HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-04-10 - City Commission Special Meeting Minutes7525 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321-2401
TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTIONS/DISCUSSIONS
SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
There will be a Special Meeting of the City Council on
Monday, April 10, 1989 at 11:00 A.M. in Conference Room #2,
City Hall, 7525 NW 88 Avenue, Tamarac, Florida.
The purpose of the meeting is:
MOTION TO APPROVE awarding bid #89-16 to Man -Con, Inc., in
the negotiated amount of $542,750.00 for the construction of
the Tamarac Sports Complex, Phase 1; and AUTHORIZING transfer
of $17.0,000.00 from the Multi -Purpose Recreation Account
#345--652-572--6DH to Tamarac Sports Complex Account
#345-652- 572-6DG to provide additional funds for this
project.
FINAL ACTION:
APPROVED.
The City Council may consider and act upon such other
business as may come before it.
All meetings are open to the public.
CAE/pm
L
Carol A. Evans
City Clerk
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the city
Council with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or
hearing, he will need a retard of the proceedings and for such
purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includes
Via testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS
CITY OF TAMARAC
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1989
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Abramowitz called this meeting to Order on
Monday, April 10, 1989 at 11:00 A.M. in Conference Room #2 (City
Clerk's Office).
PRESENT:
Mayor Norman Abramowitz
Vice Mayor Dr. H. Larry Bender
Councilman Bruce Hoffman
Councilman Henry Rohr
Councilman Jack Stelzer
ALSO PRESENT:
John P. Kelly, City Manager
Richard Doody, City Attorney
Mike Couzzo, Director of Public Works
Alan Levine, Assistant Public Works
Director
Ken Burroughs, Finance Director
Guy Mancini, President of Man -Con,
Inc.
Patricia Marcurio, Office Manager
City Clerk's Office
MOTION TO APPROVE awarding Bid #89-16 to Man --Con, Inc., in
the negotiated amount of $542,750.00 for the construction of the
Tamarac Sports Complex, Phase 1; and AUTHORIZING transfer of
$170,000.00 from the Multi -Purpose Recreation Account #345-652-
572-6DH to Tamarac Sports Complex Account #345-652-572-6DG to
provide additional funds for this project.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED.
* V/M Bender MOVED to APPROVE this Item, SECONDED by C/M Hoffman.
Mike Couzzo, Director of Public Works, said this was a
negotiated contract with Man -Con, Inc., which was the
lowest bidder on the project. He said the original bid
was $893,325.00 and, after meeting with Man -Con, Inc., on
several occasions to review the project, the new amount
would be $542,750.00.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if the negotiated contract
included all the necessary items that would make the
Sports Complex operational and Mr. Couzzo replied, yes.
Mayor Abramowitz asked when the Complex would be opened
and Mr. Couzzo said the contractor would be able to
answer questions that the City Council may have.
Guy Mancini, President of Man -Con, Inc., said if the sod
adjusted properly, the ballfields could be used the first
week of July, 1989; however, he could not guarantee that
the lighting would be affixed for night games.
C/M Hoffman asked if the Multi -Purpose Complex would be
completed if the State Funds were not granted and Mr.
Couzzo said he discussed this matter with Ken Burroughs,
Finance Director, who indicated that there was a current
Page 1
4/10/8.9
unappropriated balance of approximately $77,000.00. He
said he recommended that these funds be transferred to
the Multi -Purpose Account to make up*the difference of
this transfer.
Mr. Couzzo said there was a contingency of approximately
10% in the transfer for unforeseen matters that may occur
during the project. He said if the funds were not used,
the funds would be transferred back to the Multi -Purpose
Account.
C/M Hoffman said be would like the minimum amount
necessary transferred to the Tamarac Sports Complex
Project. He said if more funds were needed a transfer
could be made in the future.
Mr. Couzzo said there was approximately $18,000.00 being
transferred above the actual cost of the contract.
Mayor Abramowitz suggested that a stipulation be made
that any additional funds needed for the Tamarac Sports
Complex project be approved bylthe City Council.
C/M Hoffman said he would prefer that $153,000.00 be
transferred at this time as opposed to $170,000.00. He
said if there were any additional funds needed it could
be discussed at a later date.
Mr. Couzzo said the matter would come before the City
Council if additional funds we a needed because it would
be a Change Order to the contract.
