Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-10-20 - City Commission Workshop Meeting Minutesh Y 4 F<fJR1UP 7525 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE 6 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321-2401 1ELEPHONE (305) 722.5900 October 7, 1988 NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING There will be a Workshop Meeting of the City Council on Thursday, October 20, 1988, at 10:00 A.M., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 7525 NW 88th Avenue, Tamarac, Florida, for the purpose of discussing burglar alarms and recycling. All meetings are open to the public. 2 • CAROL A. EVANS CITY CLERK CAE/gt AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS CITY OF TAMARAC CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1988 TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Abramowitz called this meeting to Order on Thursday, October 20, 1988 at140:00 A.M. in the Council Chambers. PRESENT: Mayor Norman Abramowitz Vice Mayor Jack Stelzer Councilman Bruce Hoffman Councilman Henry Rohr ABSENT AND EXCUSED Councilman Dr. H. Larry Bender ALSO PRESENT: John P. Kelly, City Manager Pauline Walaszek, Special Services Secretary BURGLAR ALARM ORDINANCE City Manager Kelly said the first Item of discussion was the Burglar Alarm Ordinance. He said V/M Stelzer submitted his concerns and there were concerns from other people, especially the banking community. He said he asked Marie Eney of the Police Department about the violations from the banks and Mrs. Eney said all of the banks had a high volume of repeated offenses. City Manager Kelly said the banking community and City were concerned with so many violations. He said it was hard to address this matter because a fine had to be imposed for numerous violations to one alarm system. Mayor Abramowitz asked why V/M Stelzer's concerns were not submitted to the City Council. and City Manager Kelly said V/M Stelzer submitted his concerns to the City Attorney. He said V/M Stelzer was concerned with installers not being licensed; however, installers were licensed by Broward County and -the proposed City Ordinance provided that the City not become involved with licensing. Mayor Abramowitz asked if V/M Stelzer's concerns were available for the City Council and V/M Stelzer said when the City Attorney drafted an Ordinance, the City Council was asked to submit concerns about the content of the Ordinance. V/M Stelzer said this procedure was created to avoid violating the Sunshine Law. He said the information he submitted to the City Attorney was for the City Attorney and not the City Council. Mayor Abramowitz said he did not object to the Councilmembers expressing their concerns; however, he would like to know about those concerns if they were going to be discussed at the meetings. Page 1 0,,., 10/20/88 City Manager Kelly said it may have been better if he did not mention that V/M Stelzer submitted concerns. He said the City Attorney suggested that the City Council discuss the concerns. He had copies of V/M Stelzer's concerns made and distributed them to the City Council. (SEE ATTACHMENT) Mayor Abramowitz said there have been open Workshop meetings regarding this matter and these concerns could have been discussed at those meetings. He said he was not comfortable receiving information for his before a meeting. review City Manager Kelly said this meeting was a Workshop meeting and staff received V/M Stelzer's concerns and was prepared to respond to them. V/M Stelzer said he has been involved with the Burglar Alarm Ordinance for years and the amendments of the Ordinance have always been detained. He said he reviewed the proposed Ordinance and informed the City Attorney of his concerns. He said this process has always been used by the City Council and the meeting should not have been opened stating that he submitted his concerns. City Manager Kelly agreed with V/M Stelzer. V/M Stelzer said nothing was being kept from the City Council and his questions concerned the proposed Ordinance. He suggested that his questions be answered since he was the only one to submit his concerns to the City Attorney. C/M Hoffman said he had questions regarding the proposed Ordinance that he would like answered. Mayor Abramowitz said he was pleased that the City Council did their homework and had questions they would like answered regarding the proposed Ordinance; however,, he would like to be informed of the concerns so he could understand what was being discussed. V/M Stelzer said this Workshop meeting was called to discuss the concerns; however, he preferred to inform the City Attorney of his concerns in advance so the City Attorney could be prepared to answer the questions. City Manager Kelly said the Burglar Alarm Committee no longer existed; therefore, the proposed Ordinance provided that the Code Enforcement Board have non-exclusive jurisdiction over burglar alarm violations. Mayor Abramowitz asked how many cases came before the Burglar Alarm Committee and if the Code Enforcement Board could handle the responsibility without it interfering with their other duties. City Manager Kelly said the City Attorney and Building Department worked closely with the Code Enforcement Board. He said the City Attorney and the Building Department felt comfortable that the Code Enforcement Board could handle the violations. V/M Stelzer said there were 50 violations open and they have not been resolved and City Manager Kelly said this matter would be discussed later in the meeting. Page 2 l/ 10/20/88 C/M Hoffman said the people fined were waiting until this meeting took