HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-30 - City Commission Workshop Meeting Minutes5811 NORTHWEST 88TFI AVENUE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321
TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900
May 16, 1984
NOTICE OF WORKSHOP MEETING
CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
There will be a City Council Workshop Meeting on Wednesday,
May 30, 1984, at 10:00 A.M. in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 5811 N.W. 88 Avenue, Tamarac.
The purpose of this Workshop Meeting is to discuss a request
to establish a special taxing district in the Woodlands in
connection with a security program.
The Public is encouraged to attend.
Carol A. Evans
Assistant City Clerk
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city
Council with resper,.t to any matter considered at such meeting or
hearing, he will need a record of the prazeet.Ir3gs z,rid €w SUch
purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record Mciudes
the testimony and evidence upon which the ,appeal is to be based.
PWCf OF 140NDL9CRT MTMN ON BASIS OF HANDICAFM STATES
AN SWAL OPPOKYL= DFID R
Tape
1
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CITY COUNCIL
WORKSHOP MEETING
May 30, 1984
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Philip B. Kravitz called the meeting to order
on Wednesday, May 30, 1984, at 10:00 A.M., in the Council Chambers
at City Hall.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Philip B. Kravitz
Vice Mayor Sydney M. Stein
Councilman Jack Stelzer
Councilman Raymond J. Munitz
Councilman John J. Dunne
ALSO PRESENT: Laura Z. Stuurmans, City Manager
Jon M. Henning, City Attorney
Carol Thrasher, Secretary
Mayor Kravitz read the Notice of the Workshop Meeting into the
record stating that the purpose of this meeting was to discuss
a request to establish a special taxing district in the Woodlands
in connection with a security program.
Mayor Kravitz called for a Moment of Silent Meditation followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance.
In preface to the meeting, Mayor Kravitz stated that he has
received many letters from the Woodlanders advising that they
felt this was the wrong time of the year to hold a Workshop
because many people are away, and requesting postponement until
October or November. He also has many letters both for and
against the taxing district. Therefore, he called for this
Workshop and added that a Workshop means that Council will not
act at the conclusion of the meeting. Council is only seeking
input as to those who are for it and their reasons, and to those
who are against it and their reasons and Council may hold another
Workshop in October of November. Council wants to hear from the
public why Council should or should not approve a referendum at
which the ultimate decision will be made by the voters at the ballot.
Discussion will include the phase of legality, whether the residents
want the special district and what the main part of that security will
be. He advised that these discussions are in response to the requests
from the Woodlanders.
Mayor Kravitz announced that those giving legal opinions will be given
up to ten minutes and added that those speakers would be Mr. Platt who
is Attorney for the Woodlands, and Mr. Brower on the opposing side.
In addition, five people have asked to speak on one side and they
will be given two minutes each; and the other side has only three
speakers and they will be given three minutes each. He advised
that that does not eliminate anyone from the audience who wishes
to speak but each speaker will be limited to two minutes.
`I- 5/30/84
/cmt
Both Alan Bernstein and Leo Isaacson asked that their names be
removed as speakers for the district; they preferred to speak
as members of the public. Mayor. Kravitz stated that after
removing those two names, both sides would be equal and each
speaker would be given two minutes.
Mayor Kravitz announced that he intended to close the meeting
no later than 11:30 A.M.
George Platt from the firm of Schwartz & Nash stated that he was
representing the Woodlands Homeowners Association. He advised
that there are 892 homes in the Woodlands Which have been subjected
to numerous burglaries over the past years and even though the
City has been above and beyond the call of duty in many instances
in its concern for security in that particular area, there have
been discussions for approximately two years about ways to enhance
the security. He stated that they are gratified by Council's
interest and concern and expressed the hope that some ways can
be found to further protect the interests of the residents, who
have suffered rather expensive losses, as the crime rate indicates
over the years. He stated that unfortunately Woodlands does not
have the good fortune that some of the newer communities have
because today when a community is created there are declarations
of restrictions which have security and accessment ability built
into the private community. Now, as one sees new communities
coming in, whether it be Kings Point or others, security is going
to be in place, unlike the older communities that do not have
this security protection.
