11-10-09 Agenda Workshop MeetingCITY COMMISSION
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
WORKSHOP MEETING -TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009
6:00 P.M. DELRAY BEACH CITY HALL FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
The City will furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal
opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Contact Doug Smith at 243-
7010, 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices
are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers.
WORKSHOP AGENDA
1. Discussion regarding the Police and Fire Pension DROP Program Survey
2. Mangrove Park Boat Ramp Options
3. Commission Comments
Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at
this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based.
The City neither provides nor prepares such record.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE: November 4, 2009
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM WS.1 -WORKSHOP MEETING OF NOVEMBER 10, 2009
POLICE FIRE PENSION DROP SURVEY
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
The item before Commission is a discussion of staff survey research related to a request from the Police
and Fire Pension Board to increase the maximum time a member could remain in the DROP from five
years to seven.
BACKGROUND
At the April 14, 2009 Workshop Meeting, the City Commission discussed two requests from the Police
and Fire Pension Board for amendments to the plan. One change was to add a "pop-up" provision which
was approved by Ordinance No. 20-09 at the May 5, 2009 Commission meeting.
The other change involved a request to increase the maximum time a member could remain in the
DROP from 5 to 7 years (copy attached). At the April 14 Workshop, Commission directed staff to
conduct further research on this issue. Staff conducted a survey of other jurisdictions DROP plan
regarding their term (see attached chart). Six of the 33 jurisdictions responding were not part of the
Florida Retirement System (FRS). Of the remaining 27 respondents, survey results for Police, Fire, and
General employee plans were as follows:
Summary of DROP Survey Results
Max. DROP Yrs. Police Fire General
19 IS 16
6 I - I
7 I - -
8 2 2 3
----------No Plan----- 4~ ~ ~ ~
*Note: Orlando does not have a standard Police DROP, but they do have
a retroactive Police DROP Plan (3 years); Fire has both standard and
retroactive DROP (5 years)
As the chart above shows, the vast majority of plans surveyed have a 5 year DROP maximum. An email
from Finance Director Joe Safford is also attached with more information about jurisdictions that
increased their DROP from 5 years to either 6, 7, or 8 years.
Regarding the DROP extension request, I agree with the reservations expressed in the attached memo
from Chief Strianese. I also consider it telling that the actuary states that it is not possible to determine
the actuarial impact, and that this change might increase the City's pension costs. Unquestionably it will
cost the City more to keep an employee at the top of the pay range on the payroll two more years rather
than replacing the employee with someone at the bottom of the pay range. The attached memo from Jim
Linn states that the DROP change might increase or decrease City costs.
It also seems something of a contradiction to say on the one hand that being a Police Officer or
Firefighter is a young person's occupation, therefore they need a " 20 and out" pension plan; and then to
say on the other hand that we should extend the DROP from five years to seven and allow police
officers and firefighters to work 32 years before they retire.
As you may be aware, Mayor Bloomberg in New York has proposed increasing the normal retirement
for Police Officers and Firefighters from 20 to 25 years in order to reduce the city's pension costs and in
consideration of the fact that people are living longer and maintaining their health and strength longer
than they did twenty or thirty years ago when " 20 and out" plans started becoming the norm.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that staff be directed to inform the Police and Fire Pension Board that at this time the City
is not willing to proceed with the DROP extension as proposed .
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
POLICE & FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
609 HOMEWOOD BOULEVARD
DELRAY BEACN, FLORIDA 33445
TELBPHONE/FAX: 561.243.4707
March 2D, 2009 Ernuil: delruyp fC~conTCast.rt.et
Susan Ruby, Esq.
City Attorney
City of Delray Beach
100 NW 1 Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Ms. Ruby:
The City of Delray Beach Police and Firefighters' Retirement System, Board of Trustees', is
requesting that the City Commission amend Chapter 33, `Police and Fire-Rescue Departments',
Subheading `Pensions', of the Cade of Ordinances by amending Section 33.685, `Deferred
Retirement Option Plan', to extend the DROP period to eighty-four (84) months not to exceed
thirty-two {32) years of continuous service and to permit employees who are currently enrolled
in the Deferred Retirement Option Plan to participate for the lesser of eighty-four (84) total
months or until such time as the employee attains thirty-two (32) years of continuous service.
Attached to the proposed ordinance are two letters, dated January 13, 2009 and February 17,
2009, from Faster & Foster stipulating that these proposed amendments to the Plan will have no
impact on the assumptions used in determining the funding requirements of the program.
We ask that you please place this item on the City Commission Workshop Meeting agenda for
Apri17, 2009 for review and discussion.
Should you require further information please do not hesitate to contact me at (561) 767-6099 or
Anne Woods, Plan Admin" ator at (561) 243-4707 or Email: delrayp-f@corncast.net.