place to find the results of their violations. City Manager Kelly said several violators submitted their applications for Appeal; however, the violators were waiting for the proposed Ordinance. C/M Rohr asked if the violations would be excused if the proposed Ordinance was approved and City Manager Kelly replied that most of the violators asked to have their cases excused; however, he informed them that this could not be done without the appropriate authority. City Manager Kelly said the Police Department was in an awkward position because they had to react to the burglar alarms without direction of an Ordinance in handling the violations. V/M Stelzer said the original purpose for changing the Ordinance was to eliminate the $50.00 annual renewal fee. He said there were several matters taken out of the Ordinance which he felt should have remained in. Mayor Abramowitz said he would like to be informed of the deletions and additions of the Ordinance and why these changes were made. City Manager Kelly said the proposed Ordinance was simpler, cleaner, more enforceable and fairer than the old Ordinance. He said many of the provisions in the old Ordinance imposed unfair responsibility on the Police Department such as requiring the Police Department appearing before the Burglar Alarm Committee regarding the violations. He said the Police Chief felt this provision was not needed because it prevented the Police Officers from doing their job properly. City Manager Kelly said there would be an installation fee required for new burglar alarms. He said the Building Officials were concerned with having the qualified staff to determine if the burglar alarm systems were appropriate. He said the City's staff inspected the electrical aspect of the installations only; therefore, the provision regarding the type of system installed was eliminated. City Manager Kelly said there would be fines for violations after the third violation within a 12 month period. He said the fourth violation would be considered the first violation and the fines for those violations would be as follows: fourth violation considered first violation - $25.00 fifth violation considered second violation - 50.00 six violation considered third violation - 75.00 seventh violation considered fourth violation - 100.00 Mayor Abramowitz asked how the fee structure was determined and City Manager Kelly said after the third violation a fine would be charged for the time and service of the City; however, if the violator disputed the matter they would be able to Appeal to the Code Enforcement Board. Page 3 /; 10/20/88 Mayor Abramowitz asked if there was a fee for an Appeal. He said every time an Appeal was heard, attorneys had to be present at the meeting which cost the City money. He said if the first violation was only $25.00, an additional fee was needed to cover the costs of the Appeal. C/M Hoffman said if a person was falsely accused of something, they should have the right to Appeal; however, if the person is found guilty of the violation, they should be required to pay an Appeal Fee. Mayor Abramowitz said the Appeal Fee should be paid at the time of the application and then, if the violation is found invalid, the Appeal Fee could be returned. He said there were several things pending in the State and Federal Courts regarding frivolous litigation. Mayor Abramowitz said when he discussed the Ordinance with the City Attorney, the matter regarding the Boards having to be represented by Counsel was discussed as well. He said every time Counsel had to be present there were costs involved. C/M Rohr said if a person was found in violation, they should be required to pay a fee. He said requiring an Appeal Fee may eliminate the needless appeals that existed. Mayor Abramowitz asked what the defense of a violation could be besides the fault of the alarm company. He said a person could claim that the Police never responded to the alarm or that the alarm never sounded. Mayor Abramowitz said there was a Police report on every alarm response in the City and, if the owner of the system claimed that the false alarm was the fault of the alarm company, the person should be required to handle this matter with the alarm company. V/M Stelzer said the old Ordinance contained provisions against the alarm companies and Mayor Abramowitz asked if this provision was enforceable. C/M Hoffman said the provision could not be enforced if the alarm company was located in Coral Springs and V/M Stelzer said the City used to'require that the alarm companies pay $500.00 with the City for installing burglar alarm systems in the City. V/M Stelzer said this was one of his submitted concerns and if the City Council discussed his concerns, a lot of the questions would be answered. He said there should not be an Appeal allowed for the fourth false alarm because the previous three false alarms were excused. He said if there was a fourth alarm, either the alarm system was not operating appropriately or the owner was not operating the system correctly. Mayor Abramowitz had concerns with the person being found guilty without being heard. He said there should be a sensible way in which the violator could Appeal for a violation which he felt was unjust; however, the violator should be aware that the City incurred costs for Appeals. Page 4 / 10/20/88 Mayor Abramowitz said when a person went to the Court of Appeals, there were fees required which dissuaded frivolous litigations and lawsuits. He said this matter should be addressed in the Ordinance. V/M Stelzer said the false alarms were investigated by the Police Department