HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-06-04 - City Commission Special Meeting Minutes■
MAIL REPLY TO:
P.O. BOX 25010
TAMARAC. FLORIDA 33320
5811 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE 0 TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321
TELEPHONE (305) 722-5900
May 20, 1986
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING r;
CITY COUNCIL
TAMARAC, FLORIDA
Please be advised that the City Council of Tamarac will hold
a Special Meeting on Tuesday, June 3, 1986, at 10:00 A.M. in
the Council Chambers of City Hall, 5811 N.W. 88th Avenue,
Tamarac, Florida.
The following public hearings will be held:
1. General Fund Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1259 - Discussion and
Possible Ac ion F—oamend Ehe General Budget from an amount
of $10,037,999.00 to an amount not to exceed $10,489,669.00
for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 1985. Second
Reading.
2. Tamarac Utility West Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1260 - Dis-
cussion and Possible Action to amend the annual budget
from an amount of $ 28,023,710.00 to an amount not to
exceed $ 26,699,243.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning
October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
3. Tamarac Utility East Fund Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1261
Discussion and PosslibTe Action to amend the budget rrom
an amount of $ 752,185.00 to an amount not to exceed
$ 585,320.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1985.
Second Reading.
4. Special Funds Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1262 - Discussion and
Possible Action E—oamend the following Special Funds for
the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
a) Parks and Recreation Department Fund - from an amount of
$ 134,000 to an amount not to exceed $ 93,992.00
b) Tamarac Wildlife Preserve Fund - from an amount of
-0- to an amount not to exceed $ 9,200.00
c) Sidewalk Project Fund - from an amount of $ 3,600.00 to
an amount not to exceed $ 36,000.00
d) Street Resurfacing Fund - from an amount of $ 113,000.00
to an amount not to exceed $ 113,500.00
e) Capital Reserve Fund - from an amount of $ 350,740.00
to an amount not to exceed $ 404,420.00
f) Pension Fund - from an amount of -0- to an amount not to
exceed $ 38,000.00
g) First Aid Claims Fund - from an amount of $ 1,500.00 to
an amount not to exceed $ 5,000.00
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS
May 20, 1986
Page 2
5. Annual Federal Revenue Sharing Fund Budget - Temp.
Ord. # 1264 - Discussion and Possible Action to amend the
budget from an amount of $ 300,000.00 to an amount not to
exceed $ 250,000.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning
October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
The City Council may consider and act upon such other business
as may come before it.
The public is invited to attend.
Marilyn Bertholf
City Clerk V -
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes
If a "^ de,id�s to appeal any decision made by the city
Cour,.:.; - - ;r^titter considered at such meeting or
hearing, i«c iii r:.;.si :, the Proceedings and for such
purpose, he may i; ;.;:i i.a :� verbatim record includes
the testimony and evidence upon wmcrt the appeal is to be based.
PUr u3tit to Se r tion 286-0,105, 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 record of the proceedings and for such
Purpose, he may need to ensure that a verbatim record includes
the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
Ll
!7
r�,y
�` 9A
u n
OR10P
P.O. BOX 25010
TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320
RECORD OF COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS
REVISED AGENDA MAY 22. 1986
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
TAMARAC, FLORIDA
Please be advised that the City Council of Tamarac will hold
a Special Meeting on Wednesday, June 4, 1986, at 10:00 A.M.
in the West Conference Room at City Hall, 5811 N.W. 88th
Avenue, Tamarac, Florida.
The following public hearings will be held:
1. General Fund Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1259 - Discussion and
Possible Action to amend the General Budget from an amount
of $10,037,999.00 to an amount not to exceed $10,489,669.00
for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 1985. Second
Reading.
FINAL ACTION: ordinance 86-28 Approved
ADOPTED on-Saecond Reading,
2. Tamarac Utility West Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1260 -- Dis-
cussion and Possible Action to amend the annual budget
from an amount of $ 28,023,710.00 to an amount not to
exceed $ 26,699,243.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning
October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
FI CTION: Ordinance 86-29 Approved
ADOPTED on Second Reading with amendments by the City Attorney.
Page 1, Line 21, change from "$ 26,699,243.00" change to
26,711,243.0011
3. Tamarac Utility East Fund Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1261 -
Discussion and Possible Action to amend the budget from
an amount of $ 752,185.00 to an amount not to exceed
$ 585,320.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1985.
Second Reading.