Sincere y
~ 1--~---
Charles Jero 0
Chairperson, oard of Trustees'
Attachments
~~~El~l~
~~~~ ~ ~ 4~
"ITY A~TO~i~~~'
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 33 "POLICE
AND FIRE-RESCUE DEPARTMENTS" AT
ARTICLE IV "CTTY POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS
RETIREMENT SYSTEM" AT SECTION 33.685
"DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION PLAN" TO
EXTEND THE DROP PERIOD TO EIGHTY-FOUR
{84) MONTHS NOT TO EXCEED THIRTY-TWO {32)
YEARS OF CONTINUOUS SERVICE; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN CODE; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach desires to amend the
City Police and Firefighter Retirement System ("System") to extend the DROP period to
eighty-four (84) months not to exceed thirty-two (32) years of continuous service; and
WHEREAS, the City Comrnissian has reviewed the actuarial impact statement and
finds that it is in the best interest of the City and its employees to amend the Retirement
System.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals Adapted. That each of the above stated recitals is hereby
adopted and confirmed.
Section Z. Ci Code Amended. Section 33.6$5 "Deferred Retirement Option
Plans" of Article IV "City Police and Firefighter Retirement System," of Chapter 33
"Police and Fire-Rescue Departments" of the City Code is hereby amended to read as
fallows:l
' / Proposed additions to the existing City Code text are indicated by underline;
proposed deletions from the existing City Code text are indicated by s~l~.
Sec, 33,685. DEFERRED RETIREMENT OPTION PLAN.
{A) Effective 3anuary 1, 1994, any employee with at least twenty {20) but
not more than thirty (30) years of continuous service as a member of the
system may elect to participate in the Deferred Retirement Option Plan in
accordance with this Section. On the effective date of this Ordinance
Einsert a ective date] any em~1o, e~th at „least twent~(20) but not more
than thirty-two (32) years of continuous.,service as a member of the system
ma elect to artici ate in the Deferred Retirement O tion Plan in
accordance with this Section.
(C) 1~,An employee who elects to participate in the Deferred Retirement
Option Plan may participate in such plan for a maximum of sixty {60)
continuous months. If upon the effective date of the employee's election
there are less than sixty (60) months before the employee attains thirty
(30) years of continuous service, the employee may participate in the
Deferred Retirement Option Plan only until thirty (30) years of service is
attained.
2. On the effective date of this Ordinance insert a ective date an
em to ee who elects to artici ate in the Deferred Retirement O tion Plan
ma artici ate in such lan for a maximum of ei -four 84
continuous months. If upon the effective,.,date of the employee's election
there are less than eighty-four (84~onths before the emvlovee attains
thirty-two. (3~years of cyntin~aou_s_ service, the employee ma~Uartici~ate
in the Deferred Retirement Option Plan only until thirty-two (322years of
service is attained. Employees who are currently enrolled in the Deferred
Retirement O tion Plan an the effective date of this Ordinance insert
e ective date shall be ermitted to artici ate in the Deferred Retirement
Sian. Plan for
the, lesser of {i ei~hty_faur (84, total months or (ii} until
such time as the em to ee attains thi -two 32 ears of continuous
service.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be
severable and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall for any
reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining sections, sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Ordinance but they shall
2
remain in effect, it being the legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand
notwithstanding the invalidity of any part.
Section 4. Inclusion in the Citv Code. It is the intention of the City Commission,
and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall became and made a part
of the Code of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; that the sections of this Ordinance may be
renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such intentions; and that the word "Ordinance"
shall be changed to "Section" or other appropriate word.
Secfion 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon
passage by the City Commission at second reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on fast reading this day of X009.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this day of
2009.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:
City Attorney
3
Foster&Foster~~
Actuarial Consultants for Public Pension Plans
February 17, 2009
Ms. Anne Woods
City of Delray Beach
609 Homewood Boulevard
Delray Beach, FL 33445
Re: City of Delray Beach Police Officers' and Firefighters' Retirement Plan
Dear Anne:
We have reviewed the proposed Ordinance which allows for the addition of a Pop-Up actuarially
equivalent optional form of payment. We have also reviewed the proposed Ordinance which increases the
number of years a Member can remain in the DROP_ It is our opinion that these proposed amendments
to the Plan will have no impact on the assumptions used in determining the funding requirements of the
program.