Mr.Platt advised that approximately two years ago he was asked to
explore ways of improving the security for the residents. After
much research and attempts to use the various associations and the
Security Committee in the Woodlands, he stated that he reviewed
taxing districts and the authority of the City. He added that the
State has taken rather extensive measures to discourage the further
proliferation of independent special taxing districts because there
are over 1,000 in the State and it was getting out of control. Ile
explained that such a special taxing district is a governmental
entity unto itself with its own taxing authority, its own ad valorem
rates. In the process, local governments were left with the
authority and jurisdiction to create dependent special taxing
districts. Mr. Platt stated that if means to improve the
security of the Woodlanders were going to be made, the ultimate
decision would have to be for the Council to create an Ordinance.
Ile explained that such a district would not have any independent
authority other than what was provided under the Ordinance; the City
would set the millage and adopt the annual budget. However, he
stated, the Ordinance could provide for a Board within the district
to make policy on a day-to-day basis, with the ultimate policy and
authority resting with the City.
At this point Mr. Platt proposed going to a referendum of the regis-
tered voters in the Woodlands which is Precinct 16J. In conclusion
he stated that there has been some controversy and discussions as to
whether or not this means is legal and he advised that under Florida
Statutes Section 165.041(2) the district would be a product of the
City whereby the ad valorem taxes can be used by the referendum.
He suggested that Council and the City Attorney request a final
opinion from the Attorney General, after which further concepts
can be pursued.
-2- 5/30/84
/cmt
C/M Stelzer asked how many registered voters there were within
those 892 homes and confirmed that residents who are not regis-
tered will be excluded.by going to referendum even though their
homes will be affected. Mr. Platt stated that the same is true for
the Country Club, which is,the largest property owner in the Wood-
lands and would benefit tremendously by the district. He added
that that is the nature of the democracy in the State of Florida
and unfortunately free -holder elections which previously allowed
property holders to vote on this type of question have now been
eliminated under Florida haw.
C/M Munitz asked Mr.Platt what percentage was necessary for valid
passage under condominium laws and Mr.Platt advised that the vote
is bound by Florida laws being based on the number of actual voters.
He added that a straw ballot determined that there was an over-
whelming interest to pursue this subject. C/M Munitz asked if the
nature of the item precluded more than just a mere majority and
Mr.Platt replied no.
Vice Mayor Stein stated that with a governing board as proposed,
authority will be taken away from the City's Police Department
which would result in having a City within a City and he felt that
the Attorney General would object to this type of operation. Mr.
Platt pointed out that this was only a suggestion and that the
question of control is to be defined by the Ordinance which is
to be established by the Council. He added that this idea stemmed
from a concern of the Woodland Homeowners Board members that if
it was going to be done, they wanted to have as much control as
possible within the limitations of the law.
Max Caplan, Chairman of the Security Program of Woodlands Homeowners
Association, stated that the problem of security has been present
for years and many plans have failed because of funding. He stated
that while he was president of the Association, Mr. Platt's proposal
appealed to him and they decided to try a nonbinding straw ballot,
which included two questions to residents: (1) Are you in favor of
private security patrols; and (2) Are you in favor of the dependent
special taxing district as a means of funding. Mr. Caplan reported
the following final count on these questions: (1) Yes - 383; No - 162;
(2) Yes - 344; No - 193. He added that he considered this to be a
mandate of the concensus of those Woodlanders who voted. He stated
that the Board of Directors concerned itself with these results and
voted overwhelmingly to give the Security Chairman the power to
proceed with the security program as outlined. He advised that a
petition with about 400 signatures has been filed with the Mayor.
Tn conclusion, Mr. Caplan advised that on the basis of the foregoing
the Security Committee felt that it had a mandate to proceed with
the referendum for the voters to have the ultimate say.
Dr. Julius Barsham stated that he was asked to present the organiza-
tion and cost of a roving patrol. He advised that it was the feeling
of the Security Committee that the maximum amount of efficiency could
be effected by using a single patrol car around the clock with an
additional car from 4:00 P.M. to Midnight and a third car from 6:00
P.M. to 2:00 A.M. He explained that this would cover the most
dangerous hours of each day and the projected cost is $149,467 for
1985. This computes to $161.59, or $13.47 per month per family in
the Woodlands and with ad valorem taxation, it will vary from one
family to the other.