and most of the violators are asked to report the false alarms to their alarm companies. He said most of the alarm companies neglect to investigate the matters which cause other false alarms. He said the violator was given three chances to have the problem corrected and, if they did not, they should be required to pay the fourth violation fee. He said the alarm companies should be required to give the City a $500.00 deposit and, if the company does not repair the system, the costs should be drawn from their deposit. Mayor Abramowitz had concerns with how long the $500.00 deposit could be held by the City and V/M Stelzer said the deposit could be held as long as the alarm company was installing alarm systems within the City. C/M Rohr said the Ordinance should contain a provision that the installer of an alarm system, resident or company, needed permission from the City for the installation. He said he agreed with V/M Stelzer as to the three violations; however, if the violator appeals and is found in violation, an Appeal Fee should be paid by the violator. C/M Hoffman said the old Ordinance seemed to prevent the residents from purchasing burglar alarm systems rather than purchase them for their protection. He said the proposed Ordinance simplified the process for the residents and made it easier for them to purchase an alarm system. C/M Hoffman said it was the property owner's responsibility to see that the system was operating correctly. He said it may be possible that the fourth alarm could have been caused by lightening; therefore, Acts of God such as lightning should be placed in the proposed Ordinance. He said a violator should have the right to Appeal and, if found in violation, the violator should be required to pay the appropriate costs for that Appeal. City Manager Kelly said he received several complaints from Homeowners Associations regarding the extremely restricted Burglar Alarm Ordinance. He said the complaints were that the Ordinance prevented them from getting a burglar alarm system. City Manager Kelly said an expensive system would not assure complete protection; however, he did not see why an Appeal should be permitted. He said an Administrative Appeal could be made through the Administration as opposed to going before the Code Enforcement Board. He suggested an Appeal Officer be appointed by the City Manager with a witness to hear the Appeals. V/M Stelzer said the Code Enforcement Board had the power to make Appeal decisions and Mayor Abramowitz said the City Manager suggested that the violators be allowed to Appeal in a way that would not cost the City a lot of money. Mayor Abramowitz said he approved of this suggestion. Page 5 f 10/20/88 C/M Hoffman said this was a Workshop meeting for discussion as to what should be placed in the Ordinance. He said there should be an Appeal process and the City Manager's suggestion was acceptable and should be implemented in the Ordinance. C/M Hoffman suggested the City Attorney be directed to make the following changes in the proposed Ordinance: 1) Appoint an Appeal Officer to hear the Appeals 2) Grant relief from Acts of God such as lightning 3) Install systems by Installers licensed by the County. C/M Hoffman said the City should not be involved with the licensing procedure if the County already had a procedure in place. Mayor Abramowitz said he did not want the City Manager to be the Appeals Officer because his services were needed elsewhere and C/M Hoffman said the Ordinance could specify the City Manager or his Designee. City Manager Kelly asked the Department Heads involved to express their concerns to the City Council. C/M Rohr said he would like to see the Ordinance contain a provision for Appeal Fees when the Attorneys are involved. Ray Briant, Fire Chief, said the Ordinance contained provisions for fire alarms and smoke detectors and he asked that these provisions be eliminated because the Fire Department responded to these alarms. He said the Appeals for Acts of God should be in the Ordinance because this type of alarm would not be considered as a false alarm. He said the Police Report should report this type of alarm. TAPE 2 Mayor Abramowitz asked how many false fire alarms occurred each year and Chief Briant said new developments had a lot of false alarms. He said the City had a lot of options as to how to handle and correct the systems. C/M Hoffman said there was a vast difference between a fire alarm and burglar alarm. He said the fire alarm saved lives; however, there has not been an instance where the Police Department caught a perpetrator of a burglar alarm. Mayor Abramowitz said regardless of the type of system, if improvements were needed, they should be made. v/M Stelzer asked how many fire alarm systems were connected to the Fire Department and Chief Briant said he was not aware of the exact amount at this time. v/M Stelzer said most of the fire alarms were bought at stores such as Radio Shack and could be placed on a wall or ceiling. Chief Briant said most of the South Florida homes had these type of systems. He said the majority of the condominiums had to maintain systems hooked into the Fire Department. v/M Stelzer said there were approximately 10,000 homes that were not hooked into the Fire Department. City Manager Kelly asked Police Captain Mortimer to inform the City Council of his concerns. Page 6 ✓ f 10/20/88 C/M Hoffman asked Captain Mortimer if he had an opportunity to review the proposed Ordinance and Captain Mortimer replied, no. C/M Hoffman asked if Captain Mortimer felt there was anything that needed to be addressed in the