Because these proposed changes da not impact our actuarial assumptions, they do not change the
valuation results. It is our opinion, therefore, that formal Actuarial Impact Statements are not required in
support of their adoptions. However, since the Division of Retirement must be aware of the current
provisions of all public pension programs, we recommend that you send a copy of this letter and a copy of
the fully executed Ordinance to each of the foIlowing offices:
Mr. Charles Slavin
Bureau of Local Retirement Systems
Division of Retirement
P. O. Box 9000
Tallahassee, FL 32315-9000
Patricia Shoemaker
Municipal Police and Fire
Pension Trust Funds
Division of Retirement
P.O. Box 3010
Tallahassee, FL 32315-3010
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Bradley R Heinrichs, FSA, EA, MAAA
BRH/kob
13420 Parker Commons Bivcf., Suite i04 Fort Myers, FL 33912 • (239) 433-5500 • Fax (239) 48i-0634 • www.foster-foster.com
Foster&Foster~G
Actuarial Consultants for Public Pension Plans
January 13, 2009
Board of Trustees
City of Delray Beach Police & Fire Trust Fund
609 Homewood Boulevard
Delray Beach, FI_ 33445
Re: Potential 7-Year Drop Provision
Dear Board:
The purpose of this letter is to comment on the proposed impact on funding requirements to the
Delray Beach Police Officers' & Firefighters' Retirement System of extending the DROP period
from a maximum of 5 years to a maximum of 7 years. Additionally, we have been asked to
make similar comments regarding increasing the DROP mandatory separation age which is
currently the age at which a Member achieves 30 years of service with the Department.
For purposes of preparing an Actuarial Impact Statement, our stance is that extending the
DROP period from 5 to 7 years andlor increasing the separation age for DROP Members from
30 years of service to 32 years of service will not immediately require a change to our actuarial
assumptions and therefore would not result in a financial impact to the program. Plan changes
of this nature do not directly increase plan casts, but their existence may indirectly alter
participant behavior, which could have positive or negative consequences to the plan. This
outcome will no# be known for quite some time, and even then will be difficult to quantify. The
body of this letter is an attempt to outline the potential long-term impacts and will hopefully
facilitate discussion at the upcoming Board meeting.
First, let's discuss the maximum period #or which a Member can remain in the DROP before
mandatory separation. As I mentioned above, this period is currently 5 years, or until the
Member achieves 30 years of service with the Department, if earlier. If a Member were allowed
to remain in the DROP for a period of up to 7 years, it is very difficult to discern exactly how this
provision will impact Member behavior and the resulting impact on the plan's funding
requirements. Will a Member enter the DROP (hence retiring for pension purposes) sooner or
later than he would have previously?
Our Experience Study dated June 1 S, 2008 showed that Members have been retiring after 23
years of service, on average. Our Experience Study also showed that by decreasing the
average retirement age by 1 year, the plan casts increase by 0.3% of payroll. So if extending
the DROP period caused Members to retire (enter DROP} earlier than they otherwise would
have, the funding requirements of the plan would increase, The converse is also true.
There are other factors that should also be considered. All things being equal, Members
currently in the DROP who choose to remain in the DROP for 7 years instead of 5 will not
negatively impact the Plan. With that said, however, lengthening the DROP period may hinder
the upward mobility of the active Membership, thereby increasing turnover and reducing the
City's funding requirements. For instance, if my boss were tv stay in the DROP for an extra two
years, !may choose to leave the Department and take a promotion elsewhere rather than wait
my turn for a promotion at Delray Beach. As shown in the Experience Study, increased
turnover reduces the funding requirements of the program.
13420 Parker Commons Blvd., Suite 104 • Fort Myers, Florida 33912 • 239-433-550D • Fax 239-481-0$34 • www.foster-foster.com
Board of Trustees
Page 2
January 13, 2009
In addition to increased turnover, there are other potential outcomes from lengthening the
DROP period that would cause costs to fail. Average salary increases may be less than they
otherwise would, on average, because there are fewer promotions. As noted in the Experience
Study, a reduction in a Member's average salary increase by 1% aver his working lifetime will
reduce the City's funding requirements by 3.4% of payroll. Lower pay increases due to fewer
promotions, an average, could result from lengthening the DROP.
So while the potential #or a decrease in turnover and lower salary increases could result from
lengthening the DRDP period, thereby reducing the plan's funding requirements, there are also
a few outcomes that may cause funding requirements to increase. First, as I mentioned earlier,
if a reduction in the average retirement age were to occur as a result of the increased DROP
period, funding requirements would increase, all things being equal. Additionally, extending the
DROP period may increase the percentage of the workforce that is in DROP at any given point
in time. While the overall costs to the program would not change, the City's cost when
expressed as a percentage of the Non-DROP payroll {as required by the Division of Retirement)
will increase because the Non-DROP payroll will be less than it would've been otherwise.
