16-004689
In Re: Petition To Amend The Boundary Of The Rivers Edge Community Development District vs.
*
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Wednesday, November 30, 2016.
Recommended Order on Wednesday, November 30, 2016.
1STATE OF FLORIDA
4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
8IN RE: PETITION TO AMEND THE
14BOUNDARY OF THE RIVERS EDGE Case No. 1 6 - 4689
25COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
28/
29REPORT TO THE FLORID A
34LAND AND WATER ADJUD ICATORY CO MMISSION
41D. R. Alexander, Administrative Law Judge of the Division
50of Administrative Hearings (DOAH), conducted a local public
58hearing in this case on November 1, 2016, at the Riverton
69Amenity Center in S t. Johns, Florida .
77APPEARANCES
78For Petitioner: Jen nifer L. Kilinski, Esquire
85Hopping Green & Sams, P.A.
90Post Office Box 6526
94Tallahassee, Florida 32314 - 6526
99STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
103The issue presented in this proceeding is whether the
112Amended and R estated Petition to Amend the Boundar y of the
124Rivers Edge Community Development District (Amended Petition)
131meets the applicable criteria in chapter 190, Florida Statutes ,
140and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 42 - 1. The purpose of
151the local public heari ng was to gather information in
161anticipation of quasi - legislative rulemaking by the Florida Land
171and Water Adjudicatory Commission (Commission).
176PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
178On July 6, 2016, the Rivers Edge Community Development
187District (District) filed its Am ended Petition and exhibits with
197the Commission requesting that the Commission a mend rule 42FFF -
2081.002 by removing 2,499.74 acres from its boundaries. After
218contraction, the District will contain 1,676.79 acres. The land
228within the District is located ent irely within the incorporated
238limits of St. Johns County (County) . The County elected not to
250hold an optional public hearing within 45 days of the filing of
262the Amended Petition. On August 18, 201 6 , the Secretary of the
274Commission certified that the Amen ded Petition contained all
283required elements and referred it to DOAH to conduct a local
294public hearing, as required by section 190.005(1)(d).
301Notice of the public hearing was published in accordance
310with section 190.005(1)(d ) . At the local public hearing, t he
322District presented the testimony , live and written, of James A.
332Perry, employed by Governmental Management Services, LLC , and
340accepted as an expert in special district consulting, financial
349analysis, and management ; Ryan P. Stillwel l , P.E., employed b y
360Prosser, Inc. , and accepted as an expert in land development
370projects and community development district construction and
377engineering ; and Jason Sessions, Chairman of the District.
385District Exhibits A through J were accepted in evidence. One
395member of the public, Marsha Bailey, attended the hearing and
405offered testimony. No written comments were submitted after the
414local hearing. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 42 - 1.012(3).
424A one - volume T ranscript of the hearing has been prepared.
436T he District filed a p rop osed r eport of findings and
449conclusions , which has been considered in the preparation of
458this Report .
461Overview of the District
4651. Petitioner is seeking the adoption of an amendment to
475rule 42FFF - 1.002 to remove 2 ,499.74 acres from the District 's
488boundary , as d escribed in the Amended Petition. After
497contraction, the District will contain 1,676.79 acres.
5052. The majority of the Contr ac tion Parcel (the area being
517removed) is presently owned by Mattamy Rivertown, LLC, and one
527parcel within the Contraction Par cel is owned by the County.
538Mattamy Rivertown, LLC, has provided written consent to the
547proposed amendment of the District's boundaries. Pursuant to
555sections 190.003(14) and 190.005(1) (a)2., consent of the County
564is not required.
5673. The sole purpose of this proceeding was to consider the
578amendment of the District boundary as proposed by Petitioner.
587Information relating to the managing and financing of the
596service - delivery function of the Amended District was also
606considered. Because sections 190.046 an d 190.005 provide the
615statutory criteria to be considered, this Report summarizes the
624pertinent and material evidence relating to each relevant
632section of the statutes.
636SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
640Factors Set Forth in Section 190.005(1)(e), Florida Statutes
648A. Whether all statements contained within the Amended
656Petition have been found to be true and correct.
6654. Exhibit A consists of the Amended Petition and exhibits
675as filed with the Commission. Mr. Perry testified that he is
686familiar with the Amended Petiti on and generally described the
696exhibits.
6975. He also testified that he had prepared, or had others
708prepare under his supervision, Exhibit 9 to Exhibit A, the
718Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs (SERC).
7246. Finally, Mr. Perry testified that the contents of the
734Amended Petition and the exhibits attached thereto were true and
744correct to the best of his knowledge.