-3- 5/30/84
/cmt
C/M Munitz advised that the City Clerk's Office records 1,409
registered voters in the Woodlands, which means that based on
Mr. Caplan's figures that is roughly 38% of the voters on the
straw ballot. C/M Munitz stated that he does not consider this
to be a mandate. Mr. Caplan replied that votes can only be
counted from those who vote and advised that of the votes returned
the results were overwhelmingly 3 to 1. He added that this ballot
was distributed one to a household, not considering how many voters
lived in the home.
Oscar Brower stated that he would be discussing the legal matter,
not the security matter on this subject. He advised that there
is not an overwhelming majority in favor of the legality of the
proposal and he is speaking for those people. Mr. Brower referred to
Mr. Platt's memo wherein it discusses a special dependent taxing
district to provide supplemental police protection in a City that
has a fully financed and fully developed Police Department. Mr.
Brower stated that this is a very novel idea as no such district
has ever been contemplated by any of the documents listed in the
memo and for which he has not been able to find any legislative
or judicial authority.
Mr. Brower cited the attempt in 1975-76 by the City of Sunrise to
set up a special taxing district for certain recreational facilities
for which they had to get comprehensive legislation. He stated that
Section 125.01(g) quoted on page 2 of Mr. Platt's memo applies to
counties, not cities; and advised that this authority cannot be
automatically transferred to a municipality. He quoted a portion
of a resume of the Attorney General's opinion dated June 29, 1978,
regarding another instance in another City, that a municipality
may not create by Ordinance a special district pursuant to the
provisions of Section 165.041(2) and convey the power to levy ad
valorem taxes within that district. City Attorney Henning asked
that Mr. Brower place the number of that memo into the record and
Mr. Brower advised that it was Number 078-92 dated June 29, 1978,
Annual Report of the Attorney General.
Mr. Brower continued that Mr. Platt referred to this section of
Florida Statutes as the authority for creating this district. He
added that page 5 stated that the creation of such a district was
compatible with the City Code as provided for in Section 6.09;
yet sub -section (d) of Section 6.09, as summarized by Mr. Brower,
among other things, specifically excludes the authorizing or
repealing the levy of taxes.
In conclusion, Mr. Brower advised that there are no legal or legis-
lative precedents for this proposed special taxing district and
advised that the City should be 100% sure of the legal basis for the
district and that the taxes levied are legal or they may find that
the City is liable for the return of any taxes collected plus interest.
Mr. Brower stated that he agreed with Mr. Platt's request that the
only way to resolve this matter is by the opinion of the Attorney
General.
Mayor Kravitz requested that the City Attorney furnish the Mayor
and Council any memos in connection with the legality as presented
by both speakers.
Mary Lawson disagreed with Mr. Platt's memo that the majority of
the Woodlanders have expressed an approval of the special taxing
district. She said that none of the questions on the questionnaire
elicited a yes vote fromis majo.rity 6f;the 892 Woodlands families.
She added that the no votes and the abstentions were in the majority.
She stated that at the time the questionnaire was distributed they
were promised that the matter would be dropped if there were not a
majority vote; and that promise was not kept. She stated that the
-4- 5/30/84
/ cm t
questionnaire itself was invalid for its questions were vague
and misleading. At the Homeowners meeting where the results
of the questionnaire was announced, several residents asked that
the results be ruled null and void and that a new properly drawn
questionnaire be distributed. She advised that those in charge
of the meeting said that would be done, and it has not. Ms.
Lawson advised that the show of hands in response to the question
of who is for security, was used as an indication of an over-
whelming desire for a district and she feels this is outrageous.
She stated that a taxing district is undesirable for a long list of
reasons and added that for one thing, it gives the minority of the
Woodlanders the power to tax all Woodlanders. Ms. Lawson stated
that it was pointed out at the last Homeowners meeting that the
Club would contribute to the cost of such a district and she asked
if those members of the Club who do not live in the district would
be assessed and if those members of the Club who do live in the
district would be assessed twice. Ms. Lawson concluded that there
are many unanswered questions and she sees no precedent for the
proposal.
C/M Munitz asked what the third question on the questionnaire was
and Mr. Caplan replied that it was whether the residents were in
favor of erecting walls and fences. He added that this idea was
discarded to go with patrol cars.