In summary, there really is no generally actuarially acceptable way of quantifying the impact of
extending the DROP period. Additionally, mast DROP periods in Florida are limited to 5 years,
so statistically significant experience data is not available. The true costs of its implementation
will not be known for an extended period of time, and even then may be difficult to quantify.
Either way, however, the costslsavings are likely to be slight, and we will gladly sign a letter of
no financial impact for purposes of satis#ying the Florida Statutes for anylall of the following:
• Increasing the mandatory separation point to a lesser of the maximum of 7 total
years in DROP or 30 years of service for current andlor future DROP Members;
Increasing the mandatory separation point to the lesser of 7 years in DROP or
32 years of service with the Department for DROP Members;
• Allowing current DROP members an additional 2 years;
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
FSA, EA, MAAA
Florida DROP Survey
October 2009
Updated 11-5-09
City Police Fire General FRS Comments
Employees FL Retirement
System
Apopka 8 yrs 8 yrs 8 yrs
Avon Park None None 5 yrs
City of Bradenton 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Coral Gables 5 yrs 8 yrs 5 yrs
Coral Springs 5 yrs 5 yrs None
Crystal River 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Daytona Beach 5 yrs
Fort Lauderdale 5 yrs 5 yrs None Supervisor/ professional/managerial-3 yrs.
Gainesville 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Gulf County 5 yrs
Hallandale Beach 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Hillsborough County 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Homestead 8 yrs None 8 yrs
Lake Mary 5 yrs 5 yrs None
Lakeland 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Manatee 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs Classified as General and Special Risk.
Marion County 5 yrs
Monroe County 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Ocala None None 8 yrs Specified only General.
Orlando None* 5 yrs None *Forward DROP provision (Back DROP
provision is 3 yrs. Police & 5 yrs. Fire)
Palm Bay 5 yrs 5 yrs None
PB County Sheriff's 5 yrs
Palmetto 5 yrs None 5 yrs
Plant City 5 yrs 5 yrs None
St Cloud 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
St Lucie County None None 5 yrs
St Petersburg 7 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs Has different cannot exceed yrs of service.
Sarasota 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Stuart 5 yrs
Town of Palm Beach 5 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs
Village of Palm Springs 5 yrs None None
Village of Royal Palm Beach 5 yrs
Wilton Manors 6 yrs None 6 yrs Cannot exceed 26 yrs of service.
State of Florida Division of Re tirement has no specifics on DROP Plans as far as length of time.
From: Safford, Joseph
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 12:15 PM
To: Harden, David
Subject: RE: DROP Survey
David,
I have talked with several of these cities. Out of the five (5) cities with over 5 years of DROP four (4) increased from 5
years to either 6,7,or 8 years. One city always had 8 years in the DROP. The general consensus is that there are several
positives in going to the 8 year DROP as follows:
Qualified employees can stay longer, less employee annual turnover, less retraining costs
® Employee does not have to contribute to pension
w Minimal impact on City costs
There are also some negatives as follows:
Fellow employees have less opportunity to move up in a timely manner (one city actually had aPolice/Fire union
vote "No" to extending a 5 year DROP to an 8 year DROP because of this)
City is paying high priced employee longer when it could have another employee at lesser salary
® Pension plans could receive more employee contributions if the DROP vas shorter and new employee was
promoted or hired (difficult to determine cost savings with all the factors involved in actuarial costing)
a Some possibility of "lame duck" performance of an employee who could leave at any time when in the DROP
® Some employees, according to Department Heads, need to be replaced with "fresh blood" to improve
operations and cannot since they chose the extended DROP. Not necessarily performance problems as opposed
to there are more qualified, educated employees available
Hope this helps in your review of whether to extend the DROP Plan or not.
Let me Know if there is anything else you need to complete your decision making process.
From: Harden, David
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 1:57 PM
To: Safford, Joseph
Subject: RE: DROP Survey
This is good. Please check with those who have more than five years to see if any changed from a lesser to a greater
number, and if so what is their opinion now of'the change.
From: Safford, Joseph
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 1:14 PM
To: Harden, David; Smith, Douglas
Subject: FW: DROP Survey
Here is the latest survey on DROP Plans that we have accumulated.
::M
>'°`
~~ ~,
. ~^ ~.
A1~
LEWIS, LONGMAN & WALKER, P.A.
A T 7 0 R N E Y S A T L A VJ
REPLY TO: TALLAHASSEE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Susan Ruby, City Attorney
City of Delray Beach
FROM: Jim Linn
DATE: Apri12, 2009
RE: Proposed Police/Fire Pension Changes
As requested, I have reviewed the two proposed ordinances amending the police/fire pension
plan, and the accompanying actuarial statements, that were enclosed with Charles Jeroloman's
letter to you dated March 20, 2009. The proposed amendments are as follows:
1. Extending the DROP period from 5 to 7 years. The DROP extension would apply
to current DROP participants and those who enter the DROP in the future. This ordinance also
extends the maximum years of service a DROP participant can have from 30 to 32.