7517 . Mr. Stilwell testified that he is familiar with the
762Amended Petition and that he prepared, or had others prepare
772under his supervision, certa in of the Amended Petition exhibits.
782Mr. Stilwell generally described the Ame n ded Petition exhibits
792that he prepared, including Exhibits 1, 3, 4, and 7 to
803Exhibit A. Finally, he testified that these exhibits were true
813and correct to the best of his kn owledge.
8228. Mr. Sessions testified that he is familiar with the
832Amended Petition and that he coordinated the execution of the
842Consent to the Amendment of the Boundaries of the Rivers Edge
853Community Development District. Mr. Sessions also testified
860that t he contents of the Amended Petition and its exhibits were
872true and correct to the best of his knowledge.
8819. Petitioner has demonstrated that the Amended Petition
889and its exhibits are true and correct.
896B. Whether the amendment of the District boundary is
905inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the State
915Comprehensive Plan or of the effective local government
923comprehensive plan.
92510. Mr. Stilwell reviewed the proposed District boundary
933in light of the requirements of the State Comprehensive P lan
944found in chapter 187.
94811. The State Comprehensive Plan "provides lon g - range
958policy guidance for the orderly social, economic and physical
967growth of the State" by way of 25 subjects, goals, and numerous
979policies. §§ 187.101 and 187.201 , Fla. Stat. Mr . Stilwell
989identified Subject Nos. 15, 17, and 25 as particularly relevant.
99912. Subject 15, Land Use, recognizes the importance of
1008locating development in areas that have the resources, fiscal
1017abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth.
1024Mr. Stilwell testified that the Amended District is not
1033inconsistent with this provision because it will continue to
1042have the fiscal capability to provide a wide range of services
1053and facilities to a population in a designated growth area.
106313. S ubject 17, Public Facilities, calls for the
1072protection of existing public facilities and the timely,
1080orderly, and efficient planning and financing of new facilities.
1089Mr. Stilwell testified that the removal of the Contraction
1098Parcel from the boundary of the District will not have an impact
1110on the District's existing public facilities and services, and
1119no new facilities or services are planned to be constructed,
1129acquired, or otherwise provided by the Amended District.
113714. Subject 25, Plan Implementation, calls for sy stematic
1146planning capabilities to be integrated into all levels of
1155government throughout the State, with particular emphasis on
1163improving intergovernmental coordination and maximizing citizen
1169involvement.
117015. Mr. Stilwell testified that the Amended Distri ct is
1180not inconsistent with any applicable provisions of the State
1189Comprehensive Plan.
119116. Mr. Stilwell also reviewed the Amended District in
1200light of the requirements in the County Comprehensive Plan.
120917. Chapter 190 prohibits a community development district
1217from acting in any manner inconsistent with the local
1226government's comprehensive plan. Mr. Stilwell testified that
1233the Amended District would not be inconsistent with any
1242applicable provision of the County Comprehensive Plan.
124918. Petitioner has demonstrated that the Amended District
1257will not be inconsistent with an applicable provision of the
1267State Comprehensive Plan or County Comprehensive Plan.
1274C. Whether the area of land within the Amended District is
1285of sufficient size, is sufficiently compa ct, and is sufficiently
1295contiguous to be developable as one functional interrelated
1303community.
130419. The Amended District will include 1,676.79 acres,
1313located entirely within the incorporated limits of the County.
132220. Mr. Perry testified that the Amended D istrict has
1332sufficient land area, is sufficiently compact and contiguous to
1341be developed, and has in fact been developed, as one functional,
1352interrelated community, and the boundary amendment has no impact
1361on that functionality.
136421. Mr. Stilwell testified that the area of land within
1374the District was originally developed as a planned community.
1383The developer of the lands within the Amended District has
1393developed the Amended District as the core of the development as
1404one interrelated community. Further, t he Amended D istrict is
1414currently operating as a functionally related community, even
1422prior to the proposed elimination of the Contraction Parcel from
1432the District boundary. As a result, the Amended District
1441remains of sufficient size, compactness, and con tiguity to
1450function as one interrelated community.
145522. Petitioner has demonstrated that the Amended District
1463will be of sufficient size, sufficiently compact, and
1471sufficiently contiguous to be developed as a single functionally
1480interrelated community.
1482D. Whether the Amended District remains the best
1490alternative available for delivering community development
1496services and facilities to the area that will be served by the
1508Amended District.