C/M Hoffman said if the funds were granted by the State,
there would be no problems; however, if the money was not
received, there could be problems.
City Manager Kelly said he agreed with C/M Hoffman's
concerns; however, he said the funds were not being
issued to the Contractor. He said the funds were being
placed into an account for use after City Council
approval. He said it was better to have some funds
available for unforeseen problems in a project as opposed
to asking the City Council for a few dollars to complete
the project. He said the funds' would be held in the
account as reserve for the project.
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not want the City Council to.
be consistently transferring funds for minor projects.
He said as long as the control over the use of the funds
remained in the City Council's discretion, he did not
object to the funds being avail ble.
C/M Rohr asked who would do the!work which was deleted
from the original Bids and Mr. Pouzzo said some of the
work could be done by the Publi Works Department such as
the roads and drainage in the n rthern section. Mr.
Couzzo said if the additional lights were needed, it
would be a budgetary consideration.
C/M Rohr said the costs for materials and labor for work
done by the Public Works Department had to be considered
and Mr. Couzzo said the work was not anticipated to occur
in this Fiscal Year.
C/M Rohr asked if the funds from the State were
designated for this project and C/M Hoffman said the
Page 2
C
1
LJ
4/10/89
funds were being transferred from the Multi -Purpose
account for this project with hope that the State would
replenish the money.
Mayor Abramowitz said the money was not available for
both projects; therefore, negotiations were done with
Man -Con, Inc. He said during the negotiations, the work
which was not needed was deleted from the contract to
allow the project to begin.
C/M Hoffman said he just -wanted to make sure that there
would be enough funds available for the Multi -Purpose
Complex.
Mayor Abramowitz said as long as the City Council had the
ability to make the final decision about the funds, he
did not object to this transfer. He said he did not want
anything done on the project which was not necessary. He
thanked the Contractor for working with staff on this
matter.
Mr. Couzzo said on Thursday, April 13, 1989, the School
Board would be acting on the InterLocal Agreement with
the City. He said when the Agreement was executed, it
would go to the State for the contract and he was assured
by the State that the funds would be available in
approximately 4 weeks.
Mayor Abramowitz said the Agreement between the School
Board and the City was delaying the funds from the State.
He said the State agreed that when the Agreement was
submitted, the funds would be available for the
Multi -Purpose Complex.
C/M Hoffman said he did not object to this transfer
providing the City Council was comfortable.
C/M Stelzer asked if the drainage into the canal would be
sufficient and Mr. Couzzo said the southern portion would
be drained and the northern portion would drain into the
rocked areas because there would be no pavement.
C/M Stelzer asked if there would be funds needed for the
drainage in the future and Mr. Couzzo said when the areas
were paved to comply with the City Codes, a positive
drainage system would be installed.
C/M.Stelzer asked why the ballfields were being deleted
and Mr. Couzzo said the ballfields would be done by In-house
staff.
C/M Stelzer asked if the pavement deleted would be done
eventually and Mr. Couzzo replied, yes.
C/M Stelzer said there has been controversy in the past
about constructing projects in stages and Mr. Couzzo said
this project would not be Phased. C/M Stelzer said the
ballfields and concrete were deleted and he asked what
the purpose was for building the Complex if the
ballfields would not be included.
Mr. Couzzo said the ballfields consisted of clay which
would be constructed by the Public Works Department. He
said the paving was anticipated to be done In-house as
well.
C/M Stelzer said he was concerned with the entire cost of
the project. He said he did not object to building the
Page 3
4/10/89
ballfields; however, the law should be complied with. He
said there were problems with the Recreation Building at
Tamarac Park because it was done in phases. He said the
entire cost had to be known and 2-1/2% of the budget
pertained to the General Budget.
C/M Stelzer said the entire project was anticipated to be
approximately $893,000.00 and Mr. Couzzo said the entire
project would cost more than this.
C/M Stelzer said this matter should be placed on
Referendum. He said this type lof matter was a problem in
the past.
City Attorney Doody said this matter was reviewed prior
to the meeting. He said the Minutes of the Charter Board
discussion amending the Charter to provide for 2-1/2% of
the "then current Budget", consisted of a lot of
discussion as to whether or not the percent should be of
the General Fund or the entire Funds. He said one of the
concerns of the Charter Board was limiting 2-1/2% to the
General Fund which would allow impact fees to be used in
any amount without going to Referendum. He said the
Charter Board wanted to cover a 1 of the Budget Funds
within the Charter provision.