Ordinance and Captain Mortimer said the old Ordinance contained Sections that were not enforceable. Captain Mortimer said there were problems with the Police Officers having to appear before the Burglar Alarm Committee on violations that occurred several months prior to the meeting. He said it was unfair to call the Police Officers off duty to discuss an event that they may not recollect. He said it was not appropriate to ask the Police Officers to determine the cause of the false alarms. He said when the Police Officers filled out a report of an alarm, the date, time and type of weather was indicated. City Manager Kelly asked Dale Lee, Acting Building Official, to inform the City Council of his concerns. Dale Lee, Acting Building Official, said the first three Items listed in V/M Stelzer's concerns were addressed by the South Florida Building Code. V/M Stelzer had concerns with systems bought at Radio Shack that were only required to be plugged in and Mr. Lee said those systems were like the fire alarms that adhere to the ceilings and walls. Mr. Lee said these type of systems were not causing the false alarms to the Police Station;only the more sophisticated systems were causing the problems. V/M Stelzer said regardless of the type of system, the less sophisticated systems were being purchased. He said the Ordinance indicated that a mechanical, optical, electronical or electrical device designed to detect an unauthorized entry by administrating a signal when activated was considered an alarm. He said this type of equipment was a system regardless of whether it was installed by a professional or the resident. He said the less expensive systems were not covered by the South Florida Building Code. Mr. Lee said the residents were protected if the installations were done properly and legally and V/M Stelzer asked Mr. Lee how the term "legally" was addressed. Mr. Lee said the Ordinance stated that a person installing a burglar alarm system "shall" register the alarm. He suggested "shall" be changed to "may". Mayor Abramowitz said there was no way to monitor what type of system was bought or where it was purchased and V/M Stelzer said there was a law requiring an outside audible system to be licensed. Mayor Abramowitz had concerns with this law being enforced. He said there was no reason to have the provision in the Ordinance if it could not be enforced. He said the City was concerned with the response time needed during a burglar alarm and, if the alarms were false, the Ordinance should address a method to diminish the false alarms. Page 7 10/20/88 Mayor Abramowitz said he did not want to stop the residents from having some type of security; therefore, the registration of a less sophisticated alarm system could not be mandated unless the Police respond to a call because of that type of system. C/M Hoffman said internal systems that do not give an audible sound outside the home should be excluded from the Ordinance. City Manager Kelly suggested the City Council submit their concerns to him or staff so that the Ordinance could be redrafted. Herman Bush, Resident, said he has been in the alarm business for 30 years. He said the County's program did not cover certain burglar alarm installers and he submitted the form required by the County to the City Council. Mr. Bush said there were several types of systems and there were a lot of false alarms in the new developments because electricians installed the alarms as opposed to professionals. He said some equipment sent out electrical signals and some sent out electrical waves. Mr. Bush said the sound alarms should require a permit so that the City could be aware of who carried these alarms. He said he was concerned with the Police and Fire Departments responding to the false alarms and fines should be imposed. He said the installers should be required to check the systems during a false alarm to prevent any employees of the City from risking their lives. He said permits should be given by the City at the time of installation. Mayor Abramowitz asked who besides the electricians should install the systems and Mr. Bush said there were several companies with certified installers to do the work. Vickie Beech, Resident, said if the City began to over regulate the residents would not be able to live in their homes. Mayor Abramowitz said in order for the City to protect the residents, they had to know when, where and what was available. He said the laws would not be obeyed if the City allowed the residents to act on the honor system. He said the City should regulate the matters to where the residents had to come to the City to inform them of things being done. He said this would give the City the opportunity to know who the person was and if the installers were licensed. He said less government was better; however, in order for the City to follow the laws they had to be aware of who was operating in the City. Mrs. Beech had concerns with the laws in the City not being enforced. Carol Houser, Branch Manger of a Savings and Loans Bank, said the banking community has been hit hard with false alarms. She asked if the new Ordinance would address the banking community as well as the homeowners and City Manager Kelly replied, yes. Page 8 ` L 1 1 10/20/88 Ms. Houser said her bank had a sensitive system and there were several things that caused the alarm to sound. C/M Hoffman asked if the bank's alarm company verified the alarm before calling the Police Department and Ms. Houser said most of the alarms were after 5:00 P.M.; therefore, the alarm company called the Police Department immediately. C/M