HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-08-14 - City Commission Regular Meeting MinutesCITY OF TAMARAC
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
August 14, 1972
Reconvened from August 9 and 11, 1972
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting reconvened and was called to order at 10 a.m.
on August 14, 1972, by Mayor O. W. Seltman in the City Hall
Annex.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Mayor O. W. Seltman
Vice Mayor Evelyn M. Lange
Councilman Eugene Shultz
Councilwoman Helen Massaro
Also present: Mr. R. D. Castenholz
Mr. Harvey Ford, City Attorney
Peggy M. Twichell, City Clerk
Councilman D. Johnson was absent and excused.
PRAYER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The Mayor called for a moment of silent prayer, to be followed
by the Pledge of Allegiance.
ITEM #9: ORDINANCE Site Plan) Third Reading.
Mr. Ford reviewed the passage of the ordinance and stated that he
has taken the liberty of drafting an amendment to the ordinance,
which involves redoing the first phase, Section 2(a). Mr. Ford
then read the ordinance in full. (Upon approval of administration
it. shall be posted on the bulletin board for 72 hours, ctc.)
Mayor Seltman asked for Council's thoughts on this proposed
amendment.
Councilwoman Massaro said she felt that this was a step backwards.
That the ordinance as originally written was more in keeping with
the present trend of the thinking of the Area Planning Boards, and
the different municipalities. She went on to quote the Broward
County proposed amendment to their site plan ordinance which was
in keeping with the City's original site plan.
Mr. Ford pointed out that the County Commission is set up
differently than Tamarac, and that the proposed amendment gets
the City out of acting in an administrative capacity and allows
anybody to review a site plan.
Vice Mayor Lange questioned that part of the ordinance which reads
that the Building Inspector "may be required" to submit the site
plan to the City Engineer. She felt that they are putting too
much responsibility on the Building Inspector. Asked what happens
to this ordinance when they no longer have a City Planner.
Mr. Ford stated that he felt this ordinance contemplates a City
Planner and professional staff.
Vice Mayor Lange said she: is not in agreement with having the
Chief Building Inspector deciding whether to refer this to the
City Engineer.
Mr. Ford said that this is where somebody has to have the
authority to make a decision. This can be worded: "submit
to the Chief .Building Inspector, City Engineer and City Planner"
that is your perogative.
Mr. Castenholz explained that this covers all types of con-
struction; many of which would go to the City Engineer.
Mr. Ford explained that there is going to be a great volume
of site plans to be gone over and the Zoning Commission is really
going to be "bogged" down.
Councilwoman Massaro asked about Item "j" and "k" on Page 2 of
the original ordinance, as she does not feel that these are
needed on the site plan because separate landscape plans are
required, which must be submitted with this information.
Mr. Ford responded by saying that those requirements were set
up by Mr. Stutsman.
Councilwoman Massaro said she felt that these site plans should
come to Council for final approval.
Vice Mayor Lange again reiterated that the part wherein it is
left up to the Chief Building Inspector should be changed before
she will vote on it.
A lengthy discussion followed on the various types of buildings,
inspections and fees involved.
Councilwoman Massaro moved that this ordinance be approved as
originally written, on third reading.
Mr. Foris asked if the City had a guideline for a builder to
follow on procedures, etc.
Mr. Ford replied that Mr. Stutsman was preparing a guideline.
Councilman Shultz moved that the ordinance be accepted stating
that the Chief Building Inspector shall review the site plan, and
then it shall be reviewed by the City Planner.
Mr. Ford asked if Mr. Shultz would agree if Section 3 read that
site plans as required be examined and approved by the Chief
Building Inspector, the City Planner and the City Engineer.
Councilman Shultz said that would be acceptable.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: Councilman Shultz:
Councilwoman Massaro:
Vice Mayor Lange:
Mayor Seltman:
Motion carried 3/1.
aye
nay
aye
aye
August 14. 1972:
Mr. Ford read the ordinance in full, third reading.
Councilman Shultz moved that it be adopted on third reading.
Vice Mayor Lange asked about the 72 hour posting of the.site
plan on the bulletin board, if there is a written request say
by a Council -member, she believes that it should go to Council
then, to decide whether this site plan should be approved.
Vice Mayor Lange feels that if it should go to the Zoning Com-
mission, then it should go to both. the Zoning Commission and
the City Council.
Mr. Ford mentioned that the Zoning Commission, in the absence
of a planning department per se, has to be used administratively.
Vice Mayor Lange made a motion that the amendment be included in
the ordinance at this time.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded this motion.
Mr. Ford said he understood the motion to be substituting the
City Council for the Zoning Commission.
Vote taken: Councilman Shultz: aye
Councilwoman Massaro: aye
Vice Mayor Lange: aye
Mayor Selt.man: nay
Motion carried 3/1 to amend it.
Mr. Ford then read Section 4, as amended, posting for 72 hours,
etc.
Mr. Ford also read the title as amended.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that it be adopted on third reading.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
A discussion followed on the interpretation of the 72 hour posting
of the site plan. That any person can make a written objection.
Mr. Ford said that itwill read that upon any person making a
written request stating that a specified ordinance has been vio-
lated, a review will be necessary by City Council.
Councilwoman Massaro so moved that this amendment be adopted.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Mr. Ford again read the correction to the amendment, "if prior to
the issuance of the permit any person makes a written request there-
fore stating that a specified ordinance has been violated, such site
plan shall be reviewed by the City Council at a public meeting, and
approval from the City Council shall be a prerequisite for the
issuance of a building permit."
Vote taken: Councilman Shultz: aye
Councilwoman Massaro: aye
Vice Mayor Lange: aye
Mayor Seltman: nay
F,
Mayor Seltman then asked if Council was ready for approval of
the ordinance in its entirety.
Councilwoman Massaro so moved.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM #10: ORDINANCE (Amending #71-22), Recreational site
acquisition, second reading._
Mr. Ford read the Ordinance by title only.
Councilwoman Massaro proposed an amendment to this ordinance
where it reads excepting plats "in progress upon", would like
to delete the words "in progress upon" and put in "officially
filed before" effective date. Would like another amendment to
the body of the first page, just before the words "be it
ordained" where it reads "for the general health" would like
to put in words "safety and welfare of the inhabitants".