City Attorney Doody said when tte City Council considered
this matter, a Motion was made o amend the Charter
Amendment to 2-1/2% of the General Fund. He said the
Charter Board over -rode the City Council's request on the
basis that impact fees could beispent without a
Referendum. He said the best interpretation of the
Minutes seemed to be that the intent was to encompass all
of the funds. He said if therelwas a continuous problem
then a specific provision may be needed in the Charter to
clarify the problem.
City Attorney Doody said he would submit a copy of the
Minutes to the City Council. He said the discussion went
back and forth; however, he interpreted from the Minutes
that the entire Budget would belconsidered.
C/M Hoffman said when the original Bid was advertised, a
Referendum did not take place. He said the City Council
rejected the Bids because they were too high. He said
the City must have been taking the appropriate steps in
going out to Bid on the project. He said the General
Fund was approximately 15 million dollars; therefore, the
maximum to Bid without Referendum was $375,000.00.
City Attorney Doody said there was a history of
controversy which could be clarified by amending the
Charter. He said the Minutes indicated that the issue
was an Amendment limited to the General Fund but was
overruled by the Charter Board. He said the Resolution
adopted to place the Amendment on the Ballot at the City
Council's request was over -ruled by the Charter Board.
C/M Hoffman asked what the residents voted on and C/M
Stelzer said the residents voted'on 2-1/2% of the General
Fund. City Manager Kelly disagreed.
C/M Stelzer said when the Tamarac Park Recreation
Building was constructed, it was limited to $250,000.00.
He said the City Council always agreed that 2-1/2% would
be of the General Fund. He said the past purchases were
always based on 2-1/2% of the General Fund. He said he
Page
1
1
4/10/89
did not know if the Charter Board had the right to
over -rule the City Council's decision because the City
Council was the governing body of the City.
C/M Stelzer said he approved of this project; however, he
felt that the matter had to be taken to Referendum.
City Manager Kelly said when this issue was brought to
him, he thought that the project would have to be placed
on Referendum. He said Mr. Couzzo researched this matter
and presented the information referred to by the City
Attorney. He said the Amendment approved by the voters
did not indicate "General Fund" but stated "the Budget".
He said the actions by the Charter Board over -ruled the
City Council's request to 2-1/2% being of the General
Fund and the Ballot item encompassed the entire Budget.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if the Charter indicated in fact
how the problem should be addressed.
City Attorney Doody said this item was brought to him
late last week and one of the rules in constructing the
Charter was trying to determine the legislative intent of
the body which enacted it. He said to answer this
question, he reviewed the Minutes and the Minutes
reflected the Chairman stating before the vote, "Okay, if
we do not accept the suggestion of the City Council, it
was going to include all of the funds."
City Attorney Doody said the rationale behind the matter
was that the Charter Board was concerned about spending
impact fees without a Referendum. He said a conservative
interpretation of the Minutes indicated that the Charter
Board wanted to include the entire Budget. He said this
was his opinion; however, the City Council had to make
the determination. He suggested that the matter be
addressed in the Charter if there was a continuous
controversy.
City Attorney Doody said the legislative intent of the
Charter would uphold the course of action taken by the
City Council should they agree with his interpretation.
C/M Rohr said he relied on the City Attorney and City
Manager's expertise; therefore, this matter should be
approved.
V/M Bender said the original price was reduced and he
considered the negotiated contract a completed project.
He said the things being eliminated were not necessary
for the project; however, the items could be added as
improvements in the future.
City Manager Kelly said this project was considered as
piece -meal and the aggregate had to be considered. He
said the entire project would cost well over 1 million
dollars.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if there was a City Code requiring
that the parking lot had to be paved and Mr. Couzzo said
on the overall plan, the parking lot was paved.
C/M Stelzer said if the pavement was not done, it would
be a violation to the Code. He said he was for the
project; however, he wanted it done legally.
Page 5
4/10/89
Mayor Abramowitz said this matter should have been
addressed years ago and C/M Stelzer said this was
addressed in a positive manner.i C/M Stelzer said a
definite decision was made by t e City Council that
2-1/2% would always be calculat d on the General Fund.
Mayor Abramowitz asked if this matter was in the Charter
and C/M Stelzer asked if the Charter indicated the entire
fund. Mayor Abramowitz said the Charter addressed this
item in an ambiguous manner.