Hoffman suggested a night watchman be on duty at the bank and Mayor Abramowitz said the alarm company could adjust the alarm to make it less sensitive. Mr. Bush said the concern of cost for the burglar alarm should be considered as a life saving device because the system protected the lives of the residents. He said there were pieces of equipment that could be purchased and inserted in the panel of the alarm system for lightning. V/M Stelzer said he reviewed the old and proposed Ordinance and he posed 8 questions which he was not getting answered. Mayor Abramowitz said V/M Stelzer had every right to get those questions answered and suggested that the City Attorney answer these questions in written form. City Manager Kelly said a written answer would be given for each question posed by the City Council. V/M Stelzer asked if another Workshop meeting would be called and Mayor Abramowitz said there were several questions posed by the City Council that he would like answered. Mayor Abramowitz said these questions could be answered in written form to the City Council. At 11:30 A.M., Mayor Abramowitz RECESSED this meeting and RECONVENED at 11:40 A.M. with ALL PRESENT except C/M Bender. TAPE 3 RECYCLING City Manager Kelly said the City received a proposal from Waste Management, Inc., regarding recycling. He said the proposal has been reviewed and he would like authorization to enter into negotiations with Waste Management, Inc., to achieve a final contract. City Manager Kelly said the first matter of concern was that the City does not go into the business of waste pick up. He said the second concern was to enter into negotiations with Waste Management, Inc., to provide services to the single family residences for combined pick up of paper, aluminum and bottles. C/M Rohr said he would like newspapers as a starting item for recycling; however, he would also like bottles, aluminum cans and plastics included as collectibles immediately. He said if the program was started correctly from the beginning there should not be problems in the future. City Manager Kelly said the program would be for multi -material curbside collection from the single family homes. Page 9 J 10/20/88 C/M Rohr said he would like the program to consist of everything the State would require to be collected. Mayor Abramowitz said there were several Workshop meetings on this matter and the City was coming closer to creating a program. He said the City offered to be the Pilot City for the program proposed by Waste Management, Inc.; however, the proposal received had inaccuracies. He said the City Manager wanted to negotiate the proposal further with Waste Management, Inc., and bring a workable, feasible program back to the City Council for approval. He suggested the City Council meet individually with the City Manager and discuss their concerns. C/M Hoffman said he approved of a recycling program for the single family homes; however, a program for the condominiums had to be created. He said there were several things in the proposal that had to be discussed for instance, the 50% tipping fee cost was not acceptable. He said if Waste Management, Inc., did not pick up the total refuse in the City, the City should not pay for the amount that was not picked up. He suggested this matter be discussed during the negotiations and that the City Council be informed individually of the progress of the negotiations. C/M Rohr said he and the representatives of Waste Management, Inc., visited several condominiums and took Pictures of the areas. He suggested that immediately after the recycling program for single family homes was approved, a program for condominiums be established. He said every condominium area was different and it would take a program for each area before the matter could be resolved. Mayor Abramowitz said there has been enough discussions about creating a program and, if the City Manager and staff could not negotiate a contract that would benefit the City, the negotiations should cease with Waste Management, Inc., and the search continue for a program elsewhere. He said the City received several offers from other companies; however, Waste Management, Inc., seemed to be the best company to negotiate with. He said he would like to see a contract from Waste Management, Inc., that would benefit the City. C/M Rohr said as Liaison of the recycling matter, he would like to be involved in the negotiations. Mayor Abramowitz said if the City Manager wanted C/M Rohr present during the negotiations, he would not object; however, he wanted the City Manager and staff to negotiate with Waste Management, Inc. C/M Rohr said he has been attending the Broward County Waste Resource meetings and he had a lot of things that he could input during the negotiations. V/M Stelzer said when the first Workshop meeting took place, he suggested the City get a 10% reduction and Waste Management, Inc., could keep all of the profits. He said he did not realize that the concerns would be as great regarding the money. He said the City should not concern themselves with the 50% tipping fee costs or the condominium program. Page 10 �.. 