Then on Page 6, paragraph "f" the last line which reads, "this
ordinance shall become effective" would like it to read "immediately
upon final passage."
Mr. Ford asked Councilwoman Massaro what she meant by "filed". Do
you mean recorded in the office of the Circuit Court.
Councilwoman Massaro said that isn't what she meant exactly.
Didn't like the word "progress" because she felt that somebody
could be working on it without the City having any knowledge
about it at all.
Mr. Ford read Page 6, sub -paragraph "f", section 1, these provisions
having been suggested by Mr. Stutsman.
Councilwoman Massaro asked that the wording in the title of the
Ordinance be changed, using the wording in the body of the
ordinance. Having spoken with Mr. Stutsman on the wording of
this ordinance, he agreed that that is the way it should be.
Mr. Ford said that he had no objection to this. It would be
worded: "excepting plats where preliminary plat filed prior to
effective date." And, adding "health, safety and welfare of
the inhabitants," (at the fourth "whereas") "f" section 1, etc.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that this be accepted as corrected (amend-
ment) in the title.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
Mayor Seltman then asked what is the pleasure of Council on the
second reading of the Ordinance by amended title.
Mr. Ford read the Ordinance by title only.
i:=uust _14, 1972:
Councilwoman Massaro asked Mr. Ford if this could be made an
emergency item and passed, because of sub -divisions coming in
and not providing recreational areas, etc.
Mr. Ford. recommended that it be passed in due course.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that it be passed on second reading.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken:
all voted aye.
A discussion followed between Mr. Foris and Mr. Ford on what is
considered any emergency and who should make the decision.
Mr. Ford replied that Council should make this decision with
their attorney's guidance.
Vice Mayor Lange suggested that the emergency on this ordinance
is the health, welfare and safety of the inhabitants, and moved
that this bo declared an emergency and have a third reading.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded this motion.
Mr. Foris stated that he felt that safety, health and welfare
does not mean an emergency as such.
Vice Mayor Lange replied that the City has a lot of developers
coming in right at the present time and believes this is going
to help because if we let those slip through our fingers the
City is going to have to go back and buy recreational facilities
for them, so this is very important and should have been taken
care of a long time ago.
Councilwoman Massaro said she would like to add to this and said
that we are no longer an adult community, we now have families
with children.
Mr. Ford said that under the Charter, this is Council's decision
to make as to whether this is an emergency or not. It is not
entirely clear to him what the nature of the emergency is, but
reiterated that it is Council's decision to make.
Vote taken:
Motion failed.
Councilman Shultz:
Councilwoman Massaro:
Vice Mayor Lange:
Mayor Seltman:
nay
aye
aye
nay
Mayor Seltman announced that it has been approved on the second
reading.
ITEM #18: ANNUAL BUDGET. Announcement regarding date for publi-
cation of budget and fixinq of Public Hearinq.
Mr. Ford said that, the Council's proposed budget has been completed
and Council members have copies of the General Fund Budget, there
will be summaries published in the paper and it is necessary that
Council set a date for the publication in the newspapers and the
i
fixing of a public hearing. Due to the fact that we have been
notified by the County that there is a great deal of urgency in
establishing our ad valorem tax mill levy, for purposes of get-
ting it into the County Commission, this should be set as early
as possible.
He suggested that it should be in the papers on August 16th,
which will allow a public hearing on the 31st of August.
Mr. Castenholz, in response to a question, advised that according
to State Statutes all cities must have their ad valorem tax mill
levy into the County Commissioners by August 18th. However, it's
an impossibility under our Charter and in surveying other cities
it is impossible for most of them. Mr. Castenholz said he is
trying for the September 5th meeting of the County Commissioners,
which he was advised by the Circuit Court to be permissible.
Further advised that the City can not make their deadline of
August 18th; possibly prior to September 5th, we are dealing
with a situation over which we have no control. We are in
violation of a State Statute as are many other cities.
A general discussion of the budget and tax millage procedures
followed.
Mayor Seltman asked what is the pleasure of Council on adopting
the date of August 16th for advertising the budget in the paper,
and a Public Hearing on August 31st.
Mrs. Dubois asked, if the City had enough revenue coming in, why
is it necessary to put through a 3 mill ad valorem tax?
Mr. Castenholz explained that the State passed a Revenue Sharing
Act and as a result of that the revenues that we got, mostly
from cigarette taxes, gasoline taxes, no longer will come to us;
they will go into a State fund which is distributed to the
various cities under this Revenue Sharing Act. Now, in order
to participate, the State has laid down some specific require-
ments, one of which is that the City must levy a 3 mill ad
valorem tax, or an equivalent tax. Essentially what they have
done is that if you do not levy a 3 mill tax you no longer get
your cigarette and gasoline taxes. Unfortunately, due to our
growth we still will not get as much this year even under the
Revenue Sharing as we would have had they continued the distri-
bution of cigarette and gasoline taxes. However, if we don't
levy the 3 mill tax, then we don't get any of that.
Mr. Ford mentioned that various court actions have made Tamarac's
Occupational License Ordinance much less effective then it pre-
viously was.
Councilwoman Massaro stated that she felt Mr.Foris was expecting
the published budget figures to hold true throughout the entire
hearings on l,-he budget. These figures will not hold true unless
Council approves them at the meeting of August 31st. They could
vary and they could be changed completely.
Mr. Castenholz remarked that the published figures would be the
proposed budget as he presented it, and that Council had full
authority to change them.
Auaust 14. 1972:
Mr. Castenholz advised that when Council gets finished with
this question, he is going to suggest that Heathgate be di-
vided into another parcel to be known as AP-lB, which is un-
platted.
Mr. Ford said he is changing his recommendation on the amend-
ment, adding a new sentence to Section 6 of the Ordinance:
"except that as to portion of Parcel AP-1 lying west of the
existing western boundaries of the City extended due north
from the north western corner of the City to a point on the
north boundary of AP-1, the effective date of the annexation
shall be deferred until a petition for annexation is received
from the owner or until December 31, 1973, whichever is sooner."
This was tabled to this afternoon session so that we can get
the Heathgate description which is in City Mall.
Councilman Shultz moved and seconded by Councilwoman Massaro
that the amendment just read as to Parcel AP-1 be accepted.
Vote taken: all voted. aye.
MEETING WAS RECESSED UNTIL 2 p.m.