C/M Stelzer said the Charter only indicated "of the then
current Budget". He said the Budget was the City Budget
not the Utilities Budget. He said Melanie Reynolds,
Resident, referred to this problem several years ago
which was always a concern of the City Council.
City Attorney Doody said one of the people who voted for
the Amendment was Mrs. Reynolds, He said the Amendment
was to strike the language "General Fund". He said he
was only bringing his opinion to the City Council.
Mayor Abramowitz asked the City Manager and City Attorney
to take the necessary steps to correct this matter. He
said he did not want to do anything that was in violation
of the law; however, the City Attorney informed the City
Council of his opinion. He said he understood that the
Charter could be interpreted either way; however, he
would like to see the matter specifically stating the
law.
C/M Hoffman said based on the opinion from the City
Attorney, he approved of this Item.
VOTE: Mayor ',Abramowitz
- Aye
V/M Bender
- Aye
C/M Hoffman
- Aye
C/M Rbhr
- Aye
C/M Stelzer
- Nay
Mayor Abramowitz said he would like this matter to be
addressed in a manner that could be followed
consistently. He asked that the matter be addressed in
the near future.
City Attorney Doody asked if the City Council wanted his
office to begin reviewing the 1 nguage in the Charter and
Mayor Abramowitz asked the City Council to express their
interest in addressing this matter.
C/M Rohr suggested that the City Attorney seek further
legal advise regarding this mat er and City Attorney
Doody said the Attorney General would not assist the City
with the Charter.
C/M Hoffman said there were so many things in the Charter
that had to be reviewed. He said this matter should be
addressed during a complete review of Charter. He said
the residents should be presented with a complete amended
Charter as opposed to piece by piece.
r V/M Bender said a list of the poblems would have to be
created for whoever will be rev ewing the Charter so that
the problems were not overlooks . He said the City
Attorney should be responsible for listing the problems
in the Charter.
Page '6
1
C
1
4/10/89
City Attorney Doody
asked if the City Council wanted the
changed and Mayor Abramowitz awarehofcthed no
languaanswergthis matter because he wa
ramifications. specific
act fees collected for a
C/M Hoffman said imp the purpose without a
PI should be used for there should be no
He said if fees were collected from the
Referendum, purposes,
developers for retheamoney far recreational purposes*
Referendum to spendto see if it
should be reviewed He said other
C/M Hoffman said 2- ure$in today's economY- to see what
was a realistic fig
Cities of comparable size should be reviewe
they were doing. Council was
ht that the City ate the legality
C/M Rohr said he thought
to investi9 of
the City said the purpose
instructing Mayor Abramowitz with Man -Con.
of the matter and Y rove the contract
the meeting was to approve
Complex project.
Inc., for the Tamarac Sports
regarding the
there was a question onthe legal
Mayor Abramowitz said however, based on pp rove
matter going to Ref erendum,
interpretation of the City a
Attorney, he voted to
the Item. about
he was tired of hearing
addressed by the City
Mayor Abramowitz said he did not run for
matters that should haveliesaid
rd
Council several years ag
matters because there
made office for the easy be made and the
decisions that had to make these decisions.
the City officials to in with
not see a Problem staying
C/M Rohr said he Budget approximately
AO million dollars.
2-1/2% for a hould be implemented
Mayor Abramowitz said the language sthere was no law
in laws and, at this time,
n the C1tythis.
it►sii.,rating following this
has been Attorney to
C/M a5_tlzer said the City where this matter was
r2 for 12 years and he asked the City
proce.� Council Minutes
review L City there were levee rulingehas always
disc 1s d. He said that time and the et was exceeded►
questions posed at of the General Budget
been that if 2-1/2%
the matter had to go to Referendum. in
this matter was not stated
Mayor Abramowitz
asked why said the Charter indicated
the Charter and C/M Stelzer M Stelzer said the City
G/ Budget
2-1/2$ of the then Sudget•the General Fund
Council always considered
and apart from the Utilities Budget*
separatewas the City's bible
itz said the Char
Mayor Abramowter
ific.
and it should be spec
Council adhered to the Charter
C/M Stelzer said the C1said the City Council always
He the General Fund Budget to
as an interpretation. He
agreed that 2-l/2% Was °fSth Attachment)
limit the expenditures.
could
r asked haw much auld
dd1aiMral COzzoe saidehe� project.