FINAL ACTION: Ordinance 86-30 Approved
ADOPTED on acond Reading.
4. Special Funds Budget - Temp. Ord. # 1262 - Discussion and
Possible Action to amend the following Special Funds for
the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
a) Parks and Recreation Department Fund - from an amount of
$ 134,000 to an amount not to exceed $ 93,992.00
b) Tamarac Wildlife Preserve Fund - from an amount of
-0- to an amount not to exceed $ 9,200.00
c) Sidewalk Project Fund - from an amount of $ 3,600.00 to
an amount not to exceed $ 36,000.00
d) Street Resurfacing Fund - from an amount of $ 113,000.00
to an amount not to exceed $ 113,500.00
ac
e) Capital Reserve Fund - from an amount of $ 350,740.00
to an amount not to exceed $ 404,420.00
f) Pension Fund -- from an amount of -0- to an amount not to
exceed $ 38,000.00
g) First Aid Claims Fund - from an amount of $ 1,500.00 to
an amount not to exceed $ 5,000.00
FINAL ACTION: Ordinance 86-31 Approved
ADOPTED with amendments on Second Reading.
4 b) Add to title and Columns, "$ 9,200.00 transferred to
General Funds".
4 c) Add to title and Columns, "Transferred entire amount of
fund to General Funds".
5. Annual Federal Revenue Sharing Fund Budget - Temp.
Ord. # 1264 - Discussion and Possible Action to amend the
budget from an amount of $ 300,000.00 to an amount not to
exceed $ 250,000.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning
October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
FINAL ACTION: Ordinance 86-32 Approved
ADOPTED on Second Readins.
End of Public Hearing.
6. ECM PROPOSAL - Discussion and possible action on proposed
settlement offered by Grant Thorton. Temp, Reso, #4155,
FINAL ACTION: Resolution 86-193Approved
AGENDIZED by consent.
APPROVED to accept with amendments by the City Attorney to add
"Providing an effective date" to title, for proposed settle-
rs red by Grant Thorton for estimated- 3 500,000.00
7. SYMPHQNY P P ORCHESTRA - Discussion with information for
the Public and Council.
FINAL ACTION •
AGENDIZED by consent.
ITEM will ut on 6 11 agenda,
The City Council may consider and act upon such other business
as may come before it.
The public is invited to attend.
Marilyn Bertholf
City Clerk
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes
If a Person decides to appeal any decision made by the city
Council v,,ah re..spcLi to an,, matter ror:sidered at such meeting or
hearing, he will need a record f rs and for such
ourpa e he may r:p�,f t,j r, sur • i^s
the testimony and evidence aeon whico the apPieal is to be based.
-2-
I-
0Tq
V
n
'c4'ORIDP
P.O. BOX 25010
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33320
JUNE 4, 1986
TAPE 1 CALL TQORDER: Mayor Hart called the meeting to order
at 10:10 a.m. on Wednesday, June 4, 1986 in the Council
Chambers of City Hall.
lo ROLL CALF: PRESENT:
Mayor Bernard Hart
Vice Mayor Sydney M. Stein
Councilman Jack Stelzer
Councilman Arthur Gottesman
Councilwoman Helen Massaro
ALS PRESENT:
Larry Perretti, City Manager
Richard Rednor, Assistant
Consulting City Attorney
Pauline Walaszek, Secretary
MEDITATIO AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Hart called for a
Moment of Silent Meditation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
6. FSM,, PROPOSAL: Discussion and possible action on
proposed settlement offered by Grant Thorton. TEMP.
RES #4155
SYNOP[S-0!, ACTION: AGENDIZED by consent.
Approved to accept with amendments by the
City Attorney to add "Providing an effective
date" to title, for proposed settlement
offered by Grant Thorton for estimated
$ 3,500,000.00.
C/M Stelzer MOVED to agendize by consent the ESM Proposal
for discussions.
SECONDED by C/W Massaro.
OTE: ALL VOTED AYE
Mayor Hart called Morris Brown, Representative of
Morgan, Lewis and Bockius to speak.
