112050-Regular Session]64
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida,~.~...N°vembe~...at 8~'t4. . 1950
The City Commission of the City of Banford, Florida, met in adjourned regular session
at the City Hall in the City of Banford, Florida, at 8:00 o'clock P. M. November 20, 1950.
Present: Commissioner Andrew Carraway, Mayor
" Randall Chase
" F.A. Dyson
" John Krider
" W H. Stemper
City Attorney A. Edwin Shinholser
City Manager Clifford McKibbln, Jr.,
City Clerk H. N. Bayer
Commissioner-Elect John D. Ivey " " Sam Martins,
Meeting called to order by the Chairman.
Commissioner Dyson then moved that the meeting adjourn not later than 10:50 P.M.
Seconded by Commissioner Stamper and carried.
The Board then proceeded to confer with Mr. J. R. Stansfield, Traffic Manager, and
Mr. Bradley Kennelly, Manager of Municipal Docks, Jacksonville, with reference to the contents
of report of F. C. Hillyer & Associates, covering study of the proposed municipal docks and
terminal project with respect to volumne of cargo, tariff and terminal charges, design
plans of warehouse, storage space, operating cost, estimated annual revenue and various other
phases of operating the terminal. A copy of which is on file in the City Cltrk's Office. Said
report showing two different estimates of oroposed annual revenue to be derived from terminal
operations, base5 on handling 50,000 tons of cargo. 1. Net onerating revenue of ~32,500.O0
with net income of $6,500.00 after amortization charges, as estimated by a practical expert
terminal operator of many years ex~erlence. 2. Net operating revenue of $15,500.00, leaving
a deficit of $10,500.00 after amortization charges, as estimated by two ex~erlenced traffic
managers. The report also showed that the net operating revenue could be increased an ad-
ditional ~29,000.00 by providing additional warehouse storage space for long-term storage of
certain comTr~oditJes.
During the lengthy discussi.n numerous questions were answered by Messrs. Btansfield
and Kennelly relative to the various
carrier operations for hauling cargo.
at 20~ lower than the ali-rail rate.
T~e Chairman ne~t am~ounced
subjects contained in the report, and on common and contrac~
They stated that a water rate could probably be secured
that the Commissioner would be glad to hear from anyone
in the audience relative to t ~eir views on the proposed terminal, or, any Guestlons they wish
to ask Messrs. Btansf~leld and Kennel]y.
Thereupon Mr. H. James Gut read the following letter addressed to the Commission:
City Commission,
Sanford, Florida.
Gentlemen:
Re: SANFORD PORT TERMINAL
November 20, 1950.
That a city either grows or dies but it cannot
stay stationary.
That ali of the City Commission as well as the
r(~sidents of the City of Banford desire our
city to grow.
That the principal value of a port terminal is
not the net revenue t~at might accrue from the
terminal operation itself.
Before making a statement regarding my views of the proposed port
terminal it is necessary that certain assumptions on my part be
outlined as follows:
MINUTES 165
City Commission, Sanford, ............. 19.50
If the above assumotions are granted then I do not see how it is
possible for this City Commission to continue delaying the build-
ing of the port terminal, even if said terminal will. have an
operational deficit. Practically all new business have a deficit
their first year or so and in the case of this terminal it is
possible that there be a continuing deficit even with a much
larger than antlciosted tonnage due to comoetlng transportation
systems reducing their freight rates. However, in that ease the
savings to our residents and taxpayers from all forms of trans-
portation will be so large as to Justify the City's terminal
ooeration deficit.
I wish to call your attention to the large amount of money that
has been spent to date, largely in the last five years, in anti-
cipation of and leading up to the building of this port terminal:
The City of Sanford has spent $90,933.00 in acquiring
site for this and other terminals on the lakefront,
plus hydraulic filling of the site and surveying,
engineering, architectural and other expenses.
TEe Seminole County Chamber of Commerce has scent
for acquiring river right-of-way for the deepening
of the St. Johns River $12,918.00, and other interests
have spent for right-of-way $2,~56.00, making a total
of $15,374.00.
The United States Government has spent for deepening
of the St. Johns River to a depth of 12 feet,S589,300.
The above expenditures to date make a grand total of $695,607.00.
It is my considered opinion that even if this port terminal will
create a deficit in its operation, it s?muld still be built as the
indirect benefits far outweigh any such deficit and I therefore
hereby urge and call on the City Commission of the City of Sanford
to aporove the building of the port terminal.
Yours very truly,
S/ H. James Gut
Mr. H. H. Coleman next stated that according to the foregoing statement of Mr. Gut
approximately 70% of the cost of the total terminal project had already been expended,
and that he was in favor of constructing the terminal and completing the project because
it would induce industry to locate in Sanford.
Mr. W. C. Hutchinson stated that in view of the report of F. C. Hillyer & Associates
and that Messrs. Stsndfield's and. Kennelly's explanations and recommendations were not con-
sistant therewith.
Mr. E. G. Kilpatrick, Jr., next spoke in favor of the terminal stating that he felt
that it would be self-liquidating, but if not, the savings in freight rates that would be
effected and the new industries thst would be attracted to Sanford would justify its con-
struction.
Mr. Carl S. Mynes also spoke in favor of the terminal.
Mayor Carraway then exoressed his opinion that in view of Hil]yer & Associates report
being favorable, the it~ should not delay any further in taking some definite action on the
construction of the terminal.
Commissioner Stemper then stated that since Messrs. Stansfield's and Kennelly's
statements contradicted some of the statements in the report and because the construction of
the terminal is controversial, action should be deferred until such statements are clarified.
Commissioner Dyson stated that he felt that the City had made suf icient investigations
on the termlnal project and that action should not be prolonged any further on construction.
Mr. L. H. Ghormley next apoeared before the Board, representing L. H. Ghormley & Company,
and Fisher Hawes& Compsny, Inc., who were granted a 30 days option on September 18, 1950, in
which Zo make preliminary studies and surbeys of the oroposed terminal in order to determine
66 MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida, ~Y~.~... 8.~ at ~...~.M. .. 19 50
in amount of $350,000.00, if it was determined that it could be financed and operated on sound
basis. Mr. Ghormley advised that they had made a thorough stud~ and investigation of the pro-
posed project and had determined that it could be operated on sound basis, and had accepted the
report of F. C. Hillyer & Associates as being favorable; and that their bond attorney's hsd
approved the City's proposal to finance its construction.
& Company, and Fisher Hawes &Comosny, Inc., were ready to
the $350,000.00 Revenue Certificates, under the conditions
Thereupon Commissioner Dyson moved that
sale of the Terminal Revenue Certificates
and Fisher Hawes & Commny, Inc., and to
for approval and adoption.
Seconded by
in amount of
instruct them
Commissioner Krlder.
He then advised that L. H. Ghormley
exercise their option to purchsse
stipulated in said option agreement.
the City Manager be authorized to confirm
~350,000.00 to L. H. Ghormley &Comoany,
to prepare the necessary Bond Resolution
After considerable discussion, in which Commissioner Chase stated in his
that the proposed means of financing the construction of the
was called on the motion of Commissioner Dyson, and same was
Commissioner Carraway Aye
" Chase Nays
" Dyson Aye
" '~rider Aye
" Stamper Naye
There being no further business
the Commission:
opinion
terminal was not legal, the roll
carried by the following vote of
the meetin~ ad Journed.
MAYOR