MEETING RECONVENED AT 2 p.m.
ITEM #6:
ZONING COMMISSION:
Recommendations from Zoning Comm.
(c) Concrete Unlimited, Site Plan approval.
It was stated that the Beautification Committee had made certain
suggestions for changes and the plan had been returned to the
Architect, and that all planting will conform to the City of
Tamarac's landscaping ordinance.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that this site plan be approved subject
to approval by the Beautification Committee.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM 43: (again) ANNEXATION ORDINANCES -_9 Parcels, 3rd Reading.
Mr. Ford explained that he had re -drafted the ordinance adding
Parcel AP-1B, which includes all of the Heathgat.e sub -divisions
which are not. in the City.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that this addition to the Ordinance be made.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
Mr. ford then read the ordinance, in full, as amended. Third
reading including Parcel AP-1, AP-lA and AP-lB.
Vice Mayor Langed moved and Councilman Shultz seconded that it be
accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. CVD,
r
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP-2, by title only,
third reading.
Councilwoman Massaro moved and Councilman Shultz seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. O►21b. 1�2- —"o
AP-3:
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP---3, by title only,
third reading.
Vice Mayor Lange moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
()(CD. 7,.-2 -a /
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP-4, by title only,
third reading.
Councilman Shultz moved and Vice Mayor Lange seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. (Q 2D - 7a - a -Q-
AP-5:
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP-5, by title only,
third reading.
Vice Mayor Lange moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. (),-17.
Mr. Ford .read the ordinance covering AP-6, by title only,
third reading.
Councilwoman Massaro moved and Vice Mayor Lange seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. OP-D, % _a
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP-7, by title only,
third reading.
Councilman Shultz moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. ()(eD. 7,2---�5
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP-8, by title only,
third reading.
r
August 14 1972•
Councilwoman Massaro moved that
in the local papers August 15th,
held on August 31st.
the budget be published (summary)
and that a public hearing be
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken:
all voted aye.
Mr. Foris stated that this motion should read that this is an
emergency meeting on the 31st, to which Mr. Ford replied that
Mr. Castenholz has already stated that it is an emergency.
Councilman Shultz moved, and Vice Mayor Lange seconded that
Council has noted receipt of the Proposed Budget.
Vote taken:
all voted aye.
Mr. Castenholz stated that free copies of the Budget have been
distributed to the following:
Mayor and Council Members
27 Clubhouses
Tamarac Homeowners Assn. and Woodlands Homeowners Assn.
Charter Board
Election Board
Copies are available for review in City Hall and copies may be
purchased at City Hall.
The Utility Fund Budget will be ready for distribution tomorrow,
and this will also be advertised for Public Hearing.
It will be necessary for the President of each Association
(Clubhouse) to come in for a copy of the Budget and sign for it.
ITEM #3: (again) ANNEXATION ORDINANCES.
9 Parcels Third Reading.
Parcel
Mr. Allsworth said, regarding/ AP-1, that in lieu of a Workshop
meeting his company would like to suggest that you break up the
advertised legal description. Our thought is this; that we ex-
pedite with you the annexation of the hole in the donut, at
whatever date you propose to be appropriate, that we cooperate
with you on this annexation as the hole is an integral part of a
plan encompassing property in the City, two golf courses and a
very extensive development of some 857 odd acres. In addition
to that annexation, that we also acquiesce in the annexation of
this area (pointing to a map), which is the Sunflower area, and
that you delete from this annexation, at this time, the vast
portion to the west, for this reason:
Both the land and the hole in the donut, and to the west, is
undeveloped. It is questionable as to what municipal services
the City would be able to initially afford to the property when
annexed, and there is the question of the ad valorem tax.
From an economic standpoint, if the City were to gain at this
time the first two portions I spoke of, it would gain considerable
land for revenue purposes, with a minimum amount of services re-
quired at this time.
L� I
I
Mr. Castenholz asked Mr. Allsworth it he would be agreeable
to an agreement with the City, that we would in fact hold a
referendum during which they would either approve or disapprove
the annexation of the entire AP-1, but that there be some
agreement that the land to the west of the donut, Sections 5
and 6, not be formally annexed to the City until a petition
has been received from the property owner, and that the
Corporation agree that they would formally request annexation
prior to the filing of any plat or the development of any of
that portion.
Mr. Allsworth wanted to make sure that he understood what Mr.
Castenholz said as he feels this is important to the Company
and to the City.
It has been suggested to keep this in one parcel and going
ahead with the referendum whenever your time limit indicates,
and having the annexation to the west of here (pointing to a
map). (Mr. Castenholz said everything to the western boundary
of Section 4). And have this held out until such time as it
would be voted in, but the annexation would not be finalized
until such time as the property owners petitioned, but that
they could not develop it. The only concern is how you define
the word "develop".
Mr. Ford said that the reason for annexation of this land is to
make it a part of the overall plan for the City.
Mr. Allsworth asked what the effective date is on the whole
annexation that is being proposed.
Mr. Ford said it is possible there may be a special election
in December.
Mr. Castenholz asked Mr. Allsworth if he was suggesting that
the City go ahead with the referendum separating these parcels
and for those portions in Section 5 and 6, lying west of the
present City boundary, that the effective date be made Decem-
ber 31, 1973.
Mr. Allsworth replied yes.
Mr. Ford said he has an amendment which would cover what Mr.
Allsworth proposes. it would amend Section 5 of the Ordinance
so that it will read:
This ordinance will take effect immediately upon its final
passage except that as to the portion of Parcel AP-1 lying west
of the existing western boundaries, of the City, extended due
north to a point on the north boundary of AP-1, the effective
date shall be deferred until a petition for annexation is re-
ceived from the owner, or December 31, 1973, whichever is
sooner.
Mr. Castenholz said he thinks there is more that will have to go
in that paragraph; specifically, stating Sections 5 and 6.
Mr. Allsworth stated that if the City wanted to limit this to
Cerro owned land, further amend the legal description to read
land north of McNab, that would cover it.
Councilwoman Massaro asked Mr. Ford if when the referendum is
held, will they be voting on each Parcel separately so that one
cannot affect the other, to which Mr. Ford replied "yes".
August 14, 1972:
Vice Mayor Lange moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded that
it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. 0kb - 7.2- a(-
AP-9:
Mr. Ford read the ordinance covering AP-9, by title only,
third reading.
