceeds of the special assessment. City of Boca Raton v. State, 595 So. 2d 25, 29 (Fla. 1992); Collier County v. State, 733 So.2d 1012, 1016, 1017(Fla. 1999). It is well settled that counties and cities are generally authorized to impose and collect special assessments by ordinance as a result of their constitutional grant of home rule power. Id. at 30. Art. VIII §1, Fla. Const.; §125.01(1), Fl. Stat. In addition, § 197.3631 provides separate, supplemental authority for local governments to levy.non-ad valorem assessments. Since at least 1969,Florida Courts have recognized that the installation of sanitary sewers and water and sewer utility lines are appropriately funded through special assessments. See Meyer v. City of Oakland Park, 219 So.2d 417 (Fla. 1969); City of Hallandale v. Meekins, 237 So.2d 318 (Fla. 1970); Murphy v. City of Port St. Lucie, 666 So.2d 879 (Fla. 1996). The Supreme Court has also found that improvements to existing infrastructure may also properly be funded through special assessments. See Rosche v. City of Hollywood, 55 So.2d 909 (Fla. 1952) (holding that repaving an existing paved road constituted a special benefit sufficient to support a special assessment). Finally, the Supreme Court has approved of special assessments levied to finance the maintenance of public facilities. See Harris v. Wilson, 693 So.2d 945 (Fla. 1997). In order for such non-ad valorem assessments to be legally valid, they must pass a two- prong test. First,the assessment must provide a special benefit to the assessed property. Second the assessment for services must be properly apportioned. See Lake County v. Water Oak Management Corporation, 695 So.2d 667, 669 (Fla. 1997). The determination as to special Tom Benton,Village Manager September 2,2015 Page 3 benefit and proper apportionment are questions of fact for a legislative body (in this case the Village Council), not the judiciary. The Supreme Court has stated that "[t]he legislative determination as to the existence of special benefits and as to the apportionment of the cost of these benefits should be upheld unless the determination is arbitrary." Sarasota County v. Sarasota Church of Christ, Inc.,667 So. 2d 180, 184(Fla. 1995). B. Special Benefit. The Supreme Court has stated that the test of a special benefit is "[w]hether there is a `logical relationship' between the services provided and the benefit to real property." Lake County,695 So.2d at 669. In Meyer, the Court determined that sanitary sewer improvements constituted a special benefit to real properties and that the benefit was "sufficient to sustain as assessment." 219 So. 2d at 420; see also City of Hallandale, 237 So.2d at 321 ("We think a sanitary sewer system is by its nature designed essentially to afford special or peculiar benefits to abutting or other property within the protective proximity of the improvement); Murphy, 666 So.2d at 881 (finding special benefit for real property that would be connected to water and sewer improvements). Therefore, the Village may determine that there is a logical relationship between the sewer and water pipe improvements and the benefit to real property. The legislative determination of such a relationship based on facts presented to the Village Council satisfies the special benefit requirement imposed by the Supreme Court for the levy of a valid non-ad valorem assessment. The analysis Burton & Associates presents to the Council demonstrates that there is a logical relationship between the low pressure sewer systems and water pipe improvements and the benefits to the real property. These benefits include enhanced public health and safety and increased value of business property. C. Proper Apportionment. A valid non-ad valorem assessment that provides a special benefit in the form of a service or capital improvement to benefitted properties must also be"[flairly and reasonably apportioned among the properties that receive the special benefit." City of Boca Raton v. State, 595 So.2d 25, 29 (Fla. 1992). The determination"as to the existence of special benefits as to the apportionment of the costs of those benefits should be upheld unless the determination is arbitrary." Sarasota County,667 So.2d at 184. The Burton & Associates Report proposes an allocation for the water and sewer capital assessments according to parcel size, adjusted for public roadway and alley easements. The costs for the sewer portion of the capital assessments part of project were assessed in two tiers. Tom Benton,Village Manager September 2,2015 Page 4 The first tier is comprised of project costs applicable to all benefitted properties, regardless of development, while the second tier is comprised of the costs to purchase and install a lift station on each developed parcel. Because one of the parcels is vacant and will not have a lift station installed,the total square footage for the vacant parcel was excluded from the second tier of the sewer assessment. If development occurs on this vacant parcel in the future, the owner will be responsible for the costs of purchasing and installing the lift station and connecting to the system. The vacant parcel was assessed for the "first tier" costs because it will benefit from the availability of the other components of the sewer system to be installed. For the maintenance assessments, Burton & Associates proposes an allocation of assessments among benefitted properties based on developed square footage. Similar apportionment methodologies have previously been validated. See City of Boca Raton, 595 So.2d