2. Adding a "pop-up" option, which a member who selects a joint and survivor
benefit option could select. Under the "pop-up" the member's monthly benefit would be
actuarially reduced. Then, if the member's joint pensioner dies before the member, the member's
benefit would increase to the straight life annuity amount.
My comments on the proposed amendments follow.
DROP Extension -the DROP program, which was added to the pension plan in 1994, allows
members to "retire" for purposes of the pension plan but continue working for the city for up to 5
years (the proposed ordinance would extend this to 7 years}. During the DROP period, the
member's monthly pension benefit is paid into a DROP account in the pension fund, and is
invested among several different investment options selected by the member. At the end of the
DROP period, the member must terminate city employment, and the DROP account balance is
paid to the member (or it may be rolled over into an IRA or other qualified plan, at the member's
direction).
Helping Shape Florida's Future®
BRADENTON JACKSONVILLE TALLAHASSEE WEST PALM BEACH
1001 3rd Avenue West 245 Kiverside Avenue 2600 Centennial Place 1700 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.
Suite 670 Suite 150 Suite 100 Suite 1000
Bradenton, FL 34205 Jacksonville, FL 322D2 Tallahassee, FL 32308-0572 Wesl Palm Beach, FL 33401
(941)708-4040 (904)353-6410 (850)222-5702 (561)640-0820
Fax: (941)708-4024 Fax: (904)353-7619 Fax: (850)224-9242 Fax: (561)640-8202
www.llw-law.com
January 21, 2009
Page 2
According to the plan actuary's letter of January 13, 2009, "there is no generally acceptable way
of quantifying the [cost] impact of extending the DROP period." Translation: extending the
DROP period from 5 to 7 years may or may not increase the City's pension costs over time.
Because employee contributions are fixed in the pension plan at 6% of salary, any cost increase
resulting from the DROP extension will be borne by the City. Although the actuary states he
will "gladly sign a letter of no financial impact," he also states that extending the DROP may
"indirectly alter participant behavior, which could have positive or negative consequences to the
plan." The City is currently contributing 37% of payroll to the police/fire pension plan, and this
contribution rate can be expected to increase over the next several years as a result of the
investment losses the pension fiend has suffered in the past 18 months.
Bottom line: extending the DROP period from 5 to 7 years may increase the City's pension
costs in the future. It is also possible that the City's costs could decrease as a result of this
change. The only way to ensure that the City's pension contributions will not increase as a result
of this change would be to add language to the ordinance stating that any future cost increases
resulting from the DROP extension would be paid for through an increase in employee
contributions.
"Pop-Up" Option -this provides an additional, voluntary option for members who select a joint
and survivor form of benefit. Under the joint and sLUVivor benefit, the member elects to receive
a reduced monthly pension for life, and if he/she dies, the joint pensioner continues to receive
75%, 66.66% or 50% of the member's benefit (based on the member's election) for life. Under
the "pop-up" the member's monthly benefit would be actuarially reduced (a further reduction of
the already reduced joint and survivor benefit). Then, if the member's joint pensioner dies
before the member, the member's benefit would increase to the straight life annuity amount.
Based on the actuarial reduction of the member's benefit, the actuary has certified that this
change will have no cost impact.
A number of city police and firefighter pension plans in Florida have adopted a "pop-up" option
similar to the one that has been proposed.
Please call me if you have any questions.
POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
DROP PLAN PARTICIPANTS
(UPDATED 11/05/09)
DROP Participant DROP Effective Date
Retirement Date Terminated/
Retired from City DROP
Length
Years Months
ACKERMAN, Richard 08/01/04 01/30/09 4 6
ADAMS, William 11/01/05 06/30/06 0 8
ANZALONE, Russell 10/01/06 current/ em to ed
BOLLAN, Brian 04/01/07 current/ emplo ed
BRADLEY, Robert 05/01/04 04/30/09 5 0
BRAND, Robert 09/01/02 03/04/05 2 6
BRASSARD, David 10/01/08 current/ em to ed
BROWN, Robert 08/01/96 06/28/01 4 11
BUCE, Thomas 06/01/94 01/08/99 4 7
BUSH, Richard 12/01/07 current/ emplo ed
CATO, Michael 06/01/95 05/19/00 5 0
COOPER, Geoffre 10/01/05 current/ em to ed
COVINGTON, Veronica 01/01/00 10/14/04 4 9
D'ATRIO, Richard 06/01/96 05/30/01 5 0
DALTON, James 10/01/04 09/28/09 5 0
DAMATO, Alfred 08/01/94 07/08/99 4 11
DAVIS, Mark 12/01/02 11/27/07 5 0
DE CARTE, James 08/01/01 07/22/06 5 0
DONOVAN, John 11/01/02 09/08/06 3 10
DORCAS, Wa ne 11/01/05 current/ em to ed
EBERHART Jr, David 10/01/09 current/ em to ed
EVANS, John 02/01/08 current/ em to ed
FERNANDES, Dwa ne 05/01/09 current/ emplo ed
FINLEY, James 02/01/08 current/ em to ed
FIREHOCK, Peter 05/01/00 Deceased: 12/22/01 1 7
FLETCHER Jr, John 03/01/01 02/09/06 4 11
FLYNN, Edward 10/01/08 current/ em to ed
GARCIA, Pamela 02/01/06 current/ em to ed
GARITO, Larr 07/01/95 06/02/00 4 11
GILLARD, Lennis 07/01/00 06/05/05 4 11
HAAS, Maurice 02/01/98 12/22/01 3 10
HANSEN, John 07/01/06 current/ em to ed
HARDIN, Charles 11/01/02 10/03/03 0 11
HARTMANN, Crai 11/01/07 12/31/08 1 2
HENDRICKS, Michael 05/01/97 04/26/02 5 0
HENSLEY, Paul 05/01/04 11/30/08 4 7
HEYSLER, Tina 06/01/09 current/ em to ed
HOECHERL, Katherine 06/01/06 current/ em to ed
HOLMSTED, Jan 09/01/09 current/ em to ed
HORRELL, James 11/01/07 12/28/07 0 2
HULL, Steven 05/01/98 04/25/03 5 0
JEROLOMAN, Charles 10/01/05 current/ em to ed
KENOPKE, Michael 05/01/05 04/19/06 1 0
KNABB, Ben~amin 07/01/09 current/ em to ed
Page 1 of 3
POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
DROP PLAN PARTICIPANTS
(UPDATED 11/05/09)
DROP Participant DROP Effective Date
Retirement Date Terminated/
Retired from City DROP
Length
Years Months
KOBRIN, David 11/01/05 current/ emplo ed
KOPEL, Joseph 07/01/94 03/30/99 4 9
KOSICK, Michael 02/01/07 current/ em to ed
LICATA, Ross 05/01/02 08/01/03 1 3
LIGUORI, Jose h 07/01/09 current/ em to ed
LUNSFORD, Howard 03/01/05 current/ emplo ed
MAKLER, Jack 11/01/04 11/21/05 1 0
MARTIN Jr, Glasco 06/01/98 10/05/01 3 4
MCCOLLOM, William 04/01/06 07/06/06 0 3
MEISSNER, Edward 07/01/05 current/ emplo ed
MILLER, Jeffre 06/01/09 current/ em to ed
MITCHELL, Julius 12/01/03 06/10/05 1 6
MOOK, Thomas 06/01/94 05/20/99 5 0
MORELAND, Robert 06/01/02 04/30/07 4 11
MORLEY, Dennis 09/01/96 08/31/01 5 0
MUSCO, Robert 04/01/05 01/20/06 0 9
MYERS, Thomas Brad 03/01/07 current/ em to ed
NABORS, Thomas 09/01/04 05/26/06 1 9
NEDDO, Arthur 10/01/98 09/02/00 1 11
PARKER, Frederick 11/01/06 10/24/08 2 0
PHILLIPS Jr, Ral h 04/01/07 current/ em to ed
PITOCCHELLI, Gerald 07/01/06 10/20/06 0 3
PRIEST, David 06/01/04 11/30/08 4 6
QUINLAN, Thomas 02/01/06 current/ em to ed
RASHKIND, Glen 03/01/09 current/ em to ed
REGO, William 05/01/98 09/27/02 4 5
RINGERSEN, David 08/01/02 07/27/06 4 0
RYNCARZ, Frank 07/01/94 10/02/98 4 3
SCHOFIELD, Pete 06/01/97 05/23/02 5 0
SCHROEDER III, Jose h 03/01/05 06/30/08 3 4
SEARLES, Barr 05/01/97 04/26/02 5 0
SMITH, William 05/01/05 current/ em to ed
STEVENS, Robert 10/01/02 08/31/07 4 11
STRAGHN, Rand 10/01/95 09/21/00 5 0
STRAVINO, Charles 11/01/04 10/07/09 5 0
STRIANESE, Anthon 09/01/09 current/ em to ed
SWIGERT, Michael 04/01/05 05/25/07 2 2
TABEEK, James 03/01/08 current/ em to ed
TOMASZEWSKI, John 04/01/06 current/ em to ed
TRAWICK, Dou las 06/01/94 05/13/99 4 11
TUSTIN, Thomas 10/01/05 current/ em to ed
VAUGHN, Dou las 12/01/00 11/01/05 4 11
WEITMAN, Jose h 08/01/04 11/30/08 4 4
WHATLEY, Thomas 10/01/07 11/30/08 1 2
Page 2 of 3
POLICE AND FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM
DROP PLAN PARTICIPANTS
(UPDATED 11/05/09)
DROP Participant DROP Effective Date
Retirement Date Terminated/
Retired from City DROP
Length
Years Months
WIGDERSON, Michael 02/01/97 01/08/02 4 11
WILLIAMS, Geoffre 05/01/00 04/28/05 5 0
WINTEMUTE, James 02/01/06 current/ em to ed
WOODS, Marc 01/01/05 12/31/09 5 0
Page3of3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Richard C. Hasko, P.E., Environmental Services Director
THROUGH: David T. Harden, City Manager
DATE: November 2, 2009
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM WS.2 -WORKSHOP MEETING OF NOVEMBER 10, 2009
MANGROVE PARK BOAT RAMP SLOPE MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES
ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION
Staff requests direction regarding alternatives for reconstructing the boat ramps at Mangrove Park to
flatten the physical slope of the ramps to better accommodate launching and retrieving of trailered
boats.