Councilman Shultz moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded
that it be accepted on third reading.
Vote taken: all voted aye. f)PD. 7.2-..Z7
A motion was made that the City Attorney be instructed to pre-
pare.a Resolution., in connection with the annexations, to hold
an election. in December, 1972.
Vice Mayor Lange made a motion covering the above.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded 'the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM 413: RESOLUTION.
(a) Release of Canal Reservation on parcel of
land (Tract 16 of Section 9).
Mr. Ford read a resolution covering the above.
Councilman Shultz moved that the Release of Canal Reservation
Tract 16, Section 9, be approved.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye. �" . 7,"
(b) Release of Canal Reservation on parcel of
land_ (Tract_ 16,_Section 10) .
Mr. Ford read a resolution covering the above.
Councilman Shultz moved that the Release of Canal Reservation
Tract 16, Section 10, be approved.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye. WA;Z5o • 7a7-. 8
(c) Release of Canal Reservation on parcel of
land (Tract 4, Section 10).
Mr. Ford read a resolution covering the above.
Councilman Shultz moved that the Release of Canal Reservation
Tract 4, Section 10, be approved.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted. aye. 1165 p , 7-2 -6 y
(d) Release of Canal Reservation on 3 parcels of
land (Tract 1 of Section 8, portion of Tracts
9 and 16 of Section 4, portion of Tract 13 of
Section 3) .
Mr. Ford read the resolution covering Tract 1 of Section 8,
release of canal reservation.
Councilman Shultz moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded
that it be accepted.
Vote taken: all voted aye. /1 ��
Mr. Ford read the resolution covering Tracts 9 & 16 of Section 4,
release of canal reservation.
Councilman Shultz moved and Councilwoman Massaro seconded
that it be accepted.
Vote taken: all voted aye. 7.2
Mr. Ford read the resolution covering Tract 13 of Section 3,
release of canal reservation.
Vice Mayor Lange moved and Councilman Shultz seconded that it
be accepted.
Vote taken: all voted aye. /SD. 7e7
ITEM #15: RESOLUTION. American Video (change of name and
ownershi-D) .
Mr. Ford said in checking on this he had determined that the
so-called performance bond in the City's file was in fact not
a surety bond, simply a bond of two corporations involved, one
a franchise holder the other a management company. The City
Manager checked with the franchise owner and was told that
there has been a surety bond posted with the City and they
didn't know what happened to it and they indicated they would
get a replacement bond from the surety company and it will be
here on the 15th, which is tomorrow. He suggested that this
be put off until a later meeting.
Councilwoman Massaro moved and Councilman Shultz seconded that
this item be tabled until the September meeting.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM #16: ORDINANCE #71-3?_, Amendment to, possible action
after discussion.
Mr. Ford said that the question arose as to the ambiguity in
this ordinance as it pertains to lot clearing, the sanitation
field, and quoted from Section 4(a), referring to the removal
of weeds. He then read the ordinance in full for the first
reading.
Mr. Castenholz recommended that the wording "fire department"
be changed to "building department."
Vice Mayor Lange moved that the ordinance be adopted on first
reading with the wording "building department" substituted for
"fire department."
J
August 14 1972:
Councilman Shultz seconded the motion.
Voted taken: all voted aye.
A general discussion followed on the interpretation of this
ordinance.
ITEM #17: CHARTER CHANGES.
(a) Discussion and possible action on signing
authority_ in lieu of City Manager.
Mr. Ford stated that this was presented to the Charter Board
and the Charter Board, through Vice Mayor Lange, recommended
that Council designate the authority by job description.
Mr. Ford asked if Council had a recommendation as to who should
sign checks in the absence of the City Manager.
Mrs. Shelton, Chairman of the Charter Board, advised that the
Board has not finalized all of their Charter changes.
Mr. Castenholz advised that after the Charter Board votes on
these changes, they must be referred to the City Council for
their review.
(b) Contingency Fund.
Mr. Castenholz explained that this is mis-labeled in the Agenda
and should read "Fund Transfers". He had recommended to Council
that they go on record to the Charter Board that it should con-
sider including an amendment to clarify and provide language
which would allow budget transfers and specifically .identify the
methods, and this was referred to him, Mr. Ford and Mr. Planes.
As a consequence, Mr. Ford has a description of the wording.
Mr. Castenholz further explained that in consulting with Mr.
Planes, Mr. Planes wanted to restrict his efforts to strict
auditing and asked that he not be included in the review of this,
but that it be handled strictly on a legal and administrative
level.
Mr. Ford read the suggested addition to Section 98 of the City
Charter:
"Upon request of the City Manager, Council may transfer any part
of an unencumbered balance of an appropriation to a department,
division, board or committee, for which an appropriation for the
current year has proved insufficient."
In other words, any budget transfers would have to be done by
the Council, on recommendation of the City Manager, and handled
as an Agenda item at a public meeting.
A discussion followed on the interpretation of this recommen-
dation.
Mr. Castenholz endeavored to clarify the transfer of funds. He
is talking about not inter -fund, but inter -departmental, within
a specific fund, transfers.
61
I
Mr. Foris suggested that a maximum of $1000 be set up for
getting approval of a transfer.
Mayor Seltman said in view of the fact that this is only a
recommendation to the Charter Board, that they will review it
and send it back to Council, along with any changes or sug-
gestions.
Councilwoman Massaro asked Mr. Castenholz what his interpretation
was of the Charter right now on the intra-departmental transfers.
Mr. Castenholz said that his interpretation, at the present time,
by the language in the City Charter, is that it has the authority
to effect intra-departmental transfers, these are transfers be-
tween various allocations within a departmental appropriation.
He has not found any language within the Charter that has pro-
vided for inter -departmental transfers. This should be clari-
fied.
A discussion followed on the interpretation of Section 98 of
the Charter.
The recommendation is and Vice Mayor Lange moved that it be
recommended to the Charter Board that they add to Section 98
of the Charter, "upon the request of the City Manager the
Council may transfer any part of an unencumbered balance of
an appropriation to a department, division, office, board or
committee for which the appropriation for the current year
has proved insufficient."
Councilman Shultz seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
Mr. Ford spoke about a letter from the Charter Board, dated
June 23rd, which has not been replied to. He then read the
letter in full. Attachment #1.