Marvin Hughes addressed the concept of the district board to
supervise a supplemental police force and stated that this is
rather frightening. He questioned the expertise that can be brought
to this type of governing body without the assistance of the City.
Tape He questioned details regarding the development of the program,
2 the definition of the operation of the program, administrative
costs, salaries, legal fees, insurance, and liability; and assumed
that all of these details will be addressed at some point in time
and can be worked out. He stated however that today there is not
enough information to ask the City for a special taxing district.
Mr. Hughes commented that Mr. Platt assured that there would be a
high degree of accountability and Mr. Hughes asked who would be
accountable, for what they would be accountable and to whom. He
agreed with the figures provided by Dr. Barsham regarding the cost
of the program but suggested that the entire project is based on
the fallacy that there is a crime wave in the Woodlands and the
City. Mr. Hughes stated that the City of Tamarac has the lowest
crime rate and the highest rate of solving crimes in the County.
He concluded that it is time that the City stopped being manipulated
by the purveyors of hysteria.
Muriel London advised that the Homeowners Association officers were
trying to give the impression that they represent the vast majority
of the Woodlanders in this issue and that they have a mandate to
establish an independent taxing district. She disagreed with this
and added that many Woodlanders were opposed. She said that the
ballots were as a result of a scare mailing which threatened that
if the residents did not vote yes their very lives would be in
danger and that'.the mailing implied a complete security package
including high walls, sentries, closed entrances, around -the -clock
patrol cars; all for a few dollars per family.
She referred to last danuary's Workshop Meeting when the votes were
counted and advised that counting votes under false pretenses was
pointed out to the officers and it was suggested that the votes be
returned and a new vote be taken properly. She advised that this has
not been done and these votes are now being used to give Council a
false impression.
5/30/84
/cmt
Ms. London stated that she was so appalled by the tactics being
used by the Homeowners officers that she requested to address their
Executive Board, at which time she agreed with them that everyone
is for security but that the Woodlanders were entitled to a defini-
tion of terms on the security package with regards to the following:
(1) She questioned whether the Community was dangerous and advised
that Captain Roche informed her that it is the safest and most
heavily patrolled in Tamarac; (2) What programs would be offered,
how much it would cost and if the program would make the Community
sufficiently safer to warrant those costs. She stated that Captain
Roche has advised that patrol cars alone would not do much to
ep_hance the safety of the Community.
Ms. London advised that it has been several months since asking for
this definition and it has not yet been received and the officers
are still using the votes based on scare copy and undefined terms
to prove that they have a mandate. She concluded that all residents
are in favor of security but not for establishing an independent
taxing district that may not be necessary. She urged restraint by
the Council in waiting for that definition and for a time when all
Woodlanders are here.
Susan Kenton pointeO out that several '.-.undred of the 892 owners are
those who live up north and she questioned how there could be a
majority when hundreds of people are not permitted to vote. She
also questioned whether or not this tax would be based on a propor-
tionment to the value of their homes, which could result in the
second class citizens paying for the protection of the affluent.
Vickie Beech asked how much of the City's millage rate is being
used and if this district is established, will the City have to
give part of that rate for the special district. She also questioned
who would bear the administrative cost for the operation of the
district and if sooner or later the City taxpayers would be
responsible for this. Mayor Kravitz advised that all costs would
be charged to the area and the City Attorney confirmed that all
costs that can be identified will be built into the millage budget.
Vice Mayor Stein clarified Ms. Beech's question to be whether or
not the district would affect the City's legal, maximum millage
rate. City Attorney Henning stated that it was his understanding
that this would not detract from the City's millage rate and that
the Woodlanders would pay their taxes in the same way as other
City residents and have an additional tax billed only to that
neighborhood.
Vice Mayor Stein asked if the City reaches its maximum millage
allowable by law, can the City send out this additional millage
and Mr. Platt replied that Section 200.011(8)(d) of the Florida
Statutes states that dependent districts are added to the rates
of the governing body and shall not exceed the maximum millage
applicable to that body. Mr. Platt suggested that Council include
a maximum cap within the referendum at the time of discussions
for approval of the District.