C/M Stelzer this Complex an on the
be required for
not determine the exact maintenance cos
page 7
4/10/89
Mr. Couzzo said the only ballfields and C malnt nance would
the use of the ballfielder asked if be for the
Mr.; Courtoe City charged for
City Attorney ; replied, no,
matter i Y Doody said the
n the past and the Ci "tY Council discussed this
Put in the language "General Fund °Until made was sent to the a Motion to
denied this t Charter Board ar�d the He said the request
quest. Charter Board
C/M Stelzer said for
12 Years the
Referendum on an Cit
Y Project above Y Council required a
Fund Budget.
the 2-1/2% Of the General
Mayor Abramowitz said for 12
remiss in making sure Years the City
specified. that the laws Y Council was
political a He said he resented the of the City
expediency CityY were
x Y for as long being
as it has b g run in
C/M Stelzer said he a been.
did not agree with approved of the
Referendum. the project being
however, he
g approved without a
C/M Rohr said d hea di
not interested d not feel that the residents who
City should vote on them. Projects which would benefit the
C/M Hoffman said if there
be corrected; was somethin
Years did not however, because something wrong n should
Charter Justify it as the law, g was done for 12
was specific it He said if the
specified: however, based would be followed as i
the project should on the t was
continue. City Attorneys opinion,
With no further business
► Mayor Abramowitz ADJOURNED this
meeting at 11:50 A.M�
CARQ A. EVANS, CITY
CLERK
"This Public document was COPY to inform the generalPromulgated at a cost of
recent opinions and considerations rations of bthe Cificers and empor loyees
3 per
Tamarac. mPloyees of
Y Council of the City of
CITY OF TAM"AC
APPROVED AT MEETING OF �`� /v g9
City Clerk
Page 8
1
Charter hoard Meeting
December 27. 1983
Page 7
Mr. Stein asked that someone first make a Motion so that they can have a
discussion on this amendment. Ile explained that they have a Motion to
put this amendment on the ballot, and then they can discuss it, defeat it.
amend it, etc.
Ray Munitz, resident of Tamarac, suggested that they first address whether
or not they want -to accept the change in the language and then vote on the
amendment.
Mr. Stein replied that the change in the language is to the present and not
to their amendment. Mr. Munitz interjected to say again they should first
consider the change the Council wants. Mr. Stein explained that they first
should have the amendment in front of them and then div�bssubmltLednbys
He said they will first talk about the amendment as i
te changes. Sy
the Board to the Council, and then they will addressedhamendment. whichStein
entertained a Motion that they put the Eighth p p
provides for reduction from 2;2% to V1% of the city's annual budget. etc.
amending section 7.13 on the ballot for referendum at the March 13th election.
Melanie Reynolds: I so Move.
Alice Norian: Second
Mr. Stein ;aid that they now can have a discu-1011-
Mrs. Reynoldssaid %he would like to know exactly what are they talking about.
Mr. Stein explained that the City Council suggested an amendment which would
discuss 1122 only if it affected the City's general fund. He said.for
opurpose,
clarification, if there are special funds set aside for a particular
then the 1'1 would not affect that amount.
Mr. Henning commented that there are two concepts in this amendment. First,
he said all the funds in the City treasury are the people's funds.
which he
believes they all agree on. Mr. Stein interjected to say that he disagrees
with Mr. Henning* in that everyone understands. He said most people do not
understand, and have an attitude that if the builder put the money there
that it is not the City's funds. Jon Henning said the one concept is do
they consider all the money in the treasury the people's funds, and they
should be regulated whether or not they contributed them or whether ornot
they were contributed by other people. He said. if that's theocase,uncil says
the proposal is not applicable. Mr. Henning
statedthey could have the same control over those fundsenerathat affect
bthe
taxes.
allit
He explained that if it is not in the City g
is not tax money. Also, he said, the City could not have financing bs
ing stated that if they need
bonds without a referendum. Mr. Hennoingfto.
financing
to
referendum is still required. He said that C/M Stelzer is g
propose a refernedum that was tabled by the Charter Board regarding the
bonds without referendum. Mr. Henning said that as the amendment now reads,
if they have to send out bonds, the city gets the referendum. said,
the question is, if there is no impact on the money that the taxpayer paid.
do they still need a referendum.