Mayor Seltman suggested that this be put on the Agenda for
September, or if we have time today, we will come back to it.
ITEM 419: FINANCE.
A. Re uest for Contingency Fund Transfers.
Mr. Ford read a letter from the Charter Board dated August 8,
1972. Attachment #2.
In response to that letter, Mr. Ford wrote a letter to Council
dated August 11, 1972, Attachment #3, which he read in full.
Mr. Ford read a request from the Charter Board to the City Manager
dated August 10, 1972, Attachment #4, which he read in full.
Mr. Ford read a Resolution that has been prepared covering the
transfer of contingency funds, in full.
Mr. Castenholz read a memo to Mayor and Council, dated August
3, 1972, in its entirety.
Mrs. Dubois mentioned that she was at a meeting of the Charter
Board where Mr. Tucker advised he would not accept any payment
of his fees unless there is a Declaratory Judgement, and a
clarification of transfers from the Contingency Fund.
CLl
August 14. 1972:
Mr. Castenholz replied that the Charter Board certified Mr.
Tucker's bill and requested payment of it under date of
August loth.
Mayor Seltman said that the question is now what does Council
want to do with the Resolution just read.
A general discussion followed.
Councilman Shultz moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Lange, that
the Resolution covering the transfer of these funds from the
contingency fund be adopted.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
B. Financial Statement June 30, 1972.
Mr. Castenholz explained the procedure for these Financial
Statements.
Mr. Foris asked that the actual budgeted amount be used for
each item in the Financial Statement for comparison purposes.
Mr. Castenholz stated that he intends to improve on the re-
ports as they go along, perhaps adding two more columns; one
specifically that which is expended this month, and another
which will show the percentage of what has been expended of
the year's budget. This will give a very good comparison as
the months go by as to whether the City will go over or under
the budgeted figure.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that the Financial Report dated June
30, 1972, be accepted, but with that would like to make a
suggestion that in the future there be carried over the
transfers from the previous month.
Councilman Shultz seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
C. Six Months Audit.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that Council acknowledge receipt of the
Six Month Audit.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM 020: TEXACO GAS STATION: Consideration of instruction to
City Attorney to file suit for a declaratory decree
with reference to Texaco Gas Station (McNab and
Universitv Drive).
Mr. Ford reviewed the history of this particular matter. A par-
cel of land was annexed by the previous City Council under
Ordinancc #70-30A, with an exception clause. When the Charter
was written, this was put in the wrong place; in the interim the
Texaco people checked with City Hall and were told that this
parcel was not a part of the City. They then went to Broward
County, who checked their map and found it was not a part of the
City, and accepted a zoning application, appeared before the
County Planning and Zoning Board who zoned the property for a
gas station.
Texaco then got a building permit from Broward County and
commenced construction, at which point the Tamarac Building
Department discovered it.
The City Manager consulted Mr. Ford on it and he indicated
that the Charter Board had no power to change the boundaries
of the City, therefore the boundaries in the Charter were
not binding, but the boundaries in the previous ordinance
were binding. The Attorney General more or less agreed with
Mr. Ford, but suggested they go to court to get a decision
on this.
Council so authorized Mr. Ford to do this.
Mr. Ford went on to explain the reasons for his opinion now
to have Council send him a letter withdrawing their request
for court action. He suggested that they ask Texaco for a
letter saying they have no objection to the annexation as
long as Tamarac has no objection to their building permit
being re -issued by Broward County.
Councilman Shultz offered the motion to withdraw this suit by
the City Attorney, but asked if there was not some other way
to defeat the gas station being in this location.
Mr. Ford suggested, rather than doing this in a hurry, it
should be put off until the September meeting.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that this be deferred until the Sep-
tember meeting.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taker.: all voted aye.
ITEM #22: LITIGATION: Report by Mr. Ford.
Zarcone vs. City: Attorneys are out of the County.
Motion to dismiss has been postponed and rescheduled
to October 30.
Tuthill vs. City)
_Fox vs. City ): Motions
Hearings have been held and
two Judges.
to dismiss have been filed.
it is under advisement by
House & Garden (Occupational License): Believes this
case has been rendered moot by new law in effect.
Shackman vs. Shechter: Dormant for some time, now
active. Motion to dismiss still pending, however,
attorneys proceeding with preparation for trial.
Shechter vs. Shackman: Case dismissed without leave
to amend.
Tallia_ vs. City: Previously dismissed with leave to
amend.
Jost vs. City: Motion to dismiss still pending. No
action.
Schechter vs. Massaro: Court granted motion to dismiss
without leave to amend. A motion has been filed for re-
hearing, still pending, to be heard later this week.
r s �
August 14, 1972:
BP Oil vs. City: (Zoning). Case pending in Federal Court.
Motion filed to dismiss, no ruling as yet on this.
Bienema &Trachel vs. City: In Circuit Court of Broward
County, motion to dismiss, had a hearing on our motion and
it was granted with leave to amend. They have filed an
amended complaint. Mr. Ford plans to file another motion
to dismiss.
THA vs. City: (Ad Valorem Tax) Mr. Ford believes the appeal
is still pending and asked if anyone knows anything about this.
Mr. Foris passed out copies of a letter dated July 21, 1972,
(Attachment #5), and stated that the Board of Directors of
THA, on July llth passed the following motion:
"That this Board go on record as having advised Attorney Paul
Douglas, and the City Council, that this is an unauthorized
action on the part of Mr. Douglas and the THA is not inter-
ested in filing an appeal."
Mr. Foris further stated that he would like to point out that
as far as the THA is concerned, they are doing nothing at this
point except to advise the people that they have the right as
individuals to put their claims in on the City if they so
desire, particularly those who paid their taxes along with a
notice of protest. If sufficient of those come together and
they decide to make a class action out of this, they still can
come back before the Board of Directors and at that. time see
if the Board is inclined to proceed any further. They do
not want, in any way, to jeopardize the rights of the people
under the Judge's order which was that the Resolution which
was passed by the City Council was illegal and null and void
and any taxes collected thereunder were invalid. That is
where it stands now.
Mr. Foris remarked, after a comment from a member of the
audience, that he believes there are two others besides him-
self that have not withdrawn from this case.
Vincent vs. City: New third party complaint, against a number
of people; including Behring, William Morse, and the City.