Leo Isaacson stated that the Legal Committee of the Woodlands Home-
owners Association recognized that both Mr. Platt and Mr. Brower
have agreed that the opinion of the Attorney General should be
obtained so that the question of legality may be settled. He agreed
that the original questionnaire was ambiguous and he so stated at
the Homeowners' meeting; however the majority of the people, both
in response to the questionnaire and at that meeting, have indicated
a fear that Woodlands does not have a sufficient protection plan.
He stated that this program is meant to augment the protection
given by the City's Police Department.
-6- 5/30/84
/cmt
Alan Bernstein stated that the crucial vote on the adoption of
the referendum would be taken at the time of the year when the
majority of the Woodlanders are here and then all would have a
chance to vote. He advised that the Woodlanders want more
security but they don't want it at the expense of anyone else;
they are willing to pay for it. He expressed that the referendum
will provide for the will of the people and added that all the
Woodlanders are asking for is the right to vote in a referendum
in a democratic fashion.
Mac Lessor stated that he finds it hard to believe that this
proposition has gotten this far since both sides have agreed that
the Attorney General should render an opinion and added that this
has been an exercise in futility.
Herbert Haber stated that the Police Department has informed him
that most break-ins have occurred from the rear and the patrol
discussed today will be patrolling the front. He added that this
patrol will pass each house in the Woodlands about every two hours.
Ile expressed that delegating the authority of the Police Department
to a special district is illegal and immoral. He also questioned
whether the City might not be opened to law suits by enabling this
district to operate, and who would pay for the law fees if this
happened.
Richard Yadwin asked the following questions: (1) what kind of
patrol would be used; (2) what would happen if one of these guards
made a mistake and shot a resident; who would pay for the law suit;
(3) would the program be part of the district's responsibility or
the City's; (4) would the patrol have the capability for direct
communication with the Police Department; (5) would the patrol be
actively engaged in stopping crime or would they have to call the
Police Department for action. Mr. Yadwin recommended that the City
provide two additional police cars and a number of policeman super-
vised by the Chief of Police rather than this type of program. He
added that security would then be properly handled in a professional
manner and could be charged to the taxing district.
Walter Rekuc stated that the selection of four members of the Wood-
lands Homeowners Association to a district board would leave the
non-members without representation, which is a direct violation
of the Constitution under taxation without representation. He
added that the Florida Legislature and the Broward County Efficiency
Committee are in the process of reducing the number of taxing
districts and this proposal would be in direct conflict with State
and County objectives. He concluded that there is no justification
to create an island within the City and added that he wanted to see
all City residents with the same protection, which is provided by
the Police Force of this City.
Lucille Weiner stated that she is in favor of complete security and
asked if the road coming through on 54th Street would be covered.
Lillian Feldman, President of the Woodlands Homeowners Association,
stated that the undignified manner of handling this project was
unfair to those who worked so diligently on the project. She agreed
that everyone wants security and expressed her hope that everyone
could work together at future workshops to resolve the problem
instead of fighting among themselves.
Murray Weiner stated that he resented Ms. Feldman's statements
regarding the way the subject was being handled. He questioned
7- 5/30/84
/cmt
whether a non -binding straw ballot could be used as a mandate
of the voters and pointed out that the ballot did include many
non -voters.
Councilman Stelzer stated that Woodlands does not have a high
crime rate and added that the highest rate in the City was in
the Heathgate-Sunflower area and the areas north of Commercial
Boulevard. He speculated that if this taxing district were
approved for the Woodlands, other areas would be coming in for
the same approval. He questioned the method of voting and stated
that each homeowner should have the right to vote, which could be
permitted by a change of the deed restrictions.
George Platt agreed with C/M Stelzer's point but stated that regret-
tably when the earlier sections of the Woodlands was developed, there
were no provisions for amendment to the declarations. He added that
when Leadership took over provisions were added to allow such amend-
ments. As a result, the Woodlanders were left with 7 sets of
restrictions, none of which have an amendment provision and technically
the only way to amend them is to go to Court. He advised that the
over-riding interest would be that every homeowner should participate
because they would have a vital interest in the outcome but the
declaration and the law constrain such free -holder elections. Ile
suggested that the City could effect a legal referendum and perform
a non -binding straw ballot of Woodlanders homeowners for the City.