Morris Brown explained the ESM litigation to the Council
and public. He said that Tamarac was entitled to
receive 22 cents on the dollar for the 7 million dollar
loss and that since then independently a prosecution of
action has been done against the Alexander Grant
Partnership, which was the auditing firm for ESM. A
trial of the action along with the actions brought by
another 16 municipalities was set for mid -October during
that same time, the teams of lawyers representing the
other plaintiffs as well as Tamarac have been involved
with serious settlement negotiations for the Grant
interests. He said that proposals and counter -proposals
have been discussed and late last week a proposal of
settlement has been made which consoles for all of the
public body creditors felt that they could strongly
recommend to each of the respective clients. The dollar
effect of the proposal would be to return to Tamarac an
additional 48 cents on the dollar giving a total
recovery, once the settlement is effective, approxi-
mately, 70 cents on the dollar as well as the
-l-
6/4/86
/pw
possibility of further recovery from the bankrupt estate
and from other defendants. He said that in return for
payment to the City of Tamarac of 48 cents on the dollar
the settlement proposes that Tamarac release the Grant
partnership and each of the Grant partners from any
further claim also that the City of Tamarac as well as
other public creditors agree not to collect indirectly
from Grant and the Grant Partners what they have agreed
not to collect directly, in other words if Tamarac
should recover against Bradford or any other potential
defendants in actions the entity recover over against
Grant passed through the liability toward Grant then it
is agreed not to collect the amounts that Grant had to
pay to that entity and Mr. Tew has pending prorata or
reduce his claims against Grant to give effect to the
receipt by Tamarac and the other public creditors of the
amount of settlement from Grant. He said that the
reason he so strongly recommend the settlement is be-
cause of timing as much as anything else. He said that
the economics of producing this recovery for the Cities
at this point rather than taking the chance on what a
jury may do at trial and in any litigation a chance of
losing as well as winning and avoiding the long process
will follow the verdict even if the verdict is in favor
of Tamarac and the other creditors combined with the
amount of legal expenses that will be incurred in
connection with the continued prosecution of this
action. He said that it is the best interest of the
City to accept this offer. He also pointed out that the
terms of the offer of settlement are such that all of
the public creditors, the 17 municipalities, will have
to agree to the settlement in order for it to be
effective. He said that he does not know what other
Cities will vote because the City of Tamarac is the
first City to vote on the settlement.
C/W Massaro questioned Morris Brown as to the claim with
the recovery. She asked if Bradford had a claim against
Grant.
Morris Brown replied yes and he added that the issue is
not Bradford having a claim against Grant, the issue is
if that claim would be sustained and the feeling at this
point is that it would not be sustained. He said that
the law is not completely clear nor have the facts all
been developed in the context of that claim against
Grant the best legal judgement is that the claim against
Grant would fail and the Resolution of that issue is
probably a year and a half to two years away. He said
that Bradford is out of business and has a pool of money
which has yet not been determined, which may be avail-
able to satisfy the claims of various creditors. He
said that the anticipation of Bradford's action will
become confused the next 6 to 8 months.
C/W Massaro stated that the possibility of recovering
from Bradford are not that good.
41
Morris Brown said that he is pessimistic of the possi-
bility of a substantial recovery against Bradford
because the assets of Bradford may be inadequate to
satisfy the claims of all of the creditors who will be 4A
emerging from the woodwork now that Bradford ceased
operations.
-2_
6/4/86
/Pw
C/W Massaro asked if the City of Tamarac were to move to
accept the settlement what would happen to the Bradford
case that is pending.
Morris Brown replied that the case continues. He said
that he would like to report to Council indepth on where
the standing is on the Bradford litigation rather than
trying to make a judgement on the basis of inadequate
facts.
C/W Massaro questioned Morris Brown as to his firms
judgement that Bradford's case against Grant is not
good.
Morris Brown answered that as it stands now, Bradford
would prevail against Grant in such a way as to trigger
the indemnification provisions of the agreement. He
said that he would recommend to the City and Council
that they take the money now rather than worry about the
recovery against Bradford.
C/W Massaro asked what Morris Brown was talking about
when he mentioned the case with Mr. Tew.
Morris Brown replied that Mr. Tew had an action pending
against Grant that is on behalf of all of the creditors.
C/W Massaro queried about the effect that had on the 48
cents on the dollar if he is successful and does it have
any effect on the 22 cents on the dollar.
Morris Brown said that it has no effect on the 22 cents
on the dollar, however, the 48 cents on the dollar will
be reduced by a pro rata amount reflective of all of the
Cities agreements not to recover anymore than the 48
cents on the dollar from Grant. He said that if Mr. Tew
settles against Grant, he will only recover that amount
against Grant that relates to the other creditors other
than the City.
C/W Massaro thanked Morris Brown.