This concerns validity of deed restrictions, leases, assign-
ments of deed restrictions, assignment of leases, cable TV,
sprinklers and maintenance. Not asking for any money from the
City.
City vs. Behring Corporation- A declaratory judgement has
been filed by Mr. Carratt.
Mr. Foris remarked that he had last understood that Council
had asked Mr. Carratt to investigate possible action and then
report back with his recommendation and did Council authorize
Mr. Carratt to proceed on this? He recalls that the amount
budgeted for this was $12,500.
Council clarified this by saying it is a total of $10,000.
Mr. Foris asked if the City were to win this case, what would
be the next procedure and cost involved, and the time element
involved.
r
Mr. Ford replied that there again Mr. Carratt is the one
that is working on this and suggested that Council get an
opinion from Mr. Carratt.
Mr. Ford mentioned that Mr. Carratt had requested Mr. Ford
to refrain from taking any action to enforce liens until he,
Mr. Carratt, has his declaratory judgement. Mr. Ford asked
for Council's instructions on this.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that the City refrain from collecting
the liens without prejudice until Mr. Carratt advises that
it is alright to do this.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM #23: TAMARAC UTILITIES: Discussion and possible action.
Vice Mayor Lange moved that this be deferred until September.
Councilman Shultz seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM #27: ORDINANCE: Providing for the Re -zoning of property
from R-lB to R-3U and S-1 (Westwood Villas and Golf
Course N 112 Section of Twnp. 49S Range 41E).
Second reading.
Mr. Ford read the Ordinance, by title only, second reading.
Councilman Shultz moved that it be adopted on second reading.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Councilwoman Massaro asked if they did not require a covenant
for the golf course.
Mr. Ford said that this had been promised.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
ITEM #5: (again) ORDINANCE #72-11 (Signs) .
Mr. Ford remarked that when this item was brought up previously
in the meeting, the question of election signs was discussed.
He has drawn up an Ordinance, based entirely on the City of
Hollywood's ordinance, which is very effective on regulating
political signs. Mr. Ford then read the Ordinance amending
#72-11, the sign ordinance of the City of Tamarac.
A discussion followed on the size of signs, time limits, etc.
Councilman Shultz moved that it be adopted on first reading.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
Mr. Ford asked that this be considered an emergency ordinance
because we are in the midst of an election and there is nothing
to cover this.
August 14, 1972•
Councilman Shultz made a motion to amend this sign ordinance
limiting the size of signs to 4 x 4, 16 square feet instead
of 32 square feet.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Councilman Shultz clarified his motion to read: that we
declare an emergency and amend the ordinance to political
signs no greater than 16 square feet.
Councilman Shultz withdrew his motion regarding the amendment.
Councilwoman Massaro withdrew her seconding.
A discussion followed.
Councilwoman Massaro moved that this be considered an
emergency.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: Councilman Shultz: nay
Councilwoman Massaro: aye
Vice Mayor Lange: aye
Mayor Seltman: aye
Motion carried 3/1.
Vice Mayor Lange made a motion to amend this ordinance to
limit the size of signs to 16 square feet.
Councilwoman Massaro seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
Mr. Ford then read the Ordinance as amended. Second reading
by title only.
Councilwoman Massaro moved that it be accepted.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
Mr. Ford read the Ordinance as amended. Third reading by
title only.
Councilwoman Massaro moved that it be accepted.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye. 02D• 7a.- I
ITEM #24:
REPORT FROM MAYOR.
Mayor Seltman mentioned that the request from the Red Cross
had been turned over to the President's Association.
Mr. Ford advised that he is going on vacation September 1st
and asked that if anyone had any Resolutions or Ordinances
they wanted him to take care of, to get them to him quickly
so that they would be ready for the September meeting.
r
ITEM #25•
REPORTS FROM COUNCIL.
Councilwoman Massaro said she has been intending to bring up
the matter of the Plat Ordinance.
ITEM #26: REPORT FROM CITY MANAGER.
1. Received a notice that the Florida League convention
will be held on October 21 and 22 at Bal Harbour. He would
like Council to consider attendance at this meeting.
2. Notice that there will be a state-wide Fire Prevention
Conference, October 17th thru October 20th. Mr. Castenholz
felt it might be desirable to attend.
3. A letter from Planes & Burkett, dated August 9, 1972,
attachment #6, relative to fees.
Mr. Castenholz asked if Council would like to have the City
Attorney draw up a Resolution.
Councilwoman Massaro moved that this be deferred until the
September meeting.
Vice Mayor Lange seconded the motion.
Vote taken: all voted aye.
MAYOR SELTMAN ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 5 p.m.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR
r
F I
m
cind Cou'.1'A'',
OS9r7XC.X1MA_A.1r 4*/
D a
7 7
ci, --J:
no" o n
r s e
CI
i.
a
L,
E7 _—J
M
M
!. A ,N D u O A 7 A i A;", is A t: L 0 ^. 1 t) A 'l 3 3 1 3
T E L E P 140 N E (3 C 5 i 7:; I•-51)
Mayor
Council
Ci-.1r i,Ianager
Cit-y of Tamarac
Tariiarac, Florida 33313
Gentlemen:
Ala have_, :received an agonda of the C-Lt:y Council meetiri r
to be held on Rugust 9, 1972 and not-i c- ther:o{)�i a
rn.otion to transfer fro —at con`:i_naencv reserve iteriis for
the use of the Char-[--er Board.
_ - " t[ZC Objections W' I;c'rPp- e.V.1Otl`31�7 Ti2CiC a
are of, the_ opinioT1 1'..'hat the� forbids e cg—i7lly. ,
the existence of a cont-. nu,-=-, res --rva o?" th' t-cans'or
of arty unappro:ar. fated i teT,,is .
r
Vic), ie %E_'ech, L11amber
Al idia IZOi,)ort—son ,
Henry Hopper , ItG; Lber
ResoectLull.y subTait-ted,
CHARTER' BOARD
Cha_L.riian
i�.r71�1i:✓�C,'. l�O:t; CYl IIGT,0I1 t: , :at)C'rEatcLrjJ
�0
Law Offices
HAK±Y FORD
City Council
City of Tamarac
Tamarac, Florida
Dear Council. Members:
A 777 ellM AI 7-'3
August llth, 1972
Pembroke Plaza Building
6231 Pembroke Road
Hollywood, Florida 33023
Phone: 983-7683
Re: Item #19 on Agenda
Request for Cont:ingenc Fund Transfers
This is to advise that I have examined the City Manager's
request for fend transfers referred toabove and the ob-
jections of the Charter Board..