Vice Mayor Stein advised that the provisions of the State Statutes
call upon only electors to vote. He also suggested that it would
have been more appropriate for Mr. Platt to have contacted the City
Attorney and obtain the Attorney General's opinion prior to having
a Council Workshop. He advised the Woodlanders that they were not
unique in their request and referred to a similar request that he
had made three years ago for Woodmont, at which time he was told
emphatically that there was no way that it could be done. He stated
that if such a district is approved for the Woodlands, then Woodmont
would be the first area to request the same approval. He questioned
how the City would feel about 2, 3 or 5 special taxing districts for
police protection and added that overall this is what should be taken
into consideration.
C/M Munitz reminded the public that the Council represents the entire
City of Tamarac and is concerned about the health, safety, and welfare
of the residents of 6$ communities. He added that what happens in the
Woodlands would have an effect on all other communities and suggested
that this effect be considered when having further individual work-
shops. Referring to the mandate, he stated that 25% of the registered
voters voted yes, and he feels this could only be used as an indication
of interest, not a mandate. He suggested that the areas to be con-
sidered before going to a vote for such a district would be: (1) whether
Tape the Woodlanders want this district; and (2) whether there is a need for
3 it and how would it be fulfilled.
C/M Dunne stated that he represents the Woodlands but lives east of
441 and advised the Woodlanders that they get much more police pro-
tection than the sections to the east. He believes that it is up to
the Police Department to take this type of action.
91:11
5/30/84
/cmt
Police Chief Joseph McIntosh advised that before establishing a
plan there must first be a need and he fails to find a need for
the plan being discussed today. He reported that for the entire
City there were 153 residential burglaries in 1983 and according
to State and National statistics, a City of this size is expected
to have 500 burglaries. In the Woodlands there were 20 actual
burglaries and 7 attempts for the 1983 year. Crime has been
reduced in the City for four consecutive years and the City has
had the lowest crime rate and the highest clearance rate for the
past two years in the County. He questioned how much more the
Police Department could do with the number of people that they.
have. He feels that good coverage is provided and that the
statistics are something to be proud of. He concluded that there
is no crime wave in the City of Tamarac.
Vickie Beech asked who orchestrated this discussion and Mayor
Kravitz replied that it was being presented by the Woodland Home-
owners Association Safety Committee.
Max Caplan asked how anyone could get the information that the City
or Woodlands Homeowners Association would not be insured or that
the plan does not take in the contingency of bonding the City or
the association. He advised that the contingency funding has pro-
vided for this.
Bea Rhodes advised that her home is one of 10 properties that have
never been part of the Woodlands per se; they don't belong to Home-
owners; but her home is on the major street and all of her neighbors
are part of Woodlands. She said that before getting involved in
this issue, she would like to know if she is part. of Woodlands.
Mr. Isaacson responded that she was. Ms. Rhodes asked if she would
be taxed accordingly assuming that this district is approved. C/M
Munitz asked if she was a registered voter and Ms. Rhodes replied
that she was. Mayor Kravitz asked that they wait for a legal ruling
and additional workshops for questions of this type.
Leonard Pollack asked if Council was going to vote prior to any
further workshops and Mayor Kravitz stated that there will be no
vote at the conclusion of this meeting. He advised that there will
be other Workshops and the agenda will announce such, so that the
public could attend and be heard.
Elaine Yadwin asked if City police protection would be reduced in
the Woodlands area if they have their own force. Mayor Kravitz
advised that the entire City gets the same protection and stated
that the Police Department knows what is best for the City and
would act accordingly. Ms. Yadwin asked if this district were
approved and then found in the future to be unsatisfactory, would
there be a way to rescind it. Mr. Platt responded that if such a
district were approved by Ordinance, the Ordinance would encompass
a method of dissolving the action if it proved to be ineffective or
not worthwhile.
Harry Bernstein asked why everyone was so concerned about a straw
ballot and ignoring the postal ballot where the majority of the
residents voted no.
�L
5/30/84
/cmt
Mayor Kravitz assured the public that this is not the end of
the subject and that Council would not be voting on the subject.
He advised that the public would be given the opportunity to
offer input at future Workshops.
Mayor Kravitz closed the Workshop Meeting at 11:45 A.M.
ASSI-STANT CITY CLftK
This public document was promulgated at a cost of $153.04 or $4.25
per copy to inform the general public and public officers and
employees about recent opinions are considerations by the Council
of the City of Tamarac.
-10--
5/30/84
/cmt