C/M Stelzer asked what would happen if one of the 17
Cities does not want to take the settlement.
Morris Brown replied that he did not know. He said that
the settlement is conditioned at this point to all the
Cities going along with the settlement. He feels that
all 17 Cities will approve the settlement and if that
does not occur, he feels that Grant would be going to
trial with all 17 of the Cities in October or November.
C/M Stelzer mentioned that Pompano seems to be unhappy
about the settlement. He asked Morris Brown if that
should happen, then the only thing would happen is a
continuation of the law suit.
Morris Brown replied that he anticipates the law suit
would continue.
C/W Massaro asked that if the City approved the settle-
ment and another City does not, is the City's approval
withdrawn.
Morris Brown replied that the settlement that the City
is approving provides for unanimous approval by all of
the Cities.
_3-
6/4/86
/Pw
V/M Stein asked if it is possible that if there is one
or two holdouts would they go for the settlement based
on majority rules and battle the two separately.
Morris Brown answered that he does not know the answer
to that because one of the reasons the Grant interests
are proposing the settlement is to avoid the cost in
going to trial and that benefit would be denied to them
if they had to go to trial with one or two Cities.
V/M Stein mentioned that the fact that there could be a
settlement larger than proposed.
C/W Massaro asked if there would be a chance for another
decision if all Cities did not agree.
V/M Stein replied that the City would go back to court
again.
C/W Massaro queried whether there could be another
decision if that is what the City wanted.
V/M Stein mentioned that the settlement was based on all
of the Cities agreement for the settlement or no
agreement.
C/M Gottesman asked if there was no total agreement
among the Cities and the case goes to trial, there would
be the possibility of losing the case.
Morris Brown replied that there was always the possi-
bility of losing a case.
Mayor Hart questioned Morris Brown if the City settled
and all cities accepts the settlement, if they
have the funds available would Bradford possibly think 61
in terms of settlement of their case against munici-
palities.
Morris Brown replied that he doubts it.
Mayor Hart asked between now to October and November
when the case against Grant should come up, how many
dollars per month would it cost the City in preparation
of going to trial.
Morris Brown replied that 50 or 60 thousands dollars a
month for preparation and the trial time, being that it
is a six week trial, would involve 4 or 5 lawyers
working full time, in excess to 60 thousand dollars
while the case is actually being tried on a monthly
basis.
Mayor Hart asked if the agreement is accepted by the 17
Cities what would be the time frame for securing the
funds that the settlement is based on.
Morris Brown answered that the funds would be received
by the end of the fiscal year.
Mayor Hart mentioned that in the press, Mr. Tew has 44
filed a suit against Warner, who is one of the princi-
pals involved in the 42 million dollars. He asked that
if he wins the suit or makes a settlement, will the City
be entitled to some percentage of those funds in
addition.
-4-
6/4/86 r
/pw I/
Morris Brown replied yes. He said that participation
will be done in the general distribution of assets of
the bankrupt estate from what ever source Mr. Tew
receives from other than Grant.
Mayor Hart asked if there is a possibility of 70% plus
what ever additional funds are available. Morris Brown
said yes.
C/W Massaro asked if there was a number in dollars for
ESM cases alone.
Morris Brown replied that he had no idea of the total
amount.
Larry Perretti had no questions.
Rick Rednor mentioned there was a Resolution that Morris
Brown presented for the City concerning the settlement.
Mayor Hart opened discussion to the pubic before the
Resolution was read.
Shirley Blumfield, Resident, asked that in Morris
Brown's estimation, is 70% return on a bankruptcy the
usual return. Morris Brown replied no. She mentioned
that she would hope the Council to consider taking this
settlement.
Vicki Beech, Resident, asked that when the Resolution is
read, to please read it in the entirety.
Rick Rednor read the Resolution after amending the title
by adding "Providing an effective date."
C/M Gottesman MOVED to ACCEPT the Resolution as amended.
SECONDED by V/M Stein.
C/M Stelzer asked Rick Rednor if 48% was indicated in
the Resolution.
Rick Rednor replied that he did not see any reference to
48 or 42% and asked Morris Brown to explain.
Morris Brown answered that the number of the 48% is
derivative from the 50 million and the Cities as a whole
have claimed 105 million dollars and the proportioned
105 is 48%.
VOTE:
ALL
VOTED
AYE
7. C/M Stelzer
mentioned
that at
the pre --agenda he had
requested to
put the
Tamarac
Symphony on the 6/11
agenda and
would like to speak of that item at the
end of this
agenda
meeting
to see if the item
go
should go on
the 6/11
agenda.
