HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-09-17 - City Commission Budget Workshop Meeting MinutesMAIL REPLY TO;
P.Q. BOX 25010
TAMA RAC, FLORIDA 33320
58'f1 NORTHWEST 88TH AVENUE TAMARAC, FLORIDA 33321
TELEPHONE (305) 722.5900
September 12, 1986
NOTICE OF BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
TAMARAC, FLORIDA
There has been a City Council Workshop Meeting scheduled
for Wednesday, Se tember 17, 19ll, at 10:00'A.M. in the West
Conference Room o y a , NW 88 Avenue, for review
of Proposed Budgets for Fiscal Year 1986/87.
The public is invited to attend.
T
Carol E. Barbuto
Assistant City Clerk
0
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAPPED STATUS
CITY OF TAMARAC, FLORIDA
CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING
September 17, 1986
Tape 1 CALLTO ORDER: Mayor Hart called the meeting to order at
10:00 A.M., on Wednesday, September 17, 1986, in the West
Conference Room of City Hall.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT:
Mayor Bernard Hart
Councilman Sydney M. Stein
Councilman Arthur H. Gottesman
Vice Mayor Jack Stelzer
Councilwoman Helen Massaro
ALSO PRESENT:
John P. Kelly, City Manager
Frank Etheredge, Finance Director
Patricia Marcurio, Secretary
Mayor Hart said at the Public Hearing, which was held on Monday
evening, 9/8/86, the original Resolution was amended after dis-
cussion and comment from the public to have'a 3.35 millage rate
and a 6% utility tax. He said after the Motion was made and
approved, it was noted that the utility tax was on both electric
and telephone. He said technically a utility tax could cover
water and sewer as well.
Mayor Hart said the Finance Director and City Attorney told him
there is a State Statute which reads as follows: "A public hearing
to finalize the budget and adopt the millage shall be held not
less than two days or more than five after the date the advertise-
ment is first published. At the meeting, the adoption of the
budget millage levy shall be by separate votes. In no event shall
the millage rate adopted may not exceed the millage rate
tentatively adopted at the first meeting." Mayor Hart noted that
it was; therefore, impossible to add any other charge and they had
to go with a 3.35 millage rate.
Mayor Hart said Walter Falck, the Executive Director of the
Broward League of Cities, attended the Public Hearing on 9/8/86,
and gave Council a copy of a survey that the League is making on
utility tax levies which shows that 21 cities do have the utility
tax. He said of these 21 cities there are only 4 cities besides
Tamarac that do not have a utility tax and the greatest amount
have a 10% tax on all utilities.
Mayor Hart said he did a survey of 26 cities and all of them have
a separate garbage charge with the exception of 5, which include
the garbage charge in the ad valorem taxes. He said in most
cases the charge appears on the monthly utility bill and some have
separate contracts with the collection company.
C/W Massaro asked if the commercial and rental properties furnish
and pay for their own garbage collections or does the City do that
and Mayor Hart said he did not determine that. C/W Massaro said
that makes a difference.
Frank Etheredge, Finance Director, said the last meeting left the
tax rate at $3.35 with a 6% utility tax. He said there has been
some complaints of this and the only choices now are the 6%
utility charges on telephone and electricity or a full garbage
fee. He said whatever direction Council gives will be worked out
for the next Budget meeting.
C/W Massaro said "all utilities" could include water and sewer and
Mayor Hart said if a 6% utility tax were passed it could go on all
other utilities unless specified otherwise.
1
9/17/86
/pm
C/M Stein said at the meeting it was clearly stated that the
discussion of all utilities at this moment meant electric and
telephone. He said Waste Management notified them that direct
billing to the residents would have a minimum charge of $.35 per
month as an additional amount and Council felt that was not a
necessary charge to pass on to the residents.
C/M Gottesman said even though Council at this time is only
considering electric and telephone, at a future time Council could
add a water and sewer charge. Mayor Hart said if the Council
decided to go to a utility tax, the Resolution should read "tele-
phone and electric" only.
C/W Massaro asked Mr. Etheredge if the garbage collection fee
would cover the amount of money that is needed for the operation
of the City and Mr. Etheredge said yes, and he noted that is the
fairest way to handle this. C/W Massaro said that would be the
most economical way for the residents.
Mayor Hart asked Mr. Etheredge what the garbage charge would be
for single family homes and condominium units and Mr. Etheredge
said he was quoting $6.39 but the newspaper had an amount of
$6.37 for residential units and $3.06 for condominium units per
month. He said this would be a charge to a house whether the
services are turned on or not.
Mayor Hart asked if this garbage collection fee could be handled
by a semi-annual bill to each property owner instead of a monthly
billing on the utility bill and Council members said no.
C/M Stein said that would be more expensive and he suggested that
monthly billing be considered if this is adopted. He said the
people who benefit from the garbage collection fee are the commer-
cial users since they pay their own fees. He said the City
residents are paying $3.00 for garbage collection now with a
condominium paying $1.70; therefore, the residents will only be
paying $3.00 more plus a few cents more in the ad valorem. He
said he is in favor of the garbage collection fee.
V/M Stelzer said Council has received mixed comments since the
people in the east area of the City, whose homes have low assessed
values, complain that they will be paying more total taxes if an
ad valorem tax of $3.35 plus the 6% utility tax is levied. He
said; however, in the areas with families, there is complaint that
a home with 6 people could pay over $300.00 per month for electric
bills. He said the people in the Woodmont area, where the homes
have a high assessed value, are in favor of garbage collection
fee.
V/M Stelzer said by charging the garbage collection fee on the
utility bill, residents are being charged what they should be
charged. He said if the City adopts the utility tax the business
people will pay much more because they have higher utility bills.