151023. The District has constructed and/or acquired, or
1518intends to cons truct and/or acquire, extensive public facilities
1527within the Amended District. The District currently does not
1536provide any facilities or services within the Contraction
1544Parcel. There are certain offsite improvements, which include:
1552(a) State Road 13 rou ndabout improvement maintenance; (b) County
1562Road 244 landscape enhancement maintenance; and (c) certain of
1571the Amended District's surface water management systems that
1579support County Road 244 and therefore continue to benefit the
1589Contraction Parcel. Accor dingly, after the boundary amendment,
1597the Cost Share Agreement for Roadway and Surface Water
1606Management System Maintenance Services executed by the District
1614and Mattamy Rivertown, LLC, will be come effective and will
1624provide funding to the Amended District for the Landowner's
1633share of the shared offsite improvements' operation,
1640maintenance, repair, and replacement.
164424. Mr. Perry testified that to date, the District has
1654been the mechanism used to plan, finance, construct, operate,
1663and maintain the public fac ilities and services within the
1673existing District . The District commenced construction of the
1682entire t y of the facilities and services needed to serve the
1694Amended District in 2008 and is nearing completion of those
1704facilities contemplated . The District is currently providing
1712the associated maintenance an d operation of those facilities,
1721and the Amended District will allow for the continued operation
1731of the facilities and services to the lands within its
1741boundaries. Accordingly, the Amended District is the best
1749alternative to provide such facilities and services to the area
1759to be served.
176225. Mr. Stilwell testified that due to the fact that the
1773existing District has provided community development facilities
1780and services effectively and efficiently to the are as served
1790from the date the District was established in 2008, the District
1801has proven in the past that it is the best alternative
1812available. Even after contraction, the Amended District is
1820capable of continuing to efficiently finance and oversee the
1829opera tion and maintenance of necessary capital improvement
1837within the community.
184026. Mr. Sessions additionally testified that Mattamy
1847Rivertown , LLC, or a successor in interest or assignee(s), will
1857fund the cost of the construction of the infrastructure,
1866facil ities, and services needed to accommodate the development
1875of such property. After construction, the infrastructure and
1883facilities within the Contraction Parcel may be conveyed by the
1893owner to the County, another unit of government, or to an
1904applicable hom eowners' association for ownership and
1911maintenance, as is appropriate depending on the type of
1920infrastructure or facilities that are actually constructed.
192727. Petitioner h as demonstrated that the Amended District
1936remains the best alternative available for delivering community
1944development services and facilities to the area that will be
1954served by the Amended District.
1959E. Whether the community development services and
1966facilities of the Amended District will be incompatible with the
1976capacity and uses of exis ting local and regional community
1986development services and facilities.
199028. Mr. Perry testified that the services and facilities
1999of the Amended District are identical to those provided by the
2010existing District, and thus are not incompatible with the
2019capaci ty and use of existing local or regional community
2029development services and facilities.
203329. Mr. Stilwell testified that the services and
2041facilities to be provided by the Amended District are not
2051incompatible, and in fact remain fully compatible, with the
2060capacities and uses of the existing local or regional community
2070development facilities , and with those provided by the existing
2079District.
208030. Petitioner has demonstrated that the community
2087development services and facilities of the Amended District will
2096n ot be incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local
2108and regional community development services and facilities.
2115F. Whether the area that will be served by the Amended
2126District is amenable to separate special - dist rict government.
213631. Mr. Perry testified that the removal of the
2145Contraction Parcel will not affect the ability of the Amended
2155District to operate as a separate special - district government,
2165and that while contracting the boundaries of the existing
2174District will limit the area to be ser ved by the government
2186already in place, it will not change the way the special -
2198district government is operating either now or in the future.
220832. Mr. Stilwell testified that even with the elimination
2217of the Contraction Parcel from the existing District, th e area
2228within the Amended District remains large enough to comprise its
2238own community with individual facility and service needs.
2246Moreover, the Amended District will continue to constitute an
2255efficient mechanism for providing the necessary capital
2262infrast ructure improvements, and ongoing operation and
2269maintenance thereof, to directly serve the development within
2277its boundary. Finally, special - district governance is
2285appropriate for the Amended District because it provides a
2294mechanism whereby long - term main tenance obligations can be
2304satisfied by the persons actually using the facilities and
2313services.
231433. Petitioner has demonstrated that the area that will be
2324served by the Amended District is amenable to separate special -
2335district government.
2337G. Other requir ements imposed by statute or rule.
234634. Chapter 190 and rule chapter 42 - 1 impose specific
2357requirements regarding the petition and other information to be
2366submitted to the Commission.