SECONDED by V/M Stein.
VOTE
ALL VOTE AYE
_5_
6/4/86
/pw �.
1. General Fund Budget - Temp. Ord. #1259 - Discussion
and possible action to amend the General Budget
from an amount of $10,037,999.00 to an amount not
to exceed $10,489,669.00 for the Fiscal Year Begin-
ning October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
SYN PS35 OF ACTION: ADOPTED on Ordinance 86-28 Passed
second reading.
Rick Rednor read Temp. Ord. #1259 by title. It
V/M Stein MOVED to ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1259.
VOTE:
SECONDED by C/M Stelzer.
C/M Gottesman
- Absent
C/M Stelzer -
Aye
C/W Massaro -
Aye
V/M Stein -
Aye
Mayor Hart -
Aye
2. Tamarac Utility West Budget - Temp. Ord. #1260
Discussion and possible action to amend the annual
budget from an amount of $28, 023,710.00 to an
amount not to exceed $26,699,243.00 for the Fiscal
Year beginning October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
OYNOPSIO QF ACTION: ADOPTED with Ordinance 86-29 Passed
amendments by the City Attorney, Page 1
Line 21, change from "$26, 699,243.00"
change to "$26,711,243.00" on Second
Reading.
Rick Rednor read Temp. Ord. #1260 with amendments by
title.
V/M Stein MOVED to ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1260 as amended.
SECONDED by C/W Massaro.
Larry Ferretti said for the allocation of the 12
thousand, 6 thousand will be on the Water Treatment, 3
thousand will be Waste Water Collection, an additional 3
thousand will be Wasto Water Treatment.
Mayor Hart mentioned that this item is a reduction of
one million three hundred thousand in the budget for the
six months.
VOTE: ALL V TE AYE
3. Tamarac Utility East Fund Budget - Temp. Ord. #1261
Discussion and possible action to amend the budget
from an amount of $752,185.00 to an amount not to
exceed $585,320.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning
October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ADOPTED on Ordinance 86'-30 Passed
second reading. 48
Rick Rednor read Temp. Ord. #1261 by title.
V/M MOVED to ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1261 on Second Reading.
-6-
6/4/86
/Pw
SECONDED by C/M Gottesman.
VOTE ALL VOTE AYE
4. Special Funds Budget - Temp. Ord. #1262 -
Discussion and possible action to amend the
following Special Funds for the Fiscal Year
Beginning October 1, 1985. Second Reading.
a) Parks and Recreation Department Fund - from an
amount of $134,00.00 to an amount not to exceed
$93,992.00
b) Tamarac Wildlife Preserve Fund - from an amount
of -0- to an amount not to exceed $9,200.00
c) Sidewalk Project Fund -- from an amount of
$3,600.00 to an amount not to exceed $36,000.00
d) Street Resurfacing Fund - from an amount of
$113,000.00 to an amount not to exceed $113,500.00
e) Capital Reserve Fund - from an amount of
$350,740.00 to an amount not to exceed $404,420.00
f) Pension Fund - from an amount of -0- to an
amount not to exceed $38,000.00
g) First Aid Claims Fund -- from an amount of
$1,500.00 to an amount not to exceed $5,000.00
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: ADOPTED with Ordinance 86-31 Passed
amendments on Second Reading.
4 b) Add to title and Columns, "$9,200.00 transferred to General
Funds".
4 c) Add to title and Columns, "Transferred entire amount of fund to
General Funds".
Rick Rednor read Temp. Ord. #1262 by title.
V/M Stein MOVED to ADOPT Temp. Ord. #1262.
SECONDED by C/M Stelzer.
V/M Stelzer mentioned 4 b) from -0- to $9,200.00 is
quite an increase and also 4 c) $3,600.00 to $36,000.00.
He said he is not objecting to the items but he wondered
why the numbers have changed so dramatically. He asked
for an explanation from the City Manager.
Larry Perretti referred to 4 c) that there was a
considerable amount requested that was deleted from the
Budget in October. On item 4 b) was a grant received
and the grant monies did not cover the entire wildlife
project and in order to complete it, that was the
additional amount of money that would be needed.
C/M Stelzer mentioned that the Sidewalk fund (4 c)) is
being transferred out of the sidewalk fund into the
General Fund.