BACKGROUND
Since the completion and opening of Mangrove Park on the Intracoastal Waterway south of SE 10th
Street, the City has received numerous comments from residents using the new boat ramp facilities
concerning the steepness of the ramp slope. At an approximate 18% slope, the ramps are reported
to provide extremely challenging conditions for launch and retrieval of trailered boats. While the
ramps were constructed according to plans, they were designed somewhat steeper than other facilities
along the waterway due to the restrictions imposed by the site configuration, elevation and conservation
area requirements as established by permit. The primary site characteristic contibuting to the difficulty
of use of the new ramps is the vertical difference between the top of the ramps and the water elevation.
A car/trailer combination must be completely on the ramp slope before encountering adequate water
depth to launch or retrieve a boat. By comparison, this is not the case with the Knowles Park ramps,
where, even at low tide, the water elevation is significantly higher relative to the top of the ramps than
at Mangrove Park. Since nothing can be done about the differential site/water elevations, the ramp
length must be increased to lessen the slope.
Staff has worked with the project consultant to identify alternative proposals for ramp
reconstruction that lessen the slopes and improve launching/retrieving conditions. These alternatives
with associated construction cost estimates will be presented to Commission for review, discussion and
direction.
FUNDING SOURCE
To be determined.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests direction from Commission as to the preferred mitigation option.
I'ROJEC7 OVERVIEW
In the fall of 2002, the City of Delray Beach approached Currie Sowards Aquila Architects
(GSA) for the design of a new boat ramp park and eventual preparation of permit and
construction documents. The small regional boat ramp park was to be on property comprised of
land leased from the Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) and a small parcel owned by the
City. A drawing prepared by the City dated September 11, 2000, was provided indicating the
general concept and a proposed layout, and this was used as a starting point for discussion.
After several concepts were reviewed, it became evident that the desires of the parks
Department could not be met as far as the number of trailer parking due to the site geometry
and the requirements for turning radius and other code considerations.
Coincidentally, CSA Architects was concurrently working on the design of a new overflow parking
lot for the condominium to the north, Delray Harbor Club, and it became evident that a site re-
configuration and land swap could result in both parties getting a design closer to their
individual program requirements. Following several site alternatives and meeting with the
affected parties, the land swap was defined, and the city prepared all the necessary documents
for transfer and recordation. By now, almost two years had passed.
In February 2004, we began researching the requirements for submission for permit by
preparing all the documents needed for review and approval by all the agencies that would have
jurisdiction, including
• Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND)
• United States Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE)
• South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
• Federal and State Department of Environmental protection (DEp)
• palm Beach County Department of Environmental resource Management (ECM)
• palm Beach County Health Department
• Florida Department of Transportation
• Delray Beach planning Department (Sp~AB & p&Z)
• Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
On August 18, 2005, a Joint Application for Environmental resource permit /Authorization to
Use State Owned Submerged Lands /Federal Dredge and Fill permit for Intracoastal park
(Mangrove park) for the City of Delray Beach was submitted. After exhaustive review and
submittals of requested information, a Standard General permit was issued on July 31, 2006.
Over the next year or so, all other City required approvals were secured, the project was bid, and
construction began in mid-June, 2007, and completed in the fall of 2008.
DESIGN CON57RAIN75
Due to the established Shortage of public access boat ramps in palm Beach County, the City
Saw an opportunity to expand these resources by adding two more boat ramps within the City.