He said he feels the fairest way would be the garbage collection
tax.
C/M Stein said rentals are commercial as well and C/W Massaro said
those people pay an Occupational License for each unit.
V/M Stelzer said presently the owner of a property of entire
rental units pays an ad valorem tax which is included in the rent.
He said they will now reduce the ad valorem taxes the owner of
the apartment complex and increase the garbage collection fee for
each unit. He said there are many inequities but the garbage
collection fee would only charge the resident for what they are
getting.
1
2
9/17/86
/pm
C/M Gottesman said according to a Tam -A -Gram of November, 1985,
there was a survey made by the County regarding taxes such as
property, utility, garbage, etc., and, of the 18 cities included
in this survey, the garbage collection per unit was $36.00 per
month maximum. He said if the garbage collection tax is adopted
in Tamarac, the maximum amount residents will pay is $78.00 per
year. He said he felt the garbage collection fee was the fairest
route to take.
V/M Stelzer asked if the City pays for garbage collection for the
unoccupied or not owned apartments and Mr. Etheredge said if a
condominium has received a Certificate of Occupancy then the City
pays a garbage fee.
C/W Massaro said these are approximate rates because the Finance
Director has to check this further. She suggested that the new
rates include the full tipping charge that will be assessed to the
City and Mr. Etheredge said it is included now.
C/W Massaro asked if there will be a small fee required as a
service charge to the City for accounting, billing, etc.
Mr. Etheredge said this will be included on the utility bills and
that cost is considered. in the rates. C/W Massaro said this
should be considered further.
Mayor Hart said he originally favored the higher ad valorem but
now feels that he would support the garbage fee instead of a
utility tax. He said the comment was made that commercial users
would not pay this because they pay separately; however, when the
franchises for the various collection companies are due, the City
could consider a franchise to one company with rates set for
commercial pickups in the City.
Mr. Etheredge said the City may try to consolidate the garbage
pickup for residential and commercial under one contract to reduce
the rates.
David Silvergleid, resident, said there are inequities in any
option and he noted that if commercial businesses were taxed on
utilities, that would have been added to the sales price and the
consumers of the City would suffer. He said Council was concerned
about setting a precedent by imposing a tax on utilities and he
complimented Council on their decisions.
Irving Lopatey, President of the Tamarac Presidents Council, said
the people who attended the first Public Hearing on the budget
were not aware that the City was tied into the maximum millage
rate that was sent. He asked why today's discussions were not
brought out before this.
C/M Gottesman said at the Public Hearing, when the utility tax was
explained, he suggested that consideration be given to going to a
non -subsidized garbage fee. Mr. Lopatey said there was no mention
at that meeting that once a millage rate was established, it could
not be increased at the next meeting.
Mr. Etheredge said the situation has arisen because no Council has
ever set the tax rate and then tried to raise it. Shirley
Slumfield, resident, said most people would be happy to pay just
the garbage removal fee and she suggested Waste Management bill
the resident directly. Council members explained that this cannot
be done this year because there is a standing contract.
Vickie Beech, resident, said she concurs with the garbage removal
fee and she suggested that when this is implemented, the legisla-
tion indicate that it is just garbage. She said she feels no one
should be exempt to paying this fee such as various houses of
worship. She asked if residents would not be vulnerable to Waste
Management's negotiations if they have an exclusive contract with
the City.
3 9/17 86
/pm
Tape 2
Louis Solomon, resident, said on behalf of the elderly residents
who only have phone contacts with family in some cases, he would
hate to see a utility tax on the telephone. C/M Stein noted that
this is not a "garbage tax" but a "garbage removal fee".
Milt Siegel, resident, asked if there will be an increase in the
water and sewer fees and Council members said there is a meeting
at 12:30 P.M. today to discuss that further. Mr. Siegel said the
ad valorem is a 22% increase over last year.
Mayor Hart said this is a garbage removal fee and he asked if this
is addressed under State Law. Mr. Etheredge said what is being
referred to is a tax that would be placed on the garbage removers
themselves, not the residents.
Louis Silverman, resident, said he originally objected to a
garbage fee; however, after much discussion he felt this would be
much more fair. He asked if that fee could be made a yearly
amount and added to the County tax and Council members said no.
Melanie Reynolds, resident, asked if the garbage collection fee
had been included in the beginning, how much would the ad valorem
have been. Council members said it was based on $4.58.
Mrs. Reynolds said she objects to the garbage collection fee and
feels the ad valorem is proper. V/M Stelzer said the City has
never yet had a budget where the ad valorem was being raised above
the rate that was established.
C/M Stein said this is the fairest situation since the residents
will only pay their fair share. C/W Massaro said the people east
of 441 will have to pay more but they have always stated they are
willing to pay their fair share.
Mr. Lopatey asked how the $3.06 for condominiums will show on the
utility bill and Mr. Etheredge said the water bill is being paid
by the Association. He said there will just be the number of
units times $3.06 and it will be one line item.
Mr. Kelly said this budget is a "bare bones budget" and will not
be a boon to the services that must be provided for the City. He
said with the fixed costs of salaries, this budget is $47,000.00
less than what was used last year. He noted that this will not be
a banner year for the City and he asked for cooperation with the
various committees and boards as well as departments.
Mayor Hart adjourned the meeting at 11:15 A.M.
ATTEST:
Marilyn Be tholf
City Clerk
This public document was promulgated
$2.21 per copy to inform the general
and employees about recent opinions
Council of the City of Tamarac.
4
at a cost of $79.62 or
public and public officers
and considerations by the City
1
1
�J
9/17/86
/pm