2370Elements of the Petition
237435. The Commission has certified that the Amend ed Petition
2384meets all of the requirements of sections 190.046(1) (f) and
2394190.005(1)(a).
2395Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs (SERC)
240136. Section 190.005(1) (a)8 . requires the petition to
2410include a SERC, which meets the requirements of section 120.541.
2420Th e Amended Petition includes a SERC attached as Exhibit 8.
243137. Mr. Perry explained the purpose of the SERC, the
2441economic analysis presented therein, and the data and
2449methodology used in preparing the SERC.
245538. The SERC contains an estimate of the costs an d
2466benefits to all persons directly affected by the proposed rule
2476to amend the boundaries of the District -- the State and its
2488citizens, the County and its citizens, and property owners
2497within the existing District and the Contraction Parcel.
250539. Beyond ad ministrative costs related to the rule
2514amendment, the State and its citizens will only incur modest
2524costs from contracting the DistrictÓs boundary as proposed.
2532Specifically, State staff will process, analyze, and conduct
2540public hearings on the Amended Pet ition. Those activities will
2550utilize the time of the staff and State officials. However,
2560these costs to the State are likely to be minimal.
257040. As with the existing District, the ongoing costs to
2580various State entities related to the Amended District re late
2590strictly to the receipt and processing of various reports that
2600the Amended District is required to file annually with the State
2611and various entities. However, the costs to the State agencies
2621that will receive and process the Amended District ' s report s
2633will be minimal and is already a requirement for the existing
2644District. The Amended District is only one of many governmental
2654subdivisions required to submit various reports to the State.
2663Additionally, pursuant to section 189.018, the Amended District
2671will pay an annual fee to the Department of Economic Opportunity
2682to help offset such processing costs.
268841. It is not anticipated that the County will incur costs
2699in reviewing the Petition, as the District remitted a $15,000.00
2710filing fee to the County to offset any such costs.
2720Additionally, the County will not be required to hold any public
2731hearings on the matter, and in fact declined to hold a public
2743hearing on the matter. As with the existing District, the
2753County will not incur any quantifiable ongoing costs resulting
2762from the ongoing administration of the Amended District.
277042. The costs of petitioning for a boundary amendment to
2780the District will be paid entirely by the majority owner of the
2792Contraction Parcel, Mattamy Rivertown, LLC, pursuant to a
2800fu nding agreement with the District. Additionally, the Amended
2809District is an independent unit of local government and all
2819administrative and operating costs incurred by the District
2827relating to the financing and construction of infrastructure are
2836borne ent irely by the District and its landowners. The
2846Contraction parcel is not subject to special assessments imposed
2855by the District for the payment of debt service and/or
2865operations and maintenance expenses.
286943. Petitioner has demonstrated that the SERC meets all
2878requirements of section 120.541.
2882Other Requirements
288444. Petitioner has complied with the provisions of
2892section 190.005(1)(b) in that the County was provided a copy of
2903the Amended Petition and was paid the requisite filing fee prior
2914to Petitioner fi ling the Amended Petition with the Commission.
292445. Section 190.005(1)(d) requires Petitioner to publish
2931notice of the local public hearing in a newspaper of general
2942circulation in the County for four consecutive weeks prior to
2952the hearing. The notice was published in a newspaper of general
2963paid circulation in the County, The St. Augustine Record , on
2973October 4, 11, 18, and 25, 2016.
2980Public Comment During Hearing
298446 . Only one member of the public, Marsha Bailey, attended
2995the hearing and provided testimony at the hearing. Her comment
3005received during the hearing revolved around issues not relevant
3014to the proceeding.
301747 . Ms. Bailey testified that she is concerned about the
3028effect the amendment of the boundaries would have on the
3038property located on the St. Johns River waterfront. She wanted
3048to object to the development of those lands. However, this
3058hearing was not the proper forum for those objections.
3067CONCLUSIONS
306848 . This proceeding is governed by sections 190.00 5 and
3079190.046 and rule chapter 42 - 1.
308649. The proceeding was properly noticed pursuant to
3094section 190.005 (1)(d) by publication of an advertisement in a
3104newspaper of general paid circulation in the County and of
3114general interest and readership once each week for the four
3124consecutive weeks immediate ly prior to the hearing.
313250. Petitioner has met the requirements of
3139section 190.005 (1)(a) regarding the submission of the Amended
3148Petition and satisfaction of the filing fee requirements.
315651. Petitioner bears the burden of establishing that the
3165Amended Petition meets the relevant statutory criteria set forth
3174in section 190.005(1)(e).