V/M Stein said that the Ordinance does not say that at
all. He also asked why the City was contributing
$38,000.00 to the pension.
C/M Stelzer mentioned that was expenses. $20,000.00
professional services, $15,000.00 for actuarial and
$3,000.00 for travel.
Larry Perretti brought to the Council attention that the
Pension never had a budget and there is being one
established now.
C/M Massaro asked if the monies were to come out of the
Pension Fund.
-7-
6/4/86
/Pw �.
VOTE:
VOTE
Larry Perretti replied that 1% was contribution of the
Pension Fund which was City contribution.
V/M Stein MOVED to ADOPT 4 b) on second reading with
amendments "Add to title and Columns, "$9,200.00
transferred to General Funds".
SECONDED by C/W Massaro.
ALL VQTE AYE
V/M Stein MOVED to ADOPT 4 c) on second reading with
amendments "Add to title and Columns, "Transferred
entire amount of fund to General Funds".
SECONDED by C/W Massaro.
C/M Gottesman
- Aye
C/M Stelzer
- Aye
C/W Massaro
_ Nay
V/M Stein
Aye
Mayor Hart
- Aye
5. Annual Federal,Fgvenue Sharing Fund pudget - Temp.
rd. #1264 - Discussion and possible action to amend the
budget from an amount of $300,000.00 to amount not to exceed
$250,000.00 for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 1985.
Second Reading.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION:
APPROVED on second and final
reading. Public hearing was
held.
ORDINANCE NO. 0-86-32 PASSED.
Mr. Rednor read Temp. Ord # 264 by title.
V/M Stein MOVED APPROVAL of T d. 1264, SECONDED by
C/M Gottesman.
Melanie Reynolds, resident, said this fund should have public
input. She questioned what the reductions are and C/W Massaro
said when the fund is set up this will be explained.
VOTE:
ALL VOTED AYE
Mayor Hart noted for the benefit of the public that in places
where the budget was increased, Council added
$586,600.00 and it was reduced by $1,558,000.00; therefore, there
is a reduction of approximately 1 million dollars in the first 6
months budget.
N
7. SyMphomy.Pops Orchestra - Discussion and possible action.
SYNOPSIS OF ACTION: Agendized.by
Consent to be on the 6/11/86 Council Agenda.
C/M'Stelzer said he received a call late last night regarding a
symphony orchestra. He said approximately 10 years ago there wa
a Tamarac Symphony Pops Orchestra and after some internal
problems, they went to Lauderhill. He said they have been in
Lauderhill for 5 years and the band has developed into a symphony
orchestra of 60 people with 6 concerts per year. He said they
6/4/86
/Pw
r
P
M
have raised in excess of $100,000.00 and the problem now is that
Lauderhill is using that money for their own purposes instead of
what the orchestra wanted, which was scholarships for musical
students.
C/M Stelzer said Nat Lieberman, one of the original organizers of
this orchestra, has proposed that Tamarac have a Tamarac Symphony
Pops Orchestra at no cost to the City. He said the only require-
ment would be a place to rehearse for 3 hours a week on Tuesdays
excluding the months of May, June, July and August. He said they
may need the use of a truck to transport the band equipment to the
concerts.
C/M Stelzer said he would like Council's opinion as to whether
this could be discussed further at a Council meeting. He said
they would like to incorporate this as a non-profit organization
so that they can dispense the money for scholarships to music
students as originally planned.
V/M Stein MOVED to put this on the agenda for 6/11/86, SECONDED by
C/M Stelzer.
Mayor Hart said this requires a great deal of discussion with the
Recreation Department to determine:
1. If this building, which is supposed to be used for City
recreation for City committees, young people, etc., will be
available for rehearsals and storage, etc.
2. Whether the City wants to give City property for rehearsals
for an organization that is not consisting of Tamarac
people.
3. Whether the City wants to provide them with a truck to
transport their instruments, etc.
(Council determined that a vote was not needed on this Motion.)
Mayor Hart adjourned the meeting at 11:40 a.m.
, _- P-�, - , , , ,-, WJ0
MAYOR
TEST:
2&qk&:AL2�11Z
CITY CLE
This public document was promulgated at a cost of $ 51.90 or
$ 1.44 per copy to inform the general public and public officers
and employees about recent opinions and considerations by the City
Council of the City of Tamarac.
CITY OF TAM RAC
AFP nVED AT MEETING OF
City Clerk
mom
6/4/86
/pw