Mr. Avidon said to Jon Henning that 1n Section 7.13 in the Charter it
is now 242 and $75,000, but there is no mention of general funds. He said
d
Charter Board Meeting
December P , 1983
Page 8
this refers to any money the City has. Mrs. Reynolds interjected to say
that it states, "current budget." She said the currentAudget does not
take into account funds such as parks and recreation, pension. etc.
Mrs. Reynolds said the current budget is general fund. 'Mr. Avidon agreed
with Mrs. Reynolds' statement.
Ray Munitz, resident of Tamar:u , said he w"uld like to Amk Mr. Henning a
question. He said at one point Mr. Henning was asked to render a legal
opinion as to whether or not a referendum is necessary to expend funds
that have been earmarked if it going to be used for the', noted purpose.
Mr. Henning replied that he has not issued an opinion yet. He said
this is why the added language came up, because in his grind there is
a question mark after the word "cost".
Mr. Stein replied that Mr. Henning had three different ways to do this.
He said, one would be to the general fund, one to any project, and the
third one he didn't recall at the moment. `:r. Henning interjected, it
could be anything else the Council could think of. Syd Stein stated that
there are various ways of putting; the 1'1 in. He said the Council was
not happy with the Inn, but would go along with it if it only affects
the general funds.
Mrs. Reynolds stated that since all the moneys in City Hall are public
fun s, t en t ap*liea all moneys in CItl-liall. Sbesak that win
they talk of the money for parks and recreation as being given by the
developers, this has two prongs to it, hecause the people from whom the
developers kept the percentage of open spare that they were supposed to
have, are the ones who have really contributed. Mrs Reynolds
said a few years ago they had the argument about drainage. She said
they circumvented the Charter by dividing the drainage into two to three
parts. Mrs. Reynolds said that Mrs. Massarr stated before the Charter Board
that they were trust funds. She said this isn't so. b cause those funds
were taken from the public works and put into the drat age account.
Mrs. Reynolds stated that whether or not they were in trust or in escrow,
they were still public funds. She believes the money _hould be used as
public funds, and not only general fund.
Mr. Stein stated for clarification that Mr. Hennaing ha_ suggested that we
add the words, "involving the cost to any o:u ;rotect.' Mr. Henning interject
to say that he doesn't believe the Board tan that right at this point to make
any other changes. He said that the Council has given the Board an alternati%
to consider. He stated they only have the tw- considerations. either to
have the amendment read as submitted by ton or as are ded by the Council.
Mr. Stein said that it is Melanie Reynolds' opinion th t they go with their
original proposal, which means that all funds would -c a under the lit.
Mr. Stein said, however, that there right he a serious battle. because
Mr. Henning has not given his interpretation: ar.: CA Stelzer has a different
attitude, 0-4 Stelzer's belief is, Mr. Stvir said, that money_ set aside for
parks and recreation can he expended in spitr of this.
Miss Norian commented that this issue has been a long one on the part of the
silent majority. because they feel the Council has circumvented their wishes
for expenditure of their money without referendum... She said the people
want a limit to the extent of spending of large sums of money. Miss Norian
said this money is not spent immediately, and therefore there can be time
1
Iq TT /tea �n�c
1/1 o49/ ?�/6, 7
T
Charter board office
December :7, 1983 #
Page 9 i
for
a referendum.
t
Mr.
Henning replied he doesn't understand
which large expenditures she
is
referring to, and also he was under the
3-pressirn that City taxes
had
gone down to tilt- last vear or two.
Miss Norfan explained that dollar -wise the taxes have net gone down.
She said the rates have gone dowrn, but the assessments have gone up.
Miss \orian said that the people are aghast at the spending by ordinance
to the full limit of the 2�'.. She said it is or, the record, that the
reason they proposed that building at the park recently teas in anticipation
of this amendment. Miss Norian stated that the% know what the people's
reaction will he and therefore decided to put t'.at 'wilding up now and
spend the S:20,t)00 for it.
Mr. Avidon asked if anyone knew what the total hudgvt was when the
Charter was amended in 1976, Mr. Munitl replies'. that it was 4.6 Million.
Mr. Avidon said tilt' hrsdp.et will prow as the ,•itv keeps growing. He feels
this amendment will put a limit to the spending without the consent of the
people, which the hublir had voiced they wanted at tilt, meetings held by
the Charter Heard.
Mr. Stein said to Mr. Henning that the Charter Board will be approving all
of the Charter acendments together with the Council, except this one.
