Agenda Item Name:
Title
Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement Process with City of Alachua: Draft “Initiating Resolution”.
End
Presenter:
Ben Chumley, Senior Planner
Description:
This item includes a presentation on Interlocal Service Boundary Agreements (ISBA) under Florida annexation statute Chapter 171, Part II, and a request for Board authorization to send a letter from the County Manager to the City Manager of Alachua with a draft ISBA “Initiating Resolution”, and requesting the City’s feedback on the ISBA process, the Resolution, and the issues to be discussed. Based on feedback from the City of Alachua, the next step would be adoption of an “Initiating Resolution” to begin the formal statutory process under Chapter 171, Part II. The staff presentation and draft “Initiating Resolution” are attached to the agenda item.
Recommended Action:
Recommended Action
Authorize staff to send a letter from the County Manager to the City Manager of Alachua with a draft “Initiating Resolution” for an Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement (ISBA) process, and requesting the City’s feedback on the process, the resolution, and the issues to be discussed.
End
Prior Board Motions:
August 11, 2015 - In response to a letter from the Newberry City Manager requesting that the County take the lead on initiating an Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement process under Part II of Chapter 171 with the City of Newberry, there was some discussion of the statutory process for initiating an ISBA in relation to the Newberry request. At the conclusion of that discussion in 2015, the Board made a motion to request that the County Attorney brief the Board at a subsequent meeting on the options available to the County to address the issue of annexation through amendment of the County’s Charter. There was no specific action taken by the Board on the City of Newberry’s request in 2015.
Fiscal Consideration:
Fiscal Consideration
N/A
End
Background:
Municipal annexation is addressed in Chapter 171, Parts I and II, Florida Statutes. Part I of Chapter 171 deals primarily with the procedural and form requirements for annexation by municipalities (i.e., reasonably compact, contiguous to city, and does not create enclaves). Since the repeal of the Boundary Adjustment Act in 2016, annexation in Alachua County has been governed by Part I of Chapter 171. Part I of the annexation statute does not provide a mechanism to address service delivery and other issues associated with municipal annexation.
Part II of Chapter 171, which was added to the statute in 2006, is known as the “Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement Act”. Part II provides a mechanism for counties and cities to cooperatively address service delivery considerations associated with municipal annexation in addition to the form requirements. See “Summary of ISBA Act” attached to agenda item for more detail on Part II.
The legislative intent of Part II, according to Section 171.201, is “…to provide an alternative to Part I of this Chapter for local governments regarding the annexation of territory into a municipality and the subtraction of territory from the unincorporated area of the county. Section 171.201 further states that the principal goal of Part II of the annexation statute is to:
• Encourage local governments to jointly determine how to provide services to residents and property in the most efficient and effective manner while balancing the needs and desires of the community.
• Establish a more flexible process for adjusting municipal boundaries and to address a wider range of the effects of annexation.
• Encourage intergovernmental coordination in planning, service delivery, and boundary adjustments
• Reduce intergovernmental conflicts and litigation between local governments.
Sec. 171.201 goes on to say that, “It is the intent of this part [Part II] to promote sensible boundaries that reduce the costs of local governments, avoid duplicating local services, and increase political transparency and accountability. This part is intended to prevent inefficient service delivery and an insufficient tax base to support the delivery of those services.”
Interlocal Service Boundary Agreements (ISBA) under Part II of the statute have been used by various local governments around the State of Florida as a mechanism to address annexation and service delivery issues in a more comprehensive way than is provided under Part I of the statute. If successful, an ISBA has the potential to provide a procedural and policy framework for dealing with some of the annexation issues that the County has experienced since the repeal of the Boundary Adjustment Act in 2016, such as identifying the local government responsible for providing services and facilities within certain areas or identifying strategies for dealing with existing enclaves. The use of ISBAs has not yet been attempted in Alachua County, however the City of Alachua has expressed interest in participating in the process of developing an ISBA with the County.
In order to formally initiate the ISBA process, the statute (see s. 171.203(1) of Part II of Ch.171, F.S. attached), provides that either the County or the City can adopt an “initiating resolution” which identifies the issues and the area to be discussed as part of the ISBA negotiation process. The adoption of an initiating resolution starts the clock on a series of statutorily-prescribed steps and timelines (per s.171.203(1)-(5) F.S. as outlined in the presentation attached) for transmittal of the initiating resolution to “invited municipalities” and all other municipalities in the County, followed by adoption of any “responding resolutions” by the invited municipalities. There are also timelines wherein other municipalities in the County that are not designated as “invited municipalities” may adopt “requesting resolutions” to also participate in the ISBA negotiation process.
Given the procedural complexity and statutory timelines involved, staff believes the best approach to beginning the ISBA process with the City of Alachua would be to send the draft initiating resolution to the Alachua City Manager for review and feedback. This would allow an opportunity for communication with the City about the expectations for the process and the issues to be discussed prior to adoption of an initiating resolution which would start the statutory clock on the timelines, formal notification, and response requirements for all cities, as prescribed by s.171.203(1)-(5), F.S. This is an approach that was used in at least one other County in Florida.