I am of the opinion that the transfers can be legally
effected by means of the Resolution I. have prepared under
the terms of the City Charter, the City B"dget and the
Lams of the Statutes of Florida.
rr
Respectfully submitted,
Harvey Ford
City Attorney
61
L- J
ATT9CNIjfNT jw7
August 10, 1972
Mr. R. D. Castenholz
City Manager
City of Tamarac
Tamarac, Florida
Dear Mr. Castenholz:
This is to certify that the Board has seen and
approved the enclosed bills for Legal Services rendered,
submitted by Morris C. Tucker and request payment of same.
Yours very truly,
Opal Shelton
Chairman, Charter Board
Enclosures
LAW OFFJC)r�S
OTP
TUCKER, li.(YIH, PRONIINSKI & pESC H.[0
1201.} . ATLANTIC BO LL•"V,ARD
1'QatiIPANO BEACH, FLORIDA 3,30T(0
August 10, 1972
Legal Services for month of April 1972
Legal Services for month of May 1972
Legal Services for month of June 1972
Legal Services for month of July 1972
At?7"T#gcj-10x4r #4
$ 38.50
$122.50
$665.00
$224.00
Respectfully submitted,
Opal4 Shelton
r`
Attest:
Clerk of the Board
ARFA CODE 1105
TELEPHONE 9,12-6500
L—_1
LANv OFFICES
OF
UCKFR, ROT-11, P1tUtiUNSKI & PESC7110
1201 E. ATLANTIC BoULEvAltn
PoA.z1-ANo BEA(,i% F1.o1umA 33060
August 10, 1972
Mrs. Opal Shelton
Chairman, Charter Board
City of Tamarac
Tamarac, Florida
Legal Services rendered for month of July 1972
7-19-72
7-31--72
A•rTACNmENr
Prepare for a meeting of Charter Board
ArtrA COM 305
l L,LEpFIONE 942-6500
Time
3. Hours
Research and rough draft of Charter changes 3.4
Total Time
6.4 Hours at $35.00 per hour = $124.00
6.4 Hours
M M M
A`r-rQCHMAAur #S
TAJ-vARAC ASSCCIAI1014, INC.
July 21, 1972
Ralph Paul Douglas, Esq.,
660 South Federal Highway
Pompano Beach, Florida 33062
Re: TAHA Ad Valcri:rm Tax Suit
Dear ^7r. Douglas:
Thank you for your letters of July 17 and. July 19, 1972, which
are responsive to my letters to you of 11�lay 9 µr_c' June 19, 1972.
They provide us with confirmation which I believe is necessary
to properly record in our THA files.
The followin motion was made by T�,Irs. Mlarion 'Wollenwebber at
the THA's Board of Directors regular monthly meeting.on Jyly 11,
1972:
'T'^at this board go on record as advising attorney Ral .h
Paul Douglas and tI"Ic, City Council, that this is an un-
authorized action on the part of I,:r. Douglas and that
the THA is not interested in filing an appeal."
All officers and directors voted in favor of this motion except
the Pre:;iden-t, i. r. Julius Z . Foris .
The reason I objected v;as because I felt the TI A attorney was
not only justified but required to take whatever action was
necessary to protect the ri.-;hts of all plaintiffs and members
of the :,, ass, and that -this alas done to allow `11r� THA to ma7'ce
their non --preju'li^���1 deci�ii.,n. Four above lettow�s, indicate
tC T:Ie t:'-at li'U is 4,he case.
Th1s confir;:;s ,ny ur_derstandin _; in your above letters that you
are obtainin:; signed authorizations from the various plaintiffs
and that I assume you are to advise all pl-aintiffs, including
the mnerbers of the class, of their ri--hts and re_;s-onsibili'_le."i, ,
throw h "le al notices", as I mentioned, or whatever .,i-,earz -'ou
deem prover and adequate.
T'_�_wt your above letters and this letter will be, read in .full
at our reula.r directors' meeting early in Au gust, and yoar
final fee requires membership approval since it exceeds "100.00.
Page 1 of 2 pages
Page 2. of 2
Ralph Pawl Dou ;las, Esq.
Judrre John H. Moore,II, ordered and adjudged "That Resolution
Igo. 70-37 of the City of Tamarac, is null and void and any
taxes dependent solely on the basis of this resolution are
invalid."
The city officials who were involved in the passage of this
illegal Resolution No. 70-37, in September 1970, over the
objec. tl:.)n , of t'_^e THA were the mayor, Charles Pastor, W_cc-
I. ayor Theodore Hertrich, Council members Owenl'Lnes, Dan Dunn
and Robert Wilderman, and the City Attorney was .r. Aller: Goldberg
and MX. : or:ers was the City Clerk.
Further it is hoped that this gill become an object lesson to
elected representatives to sufficiently establish the legality
of each of their actions.
The Authorization Form which you sent to Opal Shelton has her
name incorrectly listed as "Oppel Shelton" and she.says, there-
fore, she cannot properly sign the form. I,Ir. Anthony Planzolina
now res.1des in Lauderdale Lakes.
Personally, I would prefer to continue the appeal, even though perhaps
You infer that it is meaningless. However, I cannot assume such
financial obligation. Of course, S do not wish any authorization
to prejudice the rights of any other plaintiff or member of the
class.
Since y-.l sta-Ued an action must be taken on or before July 27,
1 D72, this letter is my atter.pt to provide you with ;:hat is coos t
meaningful, within the time limitation and the our_,mertime avail-
ability of TIiA officers and d; rectcrs.
Th n'r , _ fc.r your efforts in bch^.lf of the THA and the neoplc of
Tam_.rac .
Very truly yours,
TX. AIRAC HOMEC,01NEFZ5 ASSCCIAT
cc: City Council of Tamarac,
^,.:.arac City Hall
r.-00 Roc'.-. Island Road
ma_. ,n rac, Florida
cc: r.:rs. Lillian Dubois
'�__A 1st 'Dice -President
Byi
ATTEST:
Presiders It
ecorc?in Vcreta
cc: Charter Loa rd
Tamarac City gall,
5000 Rock Island lric, d,
Tari:arac, Florida
_71
PLANES AND BURKETT
{izcrrl�ireu� {���.�r� ,:l`iid�r> ...�YcrYtccrz�r�r
MEMEERS'. AMERICAN AND FLORIDA INSTITUTES OF CERTIFIED FUDLIC: ACCOUNTANTS
WILLIAM P. PLANES, C.R.A.