317752. All portions of the Amended Petition and other
3186submittals have been completed and filed as required by law.
319653. All statements contained within the Amended Pet ition
3205are true and correct.
320954. The amendment of the District ' s boundaries is not
3220inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the State
3230Comprehensive Plan or the effective County Comprehensive Plan.
323855. The area of land within the Amended Dist rict remains
3249of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently
3258contiguous to be de velopable as one functional interrelated
3267community.
326856. The Amended District remains the best alternative
3276available for delivering community development servi ces and
3284facilities to the area that will be served by the Amended
3295District.
329657. The community development services and facilities of
3304the Amended District will not be incompatible with the capacity
3314and uses of existing local and regional community developm ent
3324services and facilities.
332758. The area to be served by the Amended District remains
3338amenable to separate special district government.
334459 . B ased on the record evidence, the A mended Petition
3356satisfies all of the statutory requirements and, therefore,
3364th ere is no reason not to grant Petitioner ' s request for
3377amendment of its boundaries.
3381DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of November, 2016, in
3391T allahassee, Leon County, Florida.
3396S
3397D. R. ALEXANDER
3400Administrative Law Judge
3403Divisi on of Administrative Hearings
3408The DeSoto Building
34111230 Apalachee Parkway
3414Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060
3419(850) 488 - 9675
3423Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847
3429www.doah.state.fl.us
3430Filed with the Clerk of the
3436Division of Administrative Hearings
3440this 30th day of Novemb er, 2016.
3447COPIES FURNISHED :
3450Cynthia Kelly , Secretary
3453Florida Land and Water
3457Adjudicatory Commission
3459Room 1801, The Capitol
3463Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0001
3468John P. "Jack" Heekin , General Counsel
3474Office of the Governor
3478Room 209, The Capitol
3482Tallahas see, Florida 32399 - 0 001
3489(eServed)
3490James W. Poppell, General Counsel
3495Department of Economic Opportunity
3499The Caldwell Building, MSC 110
3504107 East Madison Street
3508Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 4128
3513(eServed)
3514Barbara R. Leighty, Clerk
3518Transportation and Economi c
3522Development Policy Unit
3525Room 1801, The Capitol
3529Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0001
3534(eServed)
3535Jennifer L . Kilinski, Esquire
3540Hopping Green & Sams, P.A.
3545Post Office Box 6526
3549Tallahassee, Florida 32314 - 6526
3554(eServed)
- Date
- Proceedings
- PDF:
- Date: 11/30/2016
- Proceedings: Report to the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission (hearing held November 1, 2016). CASE CLOSED.
- PDF:
- Date: 11/30/2016
- Proceedings: Report cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
- PDF:
- Date: 11/22/2016
- Proceedings: Petitioner's Notice of Filing Proposed Report of Findings and Conclusions filed.
- Date: 11/22/2016
- Proceedings: Petitioner's Notice of Filing Hearing Transcript filed (not available for viewing). Confidential document; not available for viewing.
- Date: 11/01/2016
- Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/31/2016
- Proceedings: Notice of Local Public Hearing (hearing set for November 1, 2016; 10:00 a.m.; St. Johns, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 08/22/2016
- Proceedings: Letter to Ms. Leighty from Katherine Ibarra regarding Amended & Restated Petition to Amend the Boundary of the Rivers Edge Community Development District filed.
Case Information
- Judge:
- D. R. ALEXANDER
- Date Filed:
- 08/18/2016
- Date Assignment:
- 08/19/2016
- Last Docket Entry:
- 11/30/2016
- Location:
- St. Johns, Florida
- District:
- Northern
- Agency:
- Office of the Governor
Counsels
-
Jonathan T. Johnson, Esquire
Hopping, Green, and Sams, P.A.
119 South Monroe Street, Suite 300
Post Office Box 6526
Tallahassee, FL 323146526
(850) 222-7500 -
Cynthia Kelly
Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission
The Capitol
Office of the Governor
Tallahassee, FL 323990001
(850) 488-7146 -
Jennifer Kilinski, Esquire
Hopping, Green and Sams, P.A.
119 South Monroe Street, Suite 300
Post Office Box 6526
Tallahassee, FL 32314
(850) 222-7500 -
Barbara R. Leighty, Agency Clerk
Transportation and Economic
Room 1801
The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 323990001
(850) 717-9491 -
Jonathan T. Johnson, Esquire
Address of Record -
Cynthia Kelly
Address of Record -
Jennifer Kilinski, Esquire
Address of Record -
Barbara R. Leighty, Agency Clerk
Address of Record