at 31 (stating that front foot or square foot methodologies for apportioning costs of special improvement projects are traditional); Rinker Materials Corporation v. Town of Lake Park, 494 So.2d 1123, 1126(Fla. 1986) (approving of methodology that provided a credit for portions of a property that.might become right-of-way). D. Assessment Collection Procedures. The Village intends to use § 197.3632, Florida Statutes, to impose and collect the referenced non-ad valorem assessments beginning in Fiscal Year 2016. The statute requires individual first-class mail notice to all property owners upon whom the non-ad valorem assessment is to be imposed and adoption of the assessment at a public hearing if: 1. The non-ad valorem assessment is levied for the first time; 2. The non-ad valorem assessment is increased beyond the maximum rate authorized by law or judicial decree at the time of initial imposition; 3. The local government's boundaries have changed, unless all newly affected property owners have provided written consent for such assessment to the local governing board; or 4. There is a change in the purpose for such assessment or in the use of the revenue generated by such assessment. § 197.3632(4)(a),Fla. Stat. In a case rendered by the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Atlantic Gulf Communities Corporation v City of Port St. Lucie, 764 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 4th DCA, 1999), the court determined that unless the notice to benefited property owners references the fact that the assessments will continue for multiple years and conceivably increase, any subsequent assessment or increase in assessment must honor the entire notice and public hearing process in Section 197.3632, Florida Tom Benton,Village Manager September 2,2015 Page 5 Statutes. In Atlantic Gulf, the City clearly failed to provide such notice and attempted to collect stormwater assessments for multiple years and raise the assessments from time to time. Atlantic Gulf Communities,764 So.2d at 19-20. Further, Section 197.3632(6),Florida Statutes, states: If the non-ad valorem assessment is to be collected for a period of more than one year or is to be amortized over a number of years, the local governing board shall so specify and shall not be required to annually adopt the non-ad valorem assessment roll and shall not be required to provide individual notices to each taxpayer unless the provisions of subsection(4)apply. Regarding the proposed assessments, the notices to individual property owners and the Burton&Associates' analysis disclose the fact that the capital assessment will be for a set period of years, while the maintenance assessment is to continue indefinitely. Hence, the proposed notice of assessments to all landowners fully complies with the requirements of the referenced case and Section 197.3632(4)and(6),Florida Statutes,for a valid multi-year assessment. Therefore, pursuant to the referenced statute, the notice and hearings specified by § 197.3634(4)(b), Florida Statutes, will not be required in subsequent years so long as the assessment methodology or assessment rates are not modified. E. Conclusions and Opinions. In reliance on the documents reviewed, statutory interpretation and case analysis, the Firm's general conclusion and opinion is that the water and sewer capital assessments and the sewer maintenance assessments to be imposed by the Village are consistent with the special benefit and reason apportionment requirements for a valid non-ad valorem assessment. Lake County v. Water Oak Management Corporation, 695 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 1997) Sarasota County v. Sarasota County Church of Christ,667 So. 2d 180(Fla. 1995). Based upon the foregoing the Firm is of the opinion that: 1. The Village is authorized, pursuant to its local home rule power and the referenced case law, to levy, impose, and collect water and sewer capital assessments and sewer maintenance assessments to fund the fire protection services within the Village. 2. The notice procedures employed by the Village provide all property owners with notice that the assessment will be collected for multiple years. Tom Benton,Village Manager September 2,2015 Page 6 Therefore, pursuant to Section 197.3632(6), Florida Statutes, the Village may collect water and sewer capital assessments and sewer maintenance assessments for multiple years without the necessity of annually undertaking the individual notice and hearing procedures in Section 197.3632(4),Florida Statutes,unless the methodology is modified in some manner. 3. All notice and other relevant provisions of §§ 197.3631 and 197.3632, Florida Statutes,have been satisfied. 4. The enhanced water and sewer services to be provided by the Village confers a special benefit upon all assessed real property within the Village and the Burton& Associates methodology proposes a fair and reasonable apportionment of the assessment among benefited properties. In reliance upon the statutory interpretation and case law analysis provided herein, the Firm's conclusion is that the water and sewer capital assessment and the sewer maintenance assessment to be imposed by the Village is consistent with the special benefit and reasonable apportionment requirements for a valid, non-ad valorem assessment. See Lake County, supra, and Sarasota County, supra. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this opinion to the Village. Sincerely yours, Terry E. Lewis Kathryn B. Rossmell for the Firm of Lewis,Longman&Walker,P.A. TEL:bas