ALLEN F. BURKET'I. C. F..A
W I I,_1.1AM Mc K. GIBS0 N, JH.. C.P A.
Mr. Robert Castenholz, City Manager
City of Tamarac
5200 Rock Island Road
Tamarac, Florida. 33313
Dear Mr. Castenholz:
097-r"cNMENr # G
FORT LAUDEROALE, FLORIDA 33311
E--�UI WDST OA KI_A ND PARK Sc)L1 I.tvAitb
I r.l rPFIONE "."J05) E�C7-8422
M IAM I, FLOR I DA 33130
8UI I'E 45U ROF7FHTG BUILDING
28 WEGT FLAGLER STREET
TELEPHONC (30S) 3SB-625F
PLEASE REPLY TO: File No. 253
August 9, 1972
In reviewing our existing contract with, the City, which provides the terms,
rate schedules, conditions, etc., relative to the professional services which we
are to perform for the City of Tamarac, Florida, we find that, in error, the fee
schedule did not provide a specific rate for a manager classification on Management
Advisory Services Department engagements.
In retrospect we should have been more alert in accepting various special.
M.A.S. assignments, as requested and authorized by the City Council, by reviewing
the contract and requested an addendum which would provide a classification neces-
sary for the service to be performed. Consistent with our policy to render the
most competent service available, we assigned the City of Tamarac requests for
special studies and reports to the manager of our Management Advisory Department
and believe the quality and content of the reports furnished are self-evident.
Even though the rate of $30.00 per hour for our manager is consistent with
that charged to all other clients, we feel a compelling responsibility to assume
the financial burden of our own oversights. Therefore, we are adjusting all pre-
viously issued invoices covering our M.A.S. manager's services to reflect a super-
visor rate of $20.00. This would be consistent with the contract as it exists at
present. We are issuing and attaching herewith a credit memo in the amount of
$1,722.50„(1722 hours @ $10.00). In addition, we respectively request that the
City Council, by appropriate resolution, approve an addendum to our existing con-
tract which will amend the fee schedule to provide for a. Management Advisory Service
category with a corresponding rate of $30.00 per hour. This would provide the pro-
per fee schedule for any subsequent assignment which they deem necessary to assign
to our firm.
Cordially,
PLANES AND BURKETT., CHARTERED
CERTTFZED PUBLIC -ACCOUNTANTS
By
illiam P. Planes, C.P.A.
WPP/dn
Enclosure
F .-I
PLANES
AND
/BURKETT
CJiI.Gl��Y/:!X' (�.f.�l`�ar. i �2��tf��!F(,r.'!�'�CYC•rY�ll.9��.Y./2
MEMBERSAMERICAN AND FLORIDA INSTITUTES OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
WILLIAM P. PLAN E,c3. C.PA.
ALLEN r. BUF2KETT, C.PA.
WILLIAM MCK. GIBBON, JH.,C.H A.
Mr. Robert Castenholz, City Manager
City of Tamarac
5200 Rock Island Road
Tamarac, Florida 33313
Dear Mr. Castenholz:
R-r I IC40rn-cAv r G
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33311
Fi 01 WF-S1- OAKLAND PARK DOULEVARD
'1 ELEPHONE (305) 563-6422
MIAMI, FLORIDA 33130
SUITE 4SO ROBERTS BUILDING
c-'b WE`---,T FLAGLEI STREET
I'r:I.FPHONE (•705) 355-0255
PLEASE REPLY TO: File No. 253
August 9, 1972
We submit for your records the following details, which will provide
additional identification of the information contained on the following
listed invoices:
Invoices
Item
Personnel/Capacity
1132
1
hr.
Manager
William
P. Planes, C.P.A.
1132
60
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK. Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
1133
6
1/2
hrs,
Manager
William
P. Planes, C.P.A.
1133
3
1/2
hrs.
Supervisor
Allen F.
Burkett, C.P.A.
1133
12
1/2
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK. Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
1155
16
3/4
hrs.
Manager
William
P. Planes, C.P.A.
1155
37
1/2
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK. Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
1154
4
hrs.
Manager
William
P. Planes, C.P.A.
1154
22
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK, Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
1175
7
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK. Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
1175
2
1/4
hrs.
Manager
William
P. Planes, C.P.A.
1195
1
1/2
hrs.
Manager
William
P. Planes, C.P.A.
1195
31
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK. Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
1194
31
hrs.
Supervisor
William
McK. Gibson, Jr.,
C.P.A.
If you require further documentation, please do not hesitate to contact us at
your earliest convenience,
WPP/dn
Cordially,
PLANES AND BURKETT, CHARTERED
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
Byf
William P. Planes, C.P.A.
61
L. A
a
INVOICE
PLANES AND BURKETT
CHARTERED
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
601 WEST OAKLAND PARK BOULEVARD
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33311
City of Tamarac
5200 Rock Island Road
Tamarac, Florida 33313
TELEPHONE 56a-8422
DATE Augggt 9, 1972
Credit Memo
INVOICE NUMBER.
FOR SERVICES RENDERED: Credit memo issued as per letter of explanation dated August 9, 1972.
Invoice No.
Item
Adjustment
Bud et Appropriation Account
1052
MAS Manager
40 1/4
Utility
Systems Fund #547
1094
MAS Manager
2 1/2
Utility
Systems Fund #547
1051
MAS Manager
5
General
Fund # 415.36
1118
MAS Manager
3 1/2
General
Fund $415.36
1154
Manager
2
Utility
Systems Fund #621.36
1162
MAS Manager
61
General
Fund # 415.36
1194
Audit Manager
14 1/4
General
Fund #415.36
1238
John Cantwell
1.7 3/4
General
Fund # 415.36
1228
John Cantwell
26
General
Fund # 415.36
172 1/4
@ $10/hr,
..
1 722 50
..
A ,
PAYMENT IS 13U'E WITHIN 10 DAYS FROM DATE Or THIS INVOICE