At the time there were only two ramps at Knowles park and one at Lake Ida, and this was an
opportunity, albeit limited, to add two more.
The Site geometry was limited in that it was primarily an east/west Strip that opened up at the
east-end to an existing Sea wall previously used and abandoned by a Coast Guard Auxiliary
group. It was intended that Since the Site was generally flat and the existing Sea wall appeared
to be in useable condition that we would retain this Sea wall and cut aS required to construct
the two new ramps. To add to our existing constraints, the total Site area was approximately
4.5 acres, and 27% of that was mangrove habitat. In addition, once a workable design was
approved, there was an area of wetland impact of 9,897 Square feet which required a 2:1
mitigation area, or 14,613 Square feet, which could not be provided on Site due to program
requirements and other physical constraints.
Due to our limited available Site for on-Site required mitigation, it was agreed by all the parties,
including FIND and SFWMD, that a conservation easement would be created and dedicated in
perpetuity aS Such in lieu of the required on-Site mitigation and that it would be used for
educational purposes through Signage and other method S. This easement was prepared and
recorded with palm Beach County.
Another permit requirement was that we perform a bathymetric Survey and a Sea GraSS
assessment of the basin to insure that we could perform the required dredging without violating
any environmental regulations. During this process, we discovered the existence of Johnson Sea
Grasses, a Federally protected Species which required that we limit the basin dredging area to
approximately the Southern half, and thus limiting our ramp approach. AS a consequence, we
angled the ramps to provide a more direct access and were required to provide Some form of
barrier to keep boating activity out of the protected area. This immediately cut our ramp
approach area in half.
The design elevation at the top and bottom of the ramp was restricted aS well. The bottom
elevation of the ramp was determined with the intent of providing a minimum water depth of
three feet during times of low tide.
The elevation at the top of ramp was determined based upon the Surface water management
(drainage) design for the park Site. Due to the fact that the vast majority of the park Site iS
paved and the Site drainage System discharges to a protected mangrove area, water quality
treatment was required and iS provided within a dry detention area or Swale. This detention
area was also important in order to meet the regulated drainage discharge limitation for the
Site aS the detention area provides Storage for Surface water runoff. The design requirements
for the Surface water management System and the lack of available area on the Site for the
detention area were factors in Setting the elevation of the top of the boat ramp. provision of
this detention area was necessary in order to obtain permit approval from the SFMWD.
Therefore, the Site configuration and constraints, the requirement for the conservation
easement in lieu of mitigation, the Surface water management System design requirements, the
preferred minimum water depth at low tide, and the proximity of protected Johnson Sea
grasses, all combined resulting in a Site with multiple restrictions placed on the proposed
improvements. None of these conditions, including elevation differences, exist at Knowles park.
CONCLUSION
Following the completion of the project, complaints began to Surface wherein boaters Stated
that the ramps were improperly designed and that they could not manipulate the limited area
and the Steep Slope of the ramps. Consequently, these ramps are not receiving the level of use
desired by the City and the boating public.
It iS important that everyone understand that there iS no failure of design and that all
decisions are within recommended guidelines aS determined by all the permitting authorities,
including the United states Army Corps of Engineers and that no decision was made without
the active participation of the City.
AS noted above, the permit received from the SFWMD included a requirement to protect the
Johnson Sea GraSS area by provision of protective barriers (warning Signs and pilings) and a
recorded conservation easement in perpetuity.
RECOMMENDA710N
At the request of the City, the Architect and other consultants have been reviewing possible
alternatives for modification of the existing ramp to lessen the perceived challenge.
Three alternatives are being proposed aS follows:
1. Change in Slope to 14% extending landward which generally consists of extending
the top of the ramp approximately ten feet landward (South) resulting in a
reduction of Slope from the original 18% to 14% for the top two-thirds of the
ramp. The distance from the bottom of the ramp to the Sea grass piling barrier
iS approximately 35'. proposed cost for this option iS estimated in the range of
$135,000 to $150,000.
2. Change in Slope to 14% extending Seaward which keeps the top of the ramp in the
Same original location but extends the toe about Seventeen feet into the water
and lowering the Slope to 14% for the full length of the ramp. The distance
between the bottom of the ramp and the Sea grass barrier iS reduced to
approximately 19' with this alternative. proposed cost for this option iS
estimated in the range of $295,000 to $310,000.
3. Change in Slope to 13% extending Seaward i5 the Same a5 alternate 2 above only
extending another Six feet north allowing for a more gradual Slope. The distance
between the bottom of the ramp and the Sea grass barrier iS approximately 14.5'
with this alternative. proposed cost for this option iS estimated in the range of
$310,000 to $325,000.
prepared by: Jose N. Aquila, AIA
November 5, 2009