He said that tilt, Hoard withdrew one a moment ago. Svd Stein stated that
he has never seen %o much input by the public as to this particular
amendment. He said that both sides will have the opportunity to voice
their feelings to the public, including the Citv Manager and Steve good,
as to the problems that could happen, and the other side can discuss the
financial responsibility. He said that then the voters can make their
tie(, ision. Mr. Stein ~toted thou are saying the Charter Board is: proposing
the 1Y- No said the Hoard is proposing nothing, and it is the people of
Tamarac who have requested tilts he put on the ballot.
Mrs. keynoldss asked Mr. Godin for his opinion. Jim Godin said that the
people should get what they are asking for, and that is a control over
the money in City Hall,
Mr. Munitz, resident of Tamarac, again asked whether or not a
referendum is necessary to expend moneys that have been earmarked as long
as it is being spent for the earmarked purpose. Mr. Henning replied that
he has not yet issued an opinion on that, but there is a good chance it
will be necessary. Mr. Munitz then asked what the relationship is between
that and this amendment. He said that if funds are there and are earmarked.
then no referendum is necessary. If that is their opinion, he said. then this
particular amendment will have no affect on the spending of that money.
Mrs. Reynolds stated that they went back to the history of the fire station
on that. Mr. Henning replied that he understands the fire station was grant
money. He said the question comes up is this lax or 2'% a benchmark. Is
it just a measure? Mr. Henning said the people are saying that if the
Council is going to spend 'Y' amount of dollars for this large project,
the public should have referendum. On the other hand, he said, does it
mean these many dollars are coming out of the tax dollars, and the people
want a voice in it. Mr. Henning stated that if they took the benchmark
Charter Board Meeting
December 27, 1983
Page 10
theory, then any project of that size should be put to the people's vote.
He said if they just took the pocketbook theory. where before they lose
those dollars out of their own pocketbook, then that is the general fund
�
idea.
1 �
Mr. Stein stated that if the Beard passes this amendment by not accepting
the pe—neral funl prnpns t on of the Council_ it wil he noted thAt rhov
MLW 60,waug ,.ovuc a-kL it runas, earmarked or otherwise. He said they
accept this amendment as submitted by the Charter 16M. or
as amen e y t e Council.
Mrs. Reynolds commented that since they have some time, It would be wise
to ask the Attornev General for an opinion.
Mr. Stein replied that he doesn't think it has anything to do with getting
an opinion from the Attorney General at this time.
Mrs. Reynolds stated that when they get funds that are earmarked. such as
the one for the fire station, they did not linve a referendum. She wanted
to know if they now can spend only grant money for a specific project, is
it neceresary to have a referendum.
Mr. Stein replied that he agreed with Mrs. Reynolds. however, at this
moment this amendment will reduce the 24, to 112;. He said then could
ask for the Attornev General and the City Attorney's opinions. but that
would have to be done afterwards, because they can't change anything now.
Alice tiorian said that the amendment now reads, "no capital facility or
improvements or contract for acquisitions or construction of such facility
or improvements involving a cost in excess of 1Y.' of the then current budget,"
She said it very clearly states involving a cost; anything. Miss tiorian
stated that the 1�" is a measure.
Mr. Stein commented that he finds the amendment very clear. He said it
states anv project; no capital facility or improvements. Again, Syd Stein
said the Board can only accept the Council's amendment or the proposed
Charter amendment as originally submitted. He said there has been a Motion
and it was Seconded and discussion w;js had on this amendment, and he
asked for a roll call on the vote.
i VOTE ALL VOTED Ay
Mr. Stein said that they have one mote amendment, which is the Twelvth
amendment. He said that this amendment was agreed upon in principal to
defeat. This refers to Section 8.02(c), where it currently states "the
board may participate with the manapor and assigned officials in preparation
and review of the budget." The board wanted it to read "shall" instead of
"may", however the Council decided that it should stay as "may" Mr. Stein
explained that Subsections "do' and "e" were put through on the Third proposed
amendment and were passed by the Council. which changes the word "mav" to
"shall". What Mr. Henning did was t" divide the amendment. He listed
Section 8.02 (d) and (e) in the Third proposed amendment, which the Council
passed, and Section 8.02(c) Is now the Twelvth amendment. which was defeated
by the Council, and Is now given back to the Charter Board for their decisions.
LJ
1
1