- April 26, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Six months ago, Palm Coast was rejecting the county government's call to pay to move city utility infrastructure that stands in the way of a $10 million county road project.
"It’s essential that it get done. Palm Coast is working closely with us."
— JERRY CAMERON, Flagler County administrator
But now — a few weeks into a new city administration — the county believes it's on the cusp of an agreement with the city that would have both local governments sharing the cost.
"Although the state statute would require the city of Palm Coast to 100% resolve those conflicts ... this board, and I agree, had decided that they would like to be more equitable than strictly legal," County Administrator Jerry Cameron told county commissioners at a June 21 commission meeting.
The county, he said, has agreed to contribute $775,277 of the $1.64 million estimated project cost.
"It’s essential that it get done," Cameron said. "Palm Coast is working closely with us."
Commissioners, at the meeting, unanimously approved the county's side of an interlocal agreement for the work.
The Palm Coast City Council is expected to consider the agreement at a workshop and meeting.
Under state law, utility providers must bear the cost of moving their infrastructure when it's in the way of a transportation project.
Former Palm Coast City Manager Matt Morton had resisted doing so, saying that the city hadn't budgeted for such project and the the expense should fall on the people who'd benefit, not on the city's utility ratepayers. The County Commission had agreed to look into other options.
At the June 21 meeting, County Commissioner David Sullivan noted the city's former resistance.
"The last time anyone from the city was here, the old city manager said there’s no money coming from Palm Coast," Sullivan said. "Does the interlocal agreement force a contribution from Palm Coast, or does it encourage them?"
"The state statute forces it," Cameron replied. The agreement, he added, "seeks equity."
"But it’s definite that they’re going to be contributing their share," Cameron said. "There’s no question about that."
Cameron, at the county meeting, told commissioners that the county needs to sign the agreement that night so that the city could sign it at the City Council meeting the next day.
That turned out not to be quite right: The city plans to review the agreement at a workshop on Aug. 10, and then vote on it at a meeting on Aug. 17.