10/20/88 V/M Stelzer said he proposed that the City collect their own refuse and he investigated several matters. He said the City"could make over $100,000.00 per year if they did their own collection, etc. He said he did not want the City to get into the business; however, if need be, they could. V/M Stelzer said he would like to see a contract with Waste Management, Inc., making them responsible for the collection and paying the City for doing business in Tamarac. He said the recycling program generated a lot of money and there were several companies who wanted the opportunity to have a program in the City. Mayor Abramowitz said he would like the City to be aware of what type of business was being done in the City by Waste Management, Inc. He suggested the City Council authorize the City Manager and staff to negotiate with Waste Management, Inc. Vickie Beech, Resident, said any situation the City was involved in should benefit the residents. She said other Cities with a recycling program have found a great savings and could reduce the rates to the residents. She suggested that the savings in a recycling program for Tamarac go to the residents and not the recycling company. Mayor Abramowitz said there has been a lot of misinformation being generated throughout the City. He said the City has been having a problem implementing a program because of the condominiums. He said he wanted the City to be the beneficiary of the program. Ms. Beech had concerns about the program from Waste Management, Inc., being implemented in other Cities and States without considering a program for condominiums. Mayor Abramowitz said he received information from Minneapolis, Minnesota, who has a successful recycling program. He said the City Council has been trying to accumulate as much information as possible about recycling programs. City Manager Kelly asked that during negotiations, all points of contact with Waste Management, Inc., be done through him. He said he would direct his reports to C/M Rohr as the Liaison who would report to the City Council during his report at the City Council meetings. He said he would meet individually with the City Council to discuss the vital matters. The City Council agreed to this request. Bert Lauhr, Representative of Waste Management, Inc., said he supported the idea of negotiating with the City Manager and staff and this procedure was a step in the right direction. He said one of the matters discussed was why the other States have not implemented a condominium program. Mr. Lauhr said the type of programs in the other States were different than the programs needed in Florida. He said the other States had a deposit program which required the residents to pay a deposit on collectible items at the time of purchase. Page 11 v' 10/20/88 Mayor Abramowitz asked Mr. Lauhr to explain the deposit program and Mr. Lauhr said there were States that enacted and mandated Deposit Legislation and the State of Oregon was the first State to have the program. He said the Program requires a person to place a deposit on a recycling item and return it back to the store it was purchased from for their deposit return. Mr. Lauhr said this type of program was discussed in Florida; however, it was not being considered at this time. He said C/M Hoffman had concerns with the 50% cost for tipping fees. He said the purpose of this provision was a benefit to cover Waste Management, Inc.'s cost and to provide an incentive for Waste Management, Inc., to insure the City that as the hauler they would do their best to get the participation of the residents. Mr. Lauhr said there were other ways that this matter could be structured and it would be discussed during the negotiations. City Manager Kelly said Waste Management, Inc., would be handling all of the complaints and problems with the residents. He said there have been complaints from the residents in Mainlands 1, 2 and 3 regarding someone pulling paper from the garbage and placing them in their trucks. He said the residents were irate that this was being done in front of their homes. Mr. Lauhr said he was not aware that this was occurring because it was not allowed in their rules of procedure and policies. Ms. Beech asked who was going before the garbage trucks in a pickup truck and taking the papers from the garbage and Mr. Lauhr said it seemed to be an individual of the City doing this. Mayor Abramowitz said an organization may be doing this to collect money. He said this matter had to be addressed and possibly stopped before the City implemented a program. He said he would like the City Manager and staff to begin negotiations with Waste Management, Inc., as soon as possible. With no further business, Mayor Abramowitz ADJOURNED this meeting at 12:15 P.M. ACARO A. MNS, CITY CLERK "This public document was promulgated at a cost of $170.40 or $4.73 per copy to inform the general public, public officers and employees of recent opinions and considerations of the City Council of the City of Tamarac." Page 12 L] H CITY OF TAMARAC INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDU14 COUNCIL OFFICES MEMO TO: Richard Doody, City Attorney FROM: Vice Mayor Jack Stelzer DATE: September 7, 1988 SUBJECT: PROpOSEi9 ALARM ORDINANCE I have several questikons: IA'4Zp4f�,tj 1. How is the public protected by bad installation? 2. No licensing of installers - we.have no control. 3. No installation fee or electrical inspection. 4. How do you accomplish entry under 14-62? distribute keys? ok- 5. 14-59: "any" can mean any electric eye or bell activated by a customer entering a store (5th line word "entry" missing). 6. 14-60: Are forms available? Have you any idea how many hundreds or thousands of people have alarms that were not required to register under old Sect. 14--59, last sentence. 7. 14.61 (3). Word missing. 8. 14.61 (4) Can you imagine a person having a heart attack, coordinating to press two buttons at the same time? V M Ja k to zer JS/ss. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER POLICY OIL NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS