02-27-90 Regular
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
REGULAR MEETING - CITY COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 27, 1990
7 P.M. AGENDA Commission Chambers
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 or hearing, such persons will need a record of these
proceedings, and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that
a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes
the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The
City does not provide or prepare such record.
1. Roll Call.
2. Invocation.
3. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
4 . Agenda approval.
Action: Motion to approve.
S. Approval of Regular Meeting minutes of February 13, 1990.
6. Proclamation:
A. Red Cross Month- March 1990.
7. Presentation:
A. Presentation by the City's Legislative Consultant, Kathy
Daley, reo 1990 Legislative Agenda.
B. Community Appearance Board's Certificate of Excellence in
Design, Historic Preservation Category, to Cason Cottage.
C. Resolution No. 24-90: A Resolution commending James Melvin
Pendergrass for his 18 1/2 years of dedicated service as an
employee with the City of Delray Beach.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8. ORDINANCE NO. 3-90: An Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances
by enacting a new subchapter "Sidewalk Cafes" which provides the
criteria for application, permitting procedures and fees for sidewalk
cafes in the Central Business District (CBD) . City Manager recommends
approval.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 4-90: An Ordinance prohibiting the consumption of
alcoholic beverages in public places. City Manager and City Attorney
recommend approval.
10. ORDINANCE NO. 5-90: An Ordinance correcting the Zoning Map to
show appropriate zoning of GC (General Commercial) District instead of
RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District for property commonly known
as the 8th Street Market located at the northeast corner of N.E. 8th
Avenue and N.E. 8th Street. City Manager recommends approval.
11. ORDINANCE NO. 6-90: An Ordinance amending the City Code to
provide for expansion of the scope of equity investments that the
Police and Firefighters Pension Board can make.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
12. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items from the Public.
REGULAR AGENDA
Agenda
Meeting of 2/27/90
13. LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY: Consider approving
proposed landscape plan for North Federal Highway (between N.E. 8th
Street and Gulfstream Boulevard) in an approximate amount of $140,000
with funding from 1987 Utility Tax Federal Highway- Linton to North
End (Account No. 333-4141-572-61.27). City Manager recommends
approval.
14. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 LINTON I-95 LANDSCAPING: Approve Change
Order No. 1 increasing the contract amount by 11,219.50 to replace
Black Olive trees which died in the freeze and for additional sod
covering. Funding is available in 1987 Utility Tax Beautification
Surplus Fund (Account No. 119-0000-301-19.00). City Manager
recommends approval.
15. CHANGE ORDER NO. 2- WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE 1-95 INTERCHANGE:
Approve Change Order No. 2 in the amount of 16,925 for the
replacement and change out of freeze damaged plant materials.
Replacement materials include: 18 Nerium Oleander Standards ($1,620);
33 Black Olive Trees ($4,290); 1,105 Myrsine guianensis ($8,840); five
Pink Tabebuia ($675); and two Jacaranda Trees ($300). Funding is
available in 1987 Utility Tax Federal Highway Linton to North End
(Account No. 333-4141-572-61.27) . City Manager recommends approval.
16. RENEWAL OF THE CITY'S GROUP HEALTH PLAN: Consider renewing the
City's Group Health Plan with American General Group Insurance Company
with new rates as recommended by staff. City Manager recommends
approval.
17. EXTENSION OF CONTRACT: Consider request from David and Shelia
Turner for an extension until March 30, 1990 for closing on the Adult
Bookstore property. City Manager recommends approval.
18. SELECTION OF BOND COUNSEL FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES REVENUE BOND
ISSUE: Review proposals received and select bond counsel for the
Public Utilities Revenue Bond Issue.
19. WAIVER OF DEFINITION OF FAMILY: Consider two requests for waiver
of Chapter 173, Section 173.001, Section 2 regarding definition of
family.
20. REQUEST FROM COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO HIRE PLANNER:
Consider proposal that the City hire a planner to revise the current
Community Redevelopment Plan (CRP) with the CRA paying for salary and
compensation costs.
21. NAMING OF MINI PARK: Consider naming the proposed mini-park
located on the Mount Olive Missionary Baptist Church property located
at the corner of N.W. 5th Avenue and N.W. 1st Street. Historic
Preservation Board are recommending " B.F. James and Francis J. Bright
Park" .
22. DENIAL OF SETTLEMENT OFFER: Deny $15,000 settlement offer
from Mr. McCracken. City Manager and City Attorney recommend denial
of settlement offer.
CONSENT AGENDA
23. REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY TENT PERMIT: Approve request from Ames
Department Store for a temporary tent permit to erect a 25'x80' tent
in their parking lot from February 28th through March 19th for a
promotional furniture sale. City Manager recommends approval.
24. RESOLUTION NO. 17-90: A Resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to demolish an unsafe structure at 239 N.W.
8th Avenue. City Manager recommends approval.
25. RESOLUTION NO. 18-90: A Resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to demolish an unsafe structure at 20 S.W.
6th Avenue. City Manager recommends approval.
-2-
Agenda
Meeting of 2/27/90
.
26. RESOLUTION NO. 19-90: A Resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to demolish an unsafe structure at 129 S.W.
5th Avenue. City Manager recommends approval.
27. RESOLUTION NO. 20-90: A Resolution assessing ..costs for
abatement action required to demolish an unsafe structure at 429 West
Atlantic Avenue. City Manager recommends approval.
28. RESOLUTION NO. 21-90: A Resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to board up a pool area at 227 N.E. 7th
Avenue. City Manager recommends approval.
29. 'RESOLUTION NO. 22-90: A Resolution assessing costs for
abatement action required to board up an unsafe structure at 602 S.W.
9th Court. City Manager recommends approval.
30. RESOLUTION NO. 23-90: A Resolution amending Resolution No. 54-89
to provide for an eighth, nonvoting member from North Boca Raton, on
the Education Board. City Manager recommends approval.
31. AWARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS:
A. Tropic Isle Drainage Phase II- Engineering- Hardrives of
Delray Inc., in the amount of $67,273.75 with funding from 1987
Utility Tax Bond Issue (Account No. 333-3161-541-61.11).
32. Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items:
A. Commission
B. City Attorney
C. City Manager
-3-
! . '
[IT' OF DELAR' BER[H
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.E. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
407/243-7090 TELECOPIER 407/2784755
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 27, 1990
To: City Commisê,ion
From: Herbert W. A. Thip-le, City Attorney
Subject: Submission of Resignation as City Attorne~r
It is with a great deal of sadness that I am hereby submitting to you my
resignation as City Attorney for the City of Delray Beach, to be effective at
5:00 p.m. on April 27, 1990.
As you are aware, the Board of County Commissioners of IJeon County,
Florida has offered me and I have accepted the position of County Attorney
for Leon County (with the ability to institute their new in-house County
Attorney's---s.ffice), effective April 30, 1990. Not only does this present to me
a professional opportunity, but it would also allow me to meet a lon~er-term
goal of my family to relocate to the northern part of Florida.
My decision to accept the position has certainly not been made lig-htly, and
comes only after many hours of serious thought and discussions with my
family and friends concerning this opportunity. While I look forward in g-reat
anticipation to the challenges of the new position, r am saddened by the
number of opportunities and close friends who I will leave behind here in
Delray Beach.
Despite rumors and articles to the contrary, it is not now nor has it ever
been any form of political pressure or the circumstances of City politics or
elections that ca.used me to make the decision to accept the position. Rather,
the multi-faceted political atmosphere in Delray Beach has always represented
a legal and personal challenge to me which, hopefully, I have been ahlp- to
accept and meet in the past nine years.
You should also be aware that the Leon County Board of County ComMis-
sioners, and each of the Commissioners therein, are obviously dedicated and,
collectively, one of the best County Commissions that I have p-ver had the
plea,sure to meet. However, on the municipal level, there has never been an
occasion in which I have been sorry to have worked for the individual City
Council/City Commission members who have made up the City CoundJ/City
Commission of the City of Delray Beach over the last nine years and who
Memo to City Commission
February 27, 1990
Page 2
have shown genuine interest in the best for the City. In their own way,
each of the past City Commissioners with whom I have worked has brought me
both legal challenges, as well as personal satisfaction, and I have no doubt
that this trend will continue in the years ahead for my successor.
While there are certainly very many more projects still to be completed, it is
with some degree of satisfaction that we have reached this pinnacle which
allows me the opportunity to leave for the new position. What with the new
comprehensive plan now being in place, the establishment at many new
procedures and administrative boards seeking to meet your objectives, the
smooth-running self-insurance program, the implementation of many new
procedures and cost-saving devices in the City Attorney's Office, 8.S well as
the successful completion of many important and potentially costly litigation
matters, 8.11 provide me with some degree of satisfaction that my years here
have resulted in 8 benefit to the City and its taxpayers.
Additionally, with regard to the City Man8,ger's Office, it should be said that
although the circumstances of the changes in that office (there being at least
11 permanent and interim City Managers since I have taken the City Attorney
position) have resulted in some instability within the City government, it has
presented me with an opportunity to work closely with many of the top
administrative/managerial employees of the City during those difficult times.
Each of t~ persons have served the City well during these times and it
has only been with their, and the current department heads', help that we
have been able to fulfill the goals and objectives set by the City Commission.
With regard to filling the vacancy which will be created, it has always been
my position, and I recommend to you, that the City Commission look to within
the City Attorney's Office for promotion to the position rather than the costly
and sometimes inefficient process of looking throughout the nation for a new
City Attorney.
Finally, to each of the current City Commissioners, let me extend to you my
warmest personal thanks and appreci8,tion for aU of your support and
cooperation over these past years. It is because of your support of our
office and me personally that this decision has been so difficult to make.
Once again, thank you for letting me have the opportunity to serve you, the
City, and the taxpayers of the City as an Assistant City A ttorney from 1979
to 1981 and as your City Attorney since 1981, and I wish each and everyone
of you much success in our upcoming "Decade of Excellence" . The
Memo to City Commission
February 27, 1990
Page 3
profession81 fulfillment which you have provided and the kindnesses that you
have shown shall not be forgotten.
Respectfully submitted,
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF LRAY BEACH, FLORIDA
By:
ThIele, Esq.
cc: Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manager
John Elliott, Assistant City Manager
Robert Barcinskj, Assistant City Manager
Marty Ritchason, Personnel/J...abor Helations Director
Jeffrey Kurtz, Assistant City Attorney
Susan Ruby, Assistant City Attorney
Jo Weaver, Paralegal
Cathy Inglese, Legal Secretary II
Sue Hudson, Legal Secretary I
--....-
-, r
. ~
. ..
MEMORANDUM
i
.
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGENDA REPORT - MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27, 1990
DATE: February 23, 1990
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Item No. 8 (Ordinance No. 3-90) This is a Second Reading of an
Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances by enacting a new subchapter
"Sidewalk Cafes" which provides the criteria for application,
permitting procedures and fees for sidewalk cafes in the Central
Business District ( CBD) . The application fee for a sidewalk cafe
permit will be $50 with an annual charge thereafter of $50 per
renewal. Provisions of the application require a valid occupational
license¡ site plan of the area between the store front and vehicular
traffic surfaces¡ proof of insurance¡ and execution of a Hold Harmless
Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
Other provisions provide for denial, revocation, or suspension of
permit for loss of business or health permit¡ insufficient insurance
coverage¡ changing conditions relating to pedestrian or vehicular
movement¡ and failure to correct violations.
This ordinance has been amended to reflect action taken at your joint
workshop meeting of February 20th with the Downtown Development
Authority.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 3-90.
Item No. 9 (Ordinance No. 4-90) This is a Second Reading of an
Ordinance prohibiting the consumption of alcoholic beverages in public
places.
One of the provisions contained in Ordinance No. 3-90 provides for the
consumption of alcoholic beverages at permitted sidewalk cafes. This
activity is currently prohibited by Code. This Ordinance provides for
exceptions to that policy. In addition, the revised ordinance will
also eliminate the threat of arrest from golfers at the municipal golf
course and allows a mechanism by which the City Manager could waive
the application of the ordinance for special events, such as Old
School Square grand, opening, Delray Affair, and the like.
Recommend approval of Ordinance 4-90.
Item No. 10 (Ordinance No. 5-90) This is a Second Reading of an
Ordinance correcting the Zoning Map to show appropriate zoning of GC
(General Commercial) District instead of RM-10 (Multiple Family
Dwelling) District, for property commonly known as the 8th Street
Market located at the northeast corner of N.E. 8th Avenue and N.E.
8th Street. This property was zoned as C-2 upon annexation in 1971.
Since that time, the zoning map has shown three different designations
(RM-15, GC, and RM-10) and one map showed no designation even though
there have been no site specific rezonings of the property. The
Future Land Use Map designates the property as Commercial¡ thus, the
original zoning of Commercial is still appropriate. In similar
circumstances, when it was apparent an error had been made of the
official zoning map, a corrective ordinance was prepared.
Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 5-90.
Item No. 11 (Ordinance No. 6-90) This is a Second Reading of an
Ordinance which expands the scope of equity investments that the
Police and Firefighters Pension Board can make. Based upon a request
AGENDA REPORT .
Meeting of 2/27/90
made by the Police and Firefighter Pension Board of Trustees, the City
Attorney's Office, performed research regarding the modification of
the ordinance governing the financing and fund management of the
Police and Fire Pension Fund. It was the Trustees belief that returns
on our investments could be enhanced by modification or elimination of
certain restrictions on the pension fund investments contained in our
ordinances.
The City Attorney's Office has determined that the most restrictive
provision found in our Code of Ordinances is Section 33.66, subsection
33.66(E)(2), which provides restrictions on pension fund investment in
corporate stocks and bonds. Those restrictions in our Code of
Ordinances are:
1. Corporations listed on any one or more of the recognized
national stock exchanges, and holding a rating in one of the
three highest classifications.
2 . Corporations which have paid cash dividends for a period of
seven fiscal years preceding the date of acquisition.
3. Those corporation which have after-tax earnings in an average
amount equal to at least two times the amount of yearly interest
charges on their bonds, and an amount at least equal to two times
the amount of interest charges in each of three fiscal years
immediately preceding purchase¡ where those corporations which
over the seven fiscal years immediately preceding purchase have
after-tax earnings in an average amount equal to at least six
percent of the par value of their bonds in each of the three
fiscal years immediately preceding purchase.
4 . Those corporations which are not in default or which have not
been in default within the immediately preceding five year
period.
S. The Pension Board is prohibited from investing more than five
percent of Pension Fund assets in the stock of anyone issuing
company, or from acquiring more than three percent of the
outstanding stock of anyone company.
6. The Pension Board is prohibited for investing more than fifty
percent of fund assets and stocks.
Language similar to that in Item 1 above exists in State Statutes,
however, there are no provision established in the statutes for Items
2, 3, 4. With reference to Item 5 J the Statutes establish an
investment limit of five percent of outstanding stock. Likewise on
Item 6, an investment limit of 30% on stock (equity) investments
exists.
The Statute specifically states that municipalities with "local law"
pension plans may modify investment procedures contained in the
statutes through a municipal ordinance. While Section 33.66 could be
repealed in its entirety, it is recommended that it be amended to
modify or delete only those investment provisions which are more
restrictive than those in Florida Statutes. A detailed staff report
is attached as background material for this item.
Re~ommend approval of Ordinance No. 6-90.
REGULAR AGENDA
Item No. 13 Landscape Plan for North Federal Highway. In December
1989, the Commission was apprised that the FDOT would not permit
installation of landscaping designed by H. Kurt Kettlehut and
Associates without the reconstruction of all of the median curbing.
- 2 -
.
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting of 2/27/90
.
The cost for constructing nonmountable curbing was estimated at
$160,000. By consensus, the Commission directed staff to redesign the
landscape plan with "non impacting" plant materials which would be
acceptable to FDOT without changing existing curbing.
The basic restriction imposed by FDOT was that the plant material
should not have a trunk diameter greater than four inches at maturity
unless a 10 foot offset from the face of the curb and visibility
between a height of 30 inches and 6 feet could be maintained.
This project includes the medians between N.E. 8th Street and
Gulfstream Boulevard, along with the utility strips located along the
sides of the road. The medians will be irrigated, the sides of the
road will not. This plan includes the following:
A. The median just north of Plasteridge Insurance will be
developed with Royal Palms and substantial shade trees. The
existing seagrape will be saved, the Sabal Palm will be
relocated, and shrub massing will be used to create focal points
within the median.
B. Median Two has three existing Black Olives which DOT has
"grandfathered in". This median will therefore be atypical.
C. Medians 3 through 13 currently have Paurotis Palms, Silver
Buttonwood, Cattley Guavas, Indian Hawthorne and Liriope. The
Buttonwood will be replaced with Myrsine; the Cattley Guavas
with Silver Buttonwood; the Liriope with Yellow Lantana; and
the Indian Hawthorne with Ilex vomitoria.
D. The original plan did not include any sod. The medians will
have a minimum of five feet of sod along the length and 100 feet
from the ends of the medians.
E. The utility strips along the side of the road will have
existing weeds removed and have drought tolerant Bahia planted
flush with the curb. Carrotwood Trees will be planted
approximately every 60 feet. Carrotwoods are very drought
tolerant, do well in poor soil conditions, and mature to an
average of 25 feet.
The estimated cost for completion of this project is $140,000.
Funding is available in 1987 Utility Tax Federal Highway- Linton to
North End (Account No. 333-4141-572-61.27).
Recommend consideration of proposed landscape plan for North Federal
Item No. 14 Change Order No. 1 Linton/ I-95 Landscaping. This
Change Order increases the contract amount by $11,219.50 to replace
Black Olive trees which died in the freeze and for additional sod
covering. Those items which required replacement due to freeze damage
were five 12 foot Black Olive Trees ($675) and five bags of mulch
($11.25).
Other additions to the contract were necessary because the consultant
who originally prepared the design did not include enough sod to
create a finished appearance on the project. He also failed to
include the utility strips into the plan. Those additions include
68,000 square feet of Bahia sod for the interchange cloverleaf
($13,600); 10,975 square foot grading and excavation in utility
strips ($1,646.25); additional grading at interchange areas ($1,500);
4,500 square fe~t St. Augustine Sod in medians at interchange ($900);
and 4,500 square feet grading medians at interchanges ($675) .
Reductions in the contract include deletion of 28,440 square feet of
St. Augustine sod for interchanges (-$5,688) and reduction in the
- 3 -
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting of 2/27/90
price of Black Olive Trees (-$2,100). Funding is available in 1987
Utility Tax Beautification Surplus Fund (Account No.
119-0000-301-19.00).
Recommend approval of Chanqe Order No. 1 in the amount of $11,219.50
with funding from the 1987 Utility Tax Beautification Surplus Fund
(Account No. 119-000-301-19.00).
Item No. 15 Change Order No. 2- West Atlantic Avenue/I-95
Interchange. This Change Order increases the contract amount by
$16,925 and includes the cost for the replacement and change out of
freeze damaged plant materials. Replacement materials include: 18
Nerium Oleander Standards ($1,620)¡ 33 Black Olive Trees ($4,290)¡
1,105 Myrsine guianensis ($8,840)¡ five Pink Tabebuia ($675); and
two Jacaranda Trees ($300).
Recommend approval of Chanqe Order No. 2 in the amount of $16,925 with
funding from 1987 Utility Tax Federal Hiqhway Linton to North End
(Account No. 333-4141-572-61.27).
Item No. 16 Renewal of the City's Group Health Plan. The City's
Group Health Plan is due for renewal on March 1st. The Plan is
primarily one of self-insurance in which the City pays for its own
claims up to $60,000 per individual. In order to increase the cost
efficiency of the program it is recommended that we increase the self
insured maximum from $60,000 to $75,000. Under this plan we pay for
three categories of charges:
A. Administrative Fee- claims handling, recording, commission,
etc. which will be increased from $9.92 to $12.48.
B. Pooling Fee- the insured specific loss portion over the self
insured maximum per claim which will be increased remain constant
at $7.96 because of the increase in the self insurance retention.
C. Utilization Review/PPO Fee- a cost control service through
review, certification, claims management and provider fee
negotiation which will also remain the same at $2.45.
The costs reflected above are per unit which is the equivalent of
every employee, retiree, and former employees covered under C.O.B.R.A.
The claims portion of the insurance will also undergo some changes.
Those changes include:
A. Co-insurance- claims are currently paid at 90% for P.P.O.
providers, this will be reduced to 80%. This will result in a
projected savings of 4.6%.
B. Out-patient surgery and pre-admission testing- claims are
currently paid at 100%. An additional $200 deductible and
appropriate co-insurance 80% P.P.O/70% non P.P.O. would be
applied. This will result in a projected savings of 2.4%.
C. Hospital confinement- An additional $200 deductible for non-
P.P.O. confinements would be instituted. This will result in a
projected savings of 1.9%.
D. Maximum out-of-pocket expense- these costs will be increased
from $1,000 (plus deductible) to $2,000 (plus deductible) for
P.P.O providers, and from $2,000 (plus $200 deductible) to $3,000
(plus deductible) for non P.P.O. Providers.
Additionally, in order to sustain the claims projected for the future
policy period a rate increase is necessary. The rates will increase
- 4 -
·
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting of 2/27/90
from $74.60 per each employee to $181.20 and from $130 for a dependent
unit to $171. 40 . '~
Recommend approval of renewal of City's Group Health Plan.
Item No. 17 Extension of Contract. David and Shelia Turner are
requesting an extension until March 30, 1990 for closing on the Adult
Bookstore property. The Turner's are experiencing some difficulty
obtaining financing, however, are continuing to actively pursue
funding for the purchase of this property.
Recommend approval of extension until March 30, 1990 for closing on
the Adult Bookstore property for David and Shelia Turner.
Item No. 18 Selection of Bond Counsel for Public Utilities Revenue
Bond Issue. At your January 30th meeting, the Commission, by
consensus, directed staff to contact those firms who expressed an
interest in serving as bond counsel. The City Attorney's office .
issued letters on February 2nd to various firms throughout the South .
Florida area. We received proposals from:
Feaman, Adams, Harris, Fernandez and Deutch
Greenburg, Traurig, Hoffman, Lipoff, Rosen and Quentel
Holland and Knight/Gunster, Yoakley and Stewart
Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, Fitzgerald and Sheehan
Mudge, Rose, Guthrie, Alexander and Ferdon
Hodgson, Russ, Andrews, Woods and Goodyear
Livermore, Klein and Lott
As the Commission had not previously provided any criteria upon which
to analyze the proposals, the City Attorney's office is unable to
provide a recommendation. However, Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, Fitzgerald
and Sheehan is the firm that is currently representing some of the
defendants in the Aero Dri litigation, therefore, caution is
recommended.
Copies of the proposals are available for review in the City Manager's
office.
Recommend consideration of selectinq bond counsel for the Public
Utilities Revenue Bond Issue from proposals received.
Item No. 19 Request for Waiver of Section 173.001 "Definition of
Family" of the Code of Ordinances. Ordinance 91-88 describes the
definition of family as, "one or more persons lineally related by
blood, marriage, or adoption and/or a family which includes one other
person who is related in some other manner by blood or marriage,
... .". That Ordinance also provides the mechanism by which those in
violation of this definition may request a waiver on the basis of
undue hardship from the City Commission.
The Ordinance does not establish standards or criteria for what
constitutes a hardship and staff has no basis for recommendation on
these requests. The Commission should consider each case individually
and make a determination based upon the facts and merits presented
recognizing that the intent of the definition of family ordinance was
to prevent overcrowding of individual residential units.
Case 1: The current occupancy is in violation by one person, who
is reported to be the property owner's sister. She is residing
in the house because both parents are out of the area. She is a
student at Atlantic High School.
Case 2: The current occupancy is in violation by three persons,
two are reported to be the property owner's brothers and the
third is an unrelated adult female. The owner has indicated that
- 5 -
.
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting of 2/27/90
.
the above parties are temporarily residing with him due to
financial hardships.
Recommend Commission consideration of two requests to waiver Section
173.001 "Definition of Family",
Item No. 20 Request from Community Redevelopment Agency to Hire
Planner. The CRA is requesting that the City consider hiring a
planner to revise the current Community Redevelopment Plan (CRP). In
exchange the CRA will pay for salary and compensation costs.
Staff has reviewed this request and made the following determination:
A. If the City were to hire a planner as proposed by the CRA the
person hired would be subject to all City personnel policies and
procedures. These include hiring, firing and disciplinary
procedures including Civil Service Rules. Accordingly we would
also be required to provide all fringe benefits given to other
employees to incl\..i.de health, life, disability, retirement,
workers compensation benefits, all vacation, sick leave, pay
raises and performance increases. The City would also be
financially responsible for any awards of unemployment
compensation which might arise from this employment arrangement.
B. As proposed, the employee would be under the policy direction
of the CRA, thus we would have all the responsibilities without
authority over the work element. These responsibilities would
also include any liability issues that might arise from the
employee's actions.
I would think that the 5% to 10% benefit that might be derived by the
City could be better put to use by the CRA in the planning process for
redevelopment projects.
Recommend that the CRA hire the planner directly to revise the
Community Redevelopment Plan with the CRA paying for salary and
compensation costs.
Item No. 21 Naming of Mini Park. At your February 13th meeting the
Commission, approved the placement of historic markers, accepted an
easement for maintenance and agreed in concept to the development of a
mini park to be located on the Mount Olive Missionary Baptist Church
property located at the corner of N.W. 5th Avenue and N.W. 1st
Street. This item is before you for the naming of that mini park as
requested by representatives of the Community Churches of Delray Beach
United. That organization is recommending the park be named "B.F.
James and Francis J. Bright Park" in honor of the first two teachers
at School No. 4, Delray Colored.
Commission should consider that no formal policy exists regarding the
naming of facilities. In this case, the facility is not an official
City Park, rather the site of a historic marker. Having the concept
of the site being a "mini-park" by naming is a "park" may be
misleading. An alternate name for the site, "The Five Sites Historic
Marker" dedicated to B.F. James and Francis J. Bright, has also been
recommended.
Recommend consideration of naming the mini park at the corner of N.W.
5th Avenue and N.W. 1st Street.
Item No. 22 Denial of Settlement Offer. Mr. McCracken has filed
litigation against the City resulting from dog bites he received as
part of a Police investigation into a complaint of a prowler. He has
submitted a settlement offer in the amount of $15,000. The City
Attorney's office and our outside counsel recommend denial of
- 6 -
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting of 2/27/90
settlement.
Recommend denial of settlement offer from Mr. McCracken.
CONSENT AGENDA
Item No. 23 Request for Temporary Tent Permit. Ames Department
Store, located at 14550 S. Military Trail, is requesting a temporary
tent permit to erect a 25'x 80' tent on the southwest corner of their
parking lot from February 28th through March 19th. The purpose of the
tent is to accommodate a proposed promotional furniture sale. The
applicable permits have been applied for.
Recommend approval of temporary tent permit for Ames Department store
to erect a tent from February 28th through March 19th.
Item No. 24 Resolution No. 17-90. This item is a Resolution
assessing costs for abatement action required to demolish an unsafe
building on property at 239 N.W. 8th Avenue. The Resolution sets
forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a
lien on this property in the event the assessment of $2,379.35 remains
unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 17-90 assessing costs for
demolishing an unsafe building within the City.
Item No. 25 Resolution No. 18-90. This item is a Resolution
assessing costs for abatement action required to demolish an unsafe
'building on property at 20 S.W. 6th Avenue. The Resolution sets
forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a
lien on this property in the event the assessment of $3,272.50 remains
unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 18-90 assessing costs for
demolishing an unsafe building within the City.
Item No. 26 Resolution No. 19-90. This item is a Resolution
assessing costs for abatement action required to demolish an unsafe
building on property at 129 S.W. 5th Avenue. The Resolution sets
forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a
lien on this property in the event the assessment of $1,809.50 remains
unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 19-90 assessing costs for
demolishing an unsafe building within the City.
Item No. 27 Resolution No. 20-90. This item is a Resolution
assessing costs for abatement action required to demolish an unsafe
building on property at 429 West Atlantic Avenue. The Resolution sets
forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a
lien on this property in the event the assessment of $1,072.50 remains
unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 20-90 assessing costs for
demolishing an unsafe building within the City.
Item No. 28 Resolution No. 21-90. This item is a Resolution
assessing costs for abatement action required to board up a pool area
on property at 227 N.E. 7th Avenue. The Resolution sets forth the
actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a lien on
this property in the event the assessment of $82.50 remains unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 21-90 assessing costs for
boarding up a pool area within the City.
- 7 -
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting of 2/27/90
Item No. 29 Resolution No. 22-90. This item is a Resolution
assessing costs for abatement action required to board up an unsafe
building on property at 602 S.W. 9th Court. The Resolution sets
forth the actual costs incurred and provides the mechanism to attach a
lien on this property in the event the assessment of $881.50 remains
unpaid.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 22-90 assessing costs for
boarding up an unsafe building within the City.
Item No. 30 (Resolution No. 23-90) A Resolution amending Resolution
No. 54-89 to provide for appointment of an eighth, nonvoting, member
from North Boca Raton, on the Education Board.
Recommend approval of Resolution No. 23-90.
Item No. 31 Award of Bids and Contracts:
A. Tropic Isle Drainage âPhase II- Engineering- Hardrives of
Delray Inc., in the amount of $67,273.75 with funding from 1987
Utility Tax Bond Issue (Account No. 333-3161-541-61.11) .
Item No. 32 Comments and Inquiries on Non-Agenda Items:
A. Commission
B. City Attorney
C. City Manager
- 8 -
r'TY DF DELARY BEA[H
,
WHEREAS, the American Red Cross is one of the largest
and oldest social service organizations in America¡ and,
WHEREAS, volunteer and financial contributions are
needed more now than ever be fore to protect the needs of our
citizens¡ and,
WHEREAS, volunteers make it possible for the Red Cross
to collect and provide blood to the ill and injured, provide
emergency assistance to disaster victims, and to respond to the
emergency needs of armed forces personnel and their families and
dependents¡ and,
WHEREAS, Red Cross volunteers conduct thousands of
courses in health and safety¡ and,
WHEREAS, for 105 years the American Red Cross has been
an essential ingredient of American life helping us to learn, to
help, and to prosper,
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DOAK S. CAMPBELL, Mayor ~f the City
of Delray Beach, Florida, do hereby proclaim March, 1990, as
"RED CROSS MONTH"
in the City of Delray Beach and urge all residents to donate their
time and their resources to support Red Cross activities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the
Official Seal of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, on this the
27th day of February, 1990.
MAY 0 R
DOAK S. CAMPBELL
SEAL
ÍDÀ
-
[IT' OF DELAR' BEA[H
100 N.W, 1st AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/243-7000
,
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ~
1990 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA I ~
.
.
MAYOR DOAK S. CAMPBELL 111
VICE-MAYOR MARY McCARTY
COMMISSIONER BILL ANDREWS
COMMISSIONER TRISH BRAINERD
COMMISSIONER JIMMY WEATHERSPOON
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
~
,
,
f .
. t
;
I I~
' . ;
~
.
.
LEGISLATIVE CALENDER
March 5-8 Committee Meetings
March 13-15 Appropriations Committee Meetings
March 20-23 Appropriations Committee Meetings
March 20-23 Appropriations Committee Meetings
April 3 Regular Session Convenes ,..
April 26 Palm Beach County Day-Tallahassee . ,
,
June 1 Last day of the 1990 Regular Session
if the Legislature completes work in
sixty days.
~
I ~
~ .
.
¡
(
,
~
.
1990 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
1. STATE FUNDING (Budget Requests)
1. BEACH RENOURISHMENT (Maintenance)
AMOUNT: $2,007,236
FROM: Department of Natural Resources
Beach Renourishment Projects
We are presently in our sixteenth year of beach
renourishment and must continue the maintenance
program in order to save the public beach. , ~
During this past year, the Governor and Cabinet
created a special "Beach Task Force," with Mayor '.
Doak Campbell as one of it's members. This Task
Force was formed to find a dedicated funding
source which would be used solely for Florida's
beach projects. The Task force recommended an
increase in the Documentary Stamp Tax which
would raise approximately $70 million - $35 million
for beach acquisition and $35 million for beach
renourishment. Although this concept is good, it
is not expected to be approved during this
Legislative Session.
Funding breakdown for the present beach project:
Federal share: $3,442,734
State share: $2,007,236
Local share; $ 901,599
TOTAL.......$6,351,569
Total 1990 State Beach Request..........$2,007,236
2. Historic Preservation/Old School Square
AMOUNT: $400,000
FROM: Secretary of State
Department of Historical Resources
Special Catagory Grant
- 1 -
~
, .
. ~
,
!
f
,.
;
~
'.
r
.
Arts and Culture/Old School Square
AMOUNT: $200,000
FROM: Secretary of State
Division of Cultural Affairs
Cultural Facilities
Old School Square total request.............$600,000
II. General Bills
1. State Mandates
a. Continue to support legislation to prohibit
unfunded State Mandates on local government.
2. Taxation i
a. Support legislation authorizing local
governments to adopt a local option sales
tax by a super majority of the County
Commission, rather than through referendum.
b. Support legislation authorizing local
governments to impose a gas tax which
would be used for badly needed trans-
portation improvements.
c. Support the reform of the occupational
license tax to better serve the individual
local authority.
d. Support the Local Option Interim Proprietary
and General Services Fee Act,(HB 261 by Rep. Arnold).
This Act authorizes local governments to levy
a fee applicable to property improvements from
the time a Certificate of Occupancy is issued
until October 1 when the property is subject
to Ad Valorum taxation. This fee is to defray
the cost of providing services to the property
during that period.
3. Criminal Justice
a. Support and monitor HB 293 by Rep. Kelly, which
would include Code Enforcement Officers as re-
lating to criminal penalties. It provides for
-2-
.
I
I .
~
.
I
,
~
mandatory minimum sentences for violent
offenses against Code Enforcement Officers
and Inspectors engaged in the lawful per-
formance of their duties.
3. Environment
a. Support, in concept, a designated funding
source to benefit beach renourishment.
b. Support legislation which would provide
increased State research funding to improve
local waste disposal and recycling technology.
4. Home Rule
a. Support legislation which exempts municipál
recreational facilities, activities and programs I
from State child care licensing requirements.
b. Oppose any legislation that intrudes on the
ability of municipalities to manage local i
affairs in accordance with the wishes of their
citizens.
5. Community Development
a. Support and monitor HB 233 by Rep. Logan
which creates the Florida Urban Development
Loan Ac t. This Act provides for eligibility
for municipalities to receive State loans for
urban development. The purpose is to provide
local governments together with private enter-
prise a way to improve their urban community.
It provides for , but not limited to improving
storm drainage, paving streets, alleys and gutters,
installing lights, street signs and directional
signs, beautifying pedestrian malls, walkways,
or other public areas, e tc. . .
III. Support, in concept, the 1990 Legislative platform
of the Florida League of Cities.
See attached
-3-
. .
I t.
. r
~
~
':
.
'I
t
r
. '
,
FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES, INC.
1990 LEGISLATIVE POLICY STATEMENT
FEBRUARY 9, 1990 i ,
,.
~
,
I
.
,
.
\
, . ~
.
.
. .
MUNICIPAL PINANCB , TAXATION
Priority
The Florida League of cities will support legislation granting
. cities additional revenue flexibility to meet the needs determined
by responsible growth management and to fund other local
obligations. Effective growth management planning requires cities
and counties to set levels of service and determine infrastructure
needs and requires the state to end unfunded mandates.
Plexible Pinanoing
200 Florida shares less dollars with its cities than any of
the other 10 largest states. Every tax source available
to a municipality in Florida is either capped or frozen
by the state constitution or the Legislature. Growth is
causing tremendous funding needs. Cities must have some
flexibility in the types of taxes they are able to levy
and the amount of money generated from those taxes.
Without the ability to expand boundaries and to finance
badly needed services in a fair way, it is difficult for
cities to properly plan for the future.
The Florida League of Cities will: ¡
200.1 Support the repeal of section 166.231 (1) (b) of the
Florida Statutes which exempts the "fuel adjustment
charge" from the Public Service Tax.
200.2 Support legislation that allows a municipality to receive
revenues via "partial year assessments" or "interim
service fees" on new construction upon issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
~200.3 Support a one-cent local option sales tax if approved by
a majority vote of the county commission without the
necessity of a referendum.
200.4 Support increased authority for local option gas taxes
so that local governments can further address current and
future municipal transportation needs.
200.5 Support legislation which recognizes non-resident
population in both existing revenue sharing formulas as
well as new local option revenues identified to address
non-resident population service requirements.
200.6 Support the reform of the occupational license taxing
authority to allow local discretion to address equity
considerations and to provide increased revenues.
I
~
,
I '.
, .
. f
.
í
t
'I
~ .
,
.
I
200.7 Support legislation to expand the tax base of the public
service tax to include cable television services and
wastewater services.
200.8 support reform of the State Municipal Revenue Sharing
Program to increase the bondable "guaranteed
entitlement", replace the cigarette tax with a revenue
that will keep pace with inflation, and eliminate Dade
County's automatic 7 percent increase.
200.9 support legislation requiring a fair share of the state
Infrastructure Trust Fund to be allocated to
municipalities.
200.10 support legislation that would allow cities to establish
special Service Benefit Units so that specific needs can
be met without having to use general fund revenues.
200.11 Support legislation to create an affordable housing trust
fund to be funded from interest earned on mortgage escrow
accounts.
Tax Equity í
201 Tax equity between the various levels of government is
an essential factor for establishing clear delineations
of responsibility between each government and its
citizens.
The Florida League of cities will:
201.1 Support review of the Truth in Millage (TRIM) process in
order to simplify it and make it more accurate. Allow for
property indexing for inflation and population growth
~ without the mandate to advertise it as a tax increase.
~~ ' 1 i . . l't' f
2'01,.2 Support leg1.s at on that exempts mun1.c1.pa 1. 1.es rom
paying the sales tax on contracted public works
construction materials.
201.3 Support legislation that will eliminate the double
taxation of municipal citizens from the taxation for
services rendered by the county from which the residents
of a municipality derive no direct benefit.
201.4 Support legislation that requires an allocation of
county-wide collected capital revenue, for transportation
purposes, that insures that the concurrency issues,
related to roads, for which the county is responsible,
within the cities are reasonably addressed.
2
~
,
I .
. ~
I
,
.
.
.
201. 5 Support legislation requiring that the cost of state
service fees on municipal trust funds not exceed the
actual cost of collection and administration of those
funds.
201.6 Support legislation to eliminate the exemption of school
buildings from uniformly imposed impact fees for
infrastructure.
201.7 Support legislation to develop a constitutional amendment
to correct inequities caused by existing homestead
exemptions in the calculation of ad valorem taxes
relative to general obligation bond issues passed by
local government voters.
Transportation
202 The state has a responsibility to provide fundable state
transportation solutions which complement local
government efforts and integrates local and regional
growth management plans.
The Florida League of Cities will: í
\2-02, 1
Support increased authority for local option gas taxes
so that local governments can further address current and
, , future municipal transportation needs.
,
\202.2 Support legislation providing for a change in the
Department of Transportation's 20/80 matching grant
program to a funding formula more favorable to
municipalities.
202.3 support legislation to provide that the cost of
relocation of pUblicly-owned utilities shall be paid by
the appropriate constructing agency.
202.4 support legislation providing for shared funding of
traffic signalization and signage by participating
governmental jurisdictions.
Environmental Fundinq
203 For many years the state has been mandating new and more
strinqent environmental requirements on municipalities
in order to meet statewide objectives. The state should
either appropriate funds or provide municipalities with
a source of funding to pay for those objectives.
The Florida League of Cities will:
3
.
(
,
I .
t
. :
I
;
~
.
\~203.1 Support permanent re-occurring funding sources to assist
in the financing of environmentally-related programs
including advanced wastewater treatment, hazardous waste
disposal and endangered species protection.
~3.2 Support legislation that would provide increased state
i research funding to improve local waste disposal and
recycling technology.
~03.3 Support the implementation of statewide revenues to fund
beach management and renourishment programs.
í
4
.
.
I "
,
. I
f
t
'"
"
URBAN ADKINISTRÀTION COKMITTEB
PRIORITY
Support legislation that commits state resources toward ådeRUately
funding the construction of jail/prison facilities, toward
increased criminal and noncriminal penalties for those who use,
manufacture and sell drugs, and toward adequate drug preventative
and treatment programs.
ANNEXATION
300 Substantial population growth and urban sprawl have
occurred in recent years in areas adjacent to
municipalities. This has often created undesirable
situations: substandard commercial, residential and
utility development;contamination of soil, water and air;
and, in general, inadequate regulations and facilities
to protect and serve citizens in high density areas.
The League recognizes that reasonable annexation laws i
would often address these problems in a positive fashion. i
Expeditious annexation procedures, urban service areas
and the elimination of enclaves are but a few of the í
tools that would effectively control urban sprawl and the
undesirable impact haphazard growth has had on Florida's
resources.
The Florida League of Cities will:
300.1 Support legislation that provides reasonable procedures
to allow cities to eliminate enclaves and to
expeditiously annex highly developed areas adjacent to
their boundaries.
"'~300.2 Support legislation authorizing cities to optionally
waive "in-city elections" for annexations by referendum.
300.3 support legislation that utilizes urban service areas to
effectively manage orderly growth.
300.4 Support legislation that ensures municipalities are
authorized to tie annexation to the provision of
municipal utility services.
300.5 Support legislation requiring counties to observe
municipal land use plans when granting development
approvals for property located within unincorporated
enclaves.
5
~
,
, f .
~
. ;
I
, - ,
.
.
300.6 Support legislation which allows municipalities to have
extraterritorial planning authority in areas which may
reasonably be expected to annex into the municipality in
. the foreseeable future.
300.7 Support legislation permitting municipalities to amend
their comprehensive plans and rezone property
simultaneously with the voluntary annexation of the
property.
HOKE ROLE
301 The Florida League of cities believes that the essence
of the concept of home rule is simple: the citizens of
a community have the constitutional right to manage their
own affairs at the grass-roots level with minimum
interference from the state, counties and other
governmental agencies. Home rule assumes that local
problems should be settled by locally elected officials,
that the state should concentrate on the pressing affairs
of state and that the unwarranted intrusion by state
officials into the affairs of local government should be
curtailed. As local conditions are often unique, í
rapidly-changing municipalities need the flexibility to
make organizational arrangements appropriate for local
conditions. Municipalities provide key governmental
services affecting the daily- lives of their citizens:
fire and police protection; traffic control; street
maintenance; zoning and land use; provision of water,
garbage and sewer services. Municipalities therefore
need to retain all options that will allow them to
perform these functions in the most economical and
efficient manner possible. Home rule leaves each
community free to exercise its responsibilities in a
manner best suited to the needs and conveniences of its
citizens. With full responsibility resting upon the
citizens, they have an opportunity to become better
educated in the principles and methods of municipal
government, and to develop common interests in community
affairs. Unhampered local control likewise permits
prompt action in dealing with fresh municipal problems
as they arise.
The Florida League of cities will:
" 301.1 Oppose legislation that intrudes on the ability of
municipalities to manage local affairs in accordance with
the wishes of their citizens.
-~~~01.2 support legislation that requires all governmental
agencies t~ comply with locally adopted codes.
6
~
I
I '.
~ .
. ¡
í
t
~
·
301.3 Oppose any legislation mandating the statewide
certification of municipal employees.
301.4 Support the repeal of statutes and oppose legislation
that provides exemptions from local comprehensive plans
or that preempt local zoning and land use powers.
301.5 Support legislation that reestablishes local government's
home rule authority over the procurement of professional
services.
ï
'~ ~01.6 Support legislation that exempts municipal recreational
) facilities, activities and programs from state child care
licensing requirements.
301.7 Support legislation that ensures that all costs incurred
by local governments in administering state laws
governing lost or abandoned property can be offset by
the proceeds derived from the sale of such property or
that authorizes local governments to retain the proceeds
derived from the sale of such property.
301.8 Oppose legislation that limits municipal franchise fees i
or otherwise restricts a municipality's authority to
franchise utilities and other service providers operating
within its boundaries.
301. 9 Support the repeal of statutes and oppose legislation
that intrudes on the home rule authority of
municipalities to manage and fund enterprise activities
and services provided by municipalities.
301.10 Support the repeal of statutes and oppose legislation
that restricts the use of proceeds derived from the sale
of governmentally owned properties.
TORT LIABILITY
302 The Florida League of cities recognizes that, in the
areas of tort liability, certain governmental conduct
must remain immune from scrutiny by judge or jury because
to do so otherwise would significantly impair
government I s ability to govern. The threat of tort
liability can have a substantial impact on local
government's ability to provide for the general health,
safety and welfare of its citizens. Also, expenditures
of pUblic funds to satisfy tort judgments are a
taxpayer's expense. Governments provide certain unique
services to the general public and these services require
that traditional standards and notions of tort liability
should not necessarily apply to local governments.
The Florida League of Cities will:
7
~
,
I .
~
.. f
í
,
'-
302.1 support legislation that limits the exposure of local
governments to tort liability.
302.2 support legislation abolishing the doctrine of joint
and several liability. .
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION
303 The Florida League of Cities recognizes the degree of
crime in a community has a direct impact on the quality
of life of its citizens and a community's well being is
dependent in part on the efficient and effective
administration of judicial affairs. The League believes
the paramount criminal justice problems presently
crippling Florida's communities are jail/prison
overcrowdedness and increased drug related activities.
The League further recognizes that an ,adequate state
criminal justice program balances retribution with
rehabilitation and education, and that this balance is
essential to an orderly and functional society. The t
League therefore believes the state should commit its
resources toward adequately funding the construction of ,
additional local jail and state correctional facilities,
toward increased criminal and noncriminal penalties for I t
those who use, manufacture and sell drugs, and toward "
adequate drug preventative, rehabilitative, treatment,
and testing programs. ~
The Florida League of Cities will:
303.1 Support legislation that provides adequate funding for
local jail and state correctional facilities.
303.2 support legislative programs designed to provide a more
expedited judicial process, including adequate funding
to hire more prosecutors, judges and public offenders so
that persons accused of crimes can be quickly brought to
trial and jail overcrowding alleviated.
303.3 Oppose legislation that eliminates the discretion of the
judiciary to incarcerate persons convicted of criminal
offenses unless such persons can be sentenced to
residential rehabilitative facilities where their
rehabilitation can be adequately monitored and
supervised.
303.4 Support legislation that places greater penalties on
those who use, manufacture and sell drugs, including
legislation that:
8
,
I .~
~
. ¡
f
;
~
~
..
t
* Would decrease the amount of marijuana that would
subject a person convicted of trafficking in marijuana
to minimum mandatory sentences.
* Would provide for stricter criminal penzÜ ties for
persons convicted of using, selling, manufacturing or
trafficking drugs in the presence of minors.
* Would permit professional boards to discipline
licensees convicted of trafficking in or conspiring to
traffic in controlled substances.
* Would suspend state aid or benefits to persons
convicted of trafficking in or conspiring to traffic in
controlled substances unless the person participates in
an approved drug treatment and rehabilitation program.
* Would require drug testing and treatment as a
precondition for early release of persons sentenced for
drug related offenses.
* Would make it a separate criminal offense to use income
or profits derived from a violation of state drug laws ¡
to invest in, acquire, establish or operate lawful
business enterprises.
* Would establish a minimum mandatory sentence for
persons convicted of possessing a firearm while
trafficking in controlled substances.
* Would make it a separate criminal offense to conspire
to or use, promote, or encourage the use of foreign
nationals or illegal aliens in the commission of criminal
activities, particularly drug related activities.
303.5 Support legislative programs designed to educate the
public about drugs (such as "Just Say No") and to
otherwise prevent drug use, particularly among minors.
303.6 Support legislative programs designed to treat prisoners
with chemical dependencies, including legislation
directing the Department of Corrections to establ ish
special drug-treatment prisons designed to provide
substance abuse testing, counseling, and treatment
services for persons convicted and incarcerated for drug
use.
303.7 Support legislation that encourages rehabilitative
programs designed to provide for an orderly transition
of released criminal offenders into society, including
legislation directing the Department of Corrections to
develop and implement residential programs designed to
provide basic education classes and testing, social
9
.
i
I '.
~
. .
I
;
~
.
skills counseling, voca~ional training assessment and
referral services, and jOb placement referral services
for non-violent 1st time criminals incarcerated in the
state correctional system.
303.8 support legislative programs designed to provide s,tricter
penalties for habitual and repeat criminal offenders.
303.9 Support legislation that provides flexibility to local
governments in the enforcement of codes and ordinances
and that adds certainty to and streamlines local code
enforcement processes.
303.10 Support legislation that protects municipal revenues
received from violations of city ordinances and the
Uniform Traffic Control Law.
303.11 support the repeal of Florida's criminal Ceposi tion Rule.
303.12 support legislation that increases the efficiency and
funding of the Safe Neighborhoods Act.
MUNICIPAL BUILDING DEPARTMENTS
i
304 cities are not part of the building construction
industry; rather, they are instruments of the citizens'
police and regulatory powers. While the state requires
that each local government adopt and enforce a building
code, municipal governments should nonetheless continue
to have the flexibility to decide which code to adopt,
and the home rule authority to determine the mechanisms
used to enforce the code. The League encourages the
voluntary certification of building inspection personnel
and, in fact, many cities now participate in voluntary
certification programs to accomplish this goal. However,
decisions relating to the administration and operation
of municipal building departments properly belong to the
cities' citizens through their city charter provisions
and their city council.
The Florida League of Cities will:
304.1 Oppose any legislation that removes or restricts the
ability of municipal governments to manage, operate and
finance their building departments.
304.2 support the repeal of statutes restricting the amount
and use of building permit fees.
304.3 Oppose legislation that would require a statewide uniform
building code, that would authorize statewide binding
interpretations of building codes, or that would prohibit
or otherwise restrict local amendments to building codes.
10
0,
~
.
, .
I
. ~
,
I
,.
, - ,
..
.
304.4 Oppose legislation that restricts a municipality's
authority to register building contractors doing business
within the municipality.
. FIRE SAFETY'AND PREVENTION
305 Since the possibility of destruction of life and property
by fire is a matter of concern wherever people live, fire
is one of the foremost threats facing local governments.
At one time or another, it has caused great devastation
throughout Florida. The Florida League of Cities
recognizes that local government has been, and will
continue to be, the primary force in combating this
danger.
The Florida League of Cities will:
305.1 Support legislation that ensures that the adoption and
enforcement of fire safety standards are maintained at
the local level.
305.2 Support legislation that reenacts Florida' s fire and life
safety requirements for public lodging establishments in
their entirety. í
305.3 Oppose legislation that places a greater financial burden
on local government to, fund the operation of the state
Fire College.
305.4 support legislation that establishes flammability and
toxicity resistant standards for upholstered furniture.
EMINENT DOMAIN
306 Local governments often find it necessary to use their
power of eminent domain to acquire land for such public
purposes as roads, public buildings and facilities,
downtown redevelopment, and the preservation of natural
resources. However, local government's exercise of this
power is often frustrated by the prohibitive costs
associated with eminent domain actions.
The Florida League of cities will:
'" -
\306.1 support legislation that places reasonable restrictions
on the award of attorneys' fees and court costs.
306.2 Oppose legislation that would expand the concept of
"business damages."
II
.
.
I .
.
,.
.
I
,
..
.
INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENT
307 The Florida League of cities recognizes that continuing
local government education for local officials will
enable them to improve their knowledge and skills and to
better serve the citizens of their community. The League
will support continued and increased funding for the
Institute of Government's training and research programs.
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
308 Substantial outgrowth of commercial activities has
occurred in recent years from urban downtown areas. This
urban sprawl has, in some instances, created undesirable
situations in central city areas contributing to the
subsequent decline in the tax base.
~ The Florida League of Cities will:
308.1 Support technical and financial assistance to
municipalities in redeveloping and revitalizing downtowns
and existing urban areas.
308.2 Support legislation that provides incentives to t
voluntarily enhance the quality of life of Florida
citizens through fair, safe, sanitary and decent housing,
provided such enhancements are consistent with local
building, land use and zoning requirements.
308.3 Support the ability of municipalities to effectively
establish and operate community redevelopment agencies
and. to utilize tax increment financing as a tool for
community and economic development.
12
~
,
I .
. ~
t
,
..
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
priority
The Florida League of cities will support legislation to prohibit
legislative or administrative statewide mandated programs without
sufficient appropriated state funding.
state Mandates
400 Existing state legislative or administrative mandated
programs without state funding seriously disrupt home
rule powers granted to cities by the constitution of this
state. If the state has a perceived need for
implementing pOlicies and programs of a "statewide"
interest, then they should be funded by the state
Legislature. Interjection of state governmental
priorities through a series of mandates and unfunded
programs forced upon local governments seriously disrupts
the ability of local officials to establish priorities
and resolve problems.
The Florida League of cities will: ¡
400.1 Support legislation to require state agencies to provide
a detailed economic impact statement to all affected
local governmental entities outlining and evaluating all
costs which affect that local government prior to rule
implementation and adoption.
400.2 Support legislation to prohibit unfunded administrative
agency mandates on local government.
400.3 Oppose legislation that will mandate local government to
subsidize private business operations such as financing
and maintaining railroad crossings and signalization
devices.
Multi-Jurisdictional Relationships
401 The Florida League of Cities recognizes that there is a
need for state and regional responses to meet the needs
of citizens that transcend local boundaries. However,
multi-jurisdictional governmental agencies should be
understanding of and responsible to problems of
individual cities.
13
~
.
I
~
.
,
,
.
The Florida League of cities will:
401.1 Support legislation providing for required and
proportionate representation of locally elected officials
on all new and existing regional and local districts,
councils, agencies or state-designated committees which
have an impact on municipalities to ensure a balanced
representation of local governments.
401.2 Support legislation to guarantee direct municipal
government participation in the determination of funding
formulas and methods of distribution of federal and state
funds administered by counties and the state for cities
and municipal programs.
401.3 Oppose legislation or rules that authorize the Governor
and the Cabinet to apply punitive sanctions against
cities or counties submitting untimely or non-compliant
local comprehensive plans without considering the
individual merits of each case.
401.4 Support legislation which ensures that the High Speed
Rail Program must comply with the comprehensive planning
and financing process of local government. i
Low-Income, Elderly and Disadvantaged citizens
402 Low-income, elderly and disadvantaged citizens create a
complex challenge for Florida cities and a particularly
strong intergovernmental cooperation is necessary.
The Florida League of Cities urges:
402.1 The appropriate state and federal agencies to make their
full resources available to ensure adequate funding,
efficiency and effectiveness of all community service
programs, including affordable housing, especially as it
relates to the low-income, elderly and disadvantaged
citizens.
Municipal Library punding
403 The Florida League of cities recognizes the contribution
made by municipal libraries to the quality of life for
Florida's citizenry.
The Florida League of cities will:
403.1 Support legislation that would provide state funding to
all municipal and regional libraries.
14
~
.
.
. ~
,
i
;
..
ENVIRONMENTAL QUA~ITY COMMITTEE
PRIORITY
The Florida League of Cities will support Legislation that would
provide incentives and require coordinated planning ef.fort to
direct growth into urban areas where public services may
efficiently be provided and in a manner which will protect
environmentally sensitive areas and/or as provided by local
comprehensive plans.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND URBAN SPRAWL
500 One of the major environmental concerns facing our state
is the proliferation of urban sprawl. Sprawl results in
destruction of environmentally sensitive lands;
unnecessary expenditure of public finances: inefficient
provision of public services which adversely affect the
quality of life of the citizens of Florida. The
curtailment of urban sprawl should be the primary goal
of our growth management laws. Effective implementation
of these laws should result in urban infill and
redevelopment rather than encouragement of unbridled
growth in rural areas. Sensible and strong enforcement
of the comprehensive planning requirements that public
facilities be "adequate" and "available" prior to
permi tting development is essential in protecting our
environment.
The Florida League of Cities will:
500.1 Support legislation which would promote urban infill by
distinguishing public facility and service provision
requirements in urban areas from those in rural areas.
500.2 Support legislation which would clarify the role of a
municipality to determine the adequacy of public facility
and service provision within its jurisdiction.
500.3 Support legislation which would clearly authorize the
state to enforce an urban sprawl curtailment policy.
500.4 Support legislation which would ease comprehensive
planning requirements for those substantially developed
municipalities which meet statutorily adopted criteria
when easing of the requirement would not result in a
detriment to state or regional interests.
500.5 Support legislation which would provide for waiver of
certain comprehensive planning provisions where
compliance is impractical or would not promote a
substantial state interest.
15
~
,
, I
~
.
, - ~
.
.
500.6 Support legislation which deletes requirements for
addressing mobile homes within the comprehensive plan.
500.7 Support legislation which would clarify that the actions
. of all state and regional agencies and districts shall
adhere to local comprehensive plans.
500.8 support authorization for municipalities to annex by
ordinance where the area to be annexed has been
determined to meet legislatively adopted criteria.
500.9 Support legislation which would allow municipalities to
have extraterritorial planning authority in areas which
meet legislatively adopted criteria.
500.10 Support a method which would provide for immediate
annexation of encircled enclaves into host
municipalities.
500.11 Support legislation which would allow municipalities
simultaneously to process comprehensive plan amendments
and annexation requests.
500.12 Support legislation or rules which would allow i
municipalities to enter into pre-annexation development
agreements with landowners seeking to annex into a
municipality.
500.13 Support legislation which would provide that any new
planning requirements, standards, or guidelines must be
financially feasible and differentiate the needs of urban
redevelopment and in-fill development activities from
rural development activities.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION PERXXTS
501 Protection of our environment is a major concern of all
citizens of the state. The various environmental
permitting processes of the state are important to the
preservation of our natural resources. However, recent
and projected funding cutbacks at the state and federal
levels necessitate that the state permitting process be
streamlined, efficient and cost effective.
The Florida League of Cities will:
501.1 Support legislation which would provide adequate funding
to allow municipalities to meet state permitting
requirements.
16
~
,
f '.
~ .
.
,
,
..
501. 2 Support legislation which would allow for continued
discharge from a permitted facility which is operating
in accordance with permit conditions, absent proof that
said facility is causing or contributing to degradation
of water quality.
501.3 Support legislation delegating federal National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting to the
state with adequate procedural safeguards.
501. 4 Support legislation to allow delegation of state
permitting programs to municipal government where there
is a demonstration that the local program is equally
stringent or more stringent than the state program.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AND COLLECTION
502 One of the major environmental concerns facing our state
is the proper collection and disposal of solid waste.
The collection and disposal of solid waste has become a
local government problem approaching crisis proportions.
Landfilling cannot continue to be the primary method of
solid waste disposal due to the state's highly permeable
soil and water tables. Developing and implementing ,
alternatives to the use of landfills are costly.
Feasible sol id waste recovery, recycl ing and disposal
systems should be encouraged and supported by state
incentives.
The Florida League of Cities will:
502.1 Support substantial state incentives and grants for the
development and implementation of feasible alternatives
to the continued use of landfills as the primary waste
disposal facility.
502.2 Support continued state incentives for intergovernmental
cooperation, interregional efforts and innovative
solutions to resource recovery programs.
502.3 Support incentives for the existing secondary materials
market to expand, as well as legislation to attract more
of this type of industry to Florida.
502.4 Support legislation which would recognize authority of
municipalities to continue to determine the appropriate
method of collection and disposal of solid waste
generated within their boundaries.
17-
~
,
I " .
. ~
:
I
,
~
.
502.5 Support legislation which would place a refundable
deposit on beverage containers to ensure that these
reusable materials may be returned to the economic
mainstream by providing an incentive for collection and
reuse or recycling of such containers.
502.6 Support legislation which would require coordinated
issuance of required environmental permits for solid
waste disposal facilities.
502.7 Support legislation which would require the Department
of Environmental Regulation to issue permits for solid
waste disposal facilities based on best management
practices and to allow for continued use of the facility
absent a demonstration that the facility is causing
environmental harm.
502.8 Support legislation which would require surcharges on
the sale of non-recyclable waste products to fund solid
waste grants for local government.
502.9 Support legislation developing a state policy which
enables fair and equitable rates for the purchase of
electricity generated by city- or county-owned waste- ¡
to-energy plants and sold to privately-owned utilities.
STORKWATER
503 There has been recent recognition that stormwater runoff
contributes to surface water and/or groundwater
pollution. Such pollution is caused by both urban and
agricultural uses.
The Florida League of cities will:
503.1 Support legislation which would require existing urban
development to continue to meet existing stormwater
practices, absent a finding that such practices are
causing significant degradation to water quality and
absent adequate funding for retrofit.
503.2 Support legislation requiring that, where all new
stormwater systems are provided or major revisions are
made to existing facilities, such facilities must meet
current permitting requirements.
503.3 Encourage legislation which would require mitigation of
the harmful effects of agricultural runoff.
503.4 Support legislation which would require all levels of
government and agencies thereof to comply with stormwater
regulations and permits required by local governments for
facilities within their jurisdiction.
IA
~
f .
.
. .
I
,
~
.
503.5 Support legislation which provides for reasonable
areawide enforcement of stormwater regulations
(reflecting the concept of "equitable abatement") in
areas which have been significantly adversely affected
provided that enforcement and implementation· of such
regulation shall be economically feasible in urban areas.
503.6 Support legislation which would provide a continued state
funding source for "Stormwater Management."
DEVELOPMENTS OJ' REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI )
504 The DRI program is designed to monitor developments which
impact more than one county. The League recognizes the
need for a coordinated process for reviewing developments
which affect more than one jurisdiction. The concept of
Developments of Regional Impact preserves the concept of
local decision making, but offers an opportunity for a
challenge to a decision which may adversely affect the
citizens of another jurisdiction. While there are some
problems with the DRI process as it exists today, the
League believes that the process can be greatly improved
by making several changes. ,
I
The Florida League of cities will:
504.1 Support legislation providing for the use of the DRI
process which allows review of major developments that
impact across municipal or county boundaries and which
allows the affected adjacent governments to participate
in the appeal of a local government decision on the
development order.
504.2 Support legislation providing for required input into the
Binding Letter of Determination/Development of Regional
Impact process by regional planning councils (RPCs) and
adjoining affected local governments.
504.3 Support legislation providing for a requirement that
state agencies place a priority on the construction
and/or improvement of state facilities necessitated by
the approval of a DRI.
504.4 Support legislation prohibiting the Land and Water
Adj udicatory Commission from granting a development order
where a local government has previously denied the
development permi t or from deleting or altering any
permit condition imposed by the local government.
19
~
,
I '.
. ~
t
;
1
;
~
.
.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT .
The Florida League of cities will:
505.1 Support legislation providing for a goal of at least a
10 percent annual increase of publicly owned' coastal
land, with emphasis on hazard management, beach access
and shoreline recreation with continued support of the
Save Our Coast, CORAL, and other state and federal
funding programs.
505.2 Support legislation which provides for a statewide
dedicated funding source and a statewide planning program
for projects designed to enhance the beach area, such as
beach renourishment and vegetation proj ects, erosion
control, dune enhancement and relocation of seaside
development.
505.3 Support legislation providing for the reexamination of
beach access mandates.
I
505.4 support legislation requiring the state to review
comments from local government officials prior to final ,
decisions regarding permits or leases pertaining to
dumping, and discharge.
505.5 Support legislation which would protect the beach area
and prohibit off-shore oil and gas exploration within 30
miles of the Florida coast.
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING
506 The quality and quantity of potable water are crucial.
Areas cannot be developed unless they have access to an
adequate water supply. The League believes that
considerably more research is needed in this area to
determine the impact of freshwater access to the various
parties.
The Florida League of cities will:
506.1 Support legislation to develop a state water resources
management policy to be implemented within the existing
comprehensive planning process and which deals
responsibly and equitably with issues of local government
administration.
506.2 support legislation providing for guarantees for future
municipal water supplies when the city has properly
reviewed, inventoried and planned for this supply. Areas
should not have the opportunity to consume valuable
. drinking water because of irresponsible planning and
growth management.
20
~
,
I
. ~
,
- ~
.
.
. .
506.3 Support legislation providing for equitable distribution
of water resources, fair water quality regulations and
measures to encourage water conservation.
'506.4 Support legislation to provide for an immediate source
of state emergency funds to alleviate new discoveries of
potential contaminants in public water supplies.
506.5 Support legislation prohibiting water management
districts from constructing, operating and maintaining
water production and transmission facilities in
competition with municipal facilities.
506.6 Support legislation which will effectively implement the
High Water Recharge (Bluebelt) Amendment to the Florida
Constitution.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND REUSE
507 Once municipal water has been used, it is, in most
instances, properly treated and recycled back into the
environment. Although some additional efforts must be
made to improve municipal discharges, the process is í
being constantly improved and upgraded. On the other
hand, package plants and numerous septic tanks often do
not accomplish the level of treatment needed to protect
the ecosystem of the state.
The Florida League of Cities will:
507.1 Support legislation regulating the use of septic tanks
in new development.
507.2 Support a severe limitation on installation of new
package plants and increased regulation of existing
package plants, including strong measures to prevent
improper operations and/or abandonment.
507.3 support legislation providing for state support and
funding of technology and innovative programs that
dispose of wastewater and promote water reuse.
507.4 Support legislation providing for state recognition of
the importance of high water recharge areas to our
citizens and the protection of such.
WETLANDS
508 The state's wetlands are essential to the state's natural
ecosystem. These wetlands provide water filtration and
storage and serve as a natural habitat to fish and
wildlife. . Development in wetland areas should be
prevented.
21
~
'.
~ .
. t
!
f
~
~
.
~
.
.
I
HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE
509 The proper storage, disposal, treatment and
transportation of hazardous waste and infectious
materials and other materials for the protection of the
public health, safety and welfare are essential.
The Florida League of Cities will:
509.1 Support legislation providing for a continued revenue
source for the hazardous waste management fund and
encourage its use for reimbursement to local governments
for expenses incurred in abating potential dangers due
to hazardous waste.
509.2 Support legislation which would define infectious wastes
and establish procedures for disposal and transportation
of said waste.
509.3 Support legislation which would allow imposition of civil
penalties which meet or exceed the cost of legal disposal
of toxic materials against illegal dumpers of said
materials. i
509.4 Support legislation to more precisely define hazardous
and toxic waste.
22
.
I
I .
~
. ;
I
,
..
.
ETHICS AND PERSONNEL
Priority
The Florida Leaque of Cities will support a constitutional
amendment which would equally apply open government and public
meetings laws to all public officials in Florida.
The Florida League of cities will support legislation which would
exempt the lawyer-client relationship from the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine and Public Records laws.
Personnel Expenditures
600 Municipalities are major employers in Florida, with
more than 100,000 employees. Personnel-related
expenses account for between 60 and 80 percent of
municipal budget expenditures. Municipal officials
are held directly accountable to their citizens for
these fiscal and administrative personnel decisions,
and should therefore have final control over the cost
of providing pay and benefits for their employees.
Mandated increases in these areas place an inequitable i
burden on cities which design and are responsible for
employee benefit and salary plans.
The Florida League of Cities will:
600.1 Oppose any legislation that imposes mandatory
certification, payor fringe benefits for local public
employees and propose that any legislation requiring
mandatory certification, pay and fringe benefits be
extended to state employees, as well as local public
employees.
600.2 Oppose any legislation which would restrict cities'
ability to maintain drug and alcohol free workplaces,
under Home Rule, to include testing, disciplinary
procedures and employee assistance programs.
Local Public Officials
601 The Florida League of Cities recognizes that thousands
of Florida citizens are now serving in municipal
offices and that most serve in this public capacity
with little remuneration and great personal
expenditure of time, effort and talent. We are of the
firm belief that individuals in such public office
should not be subjected to undue or unreasonable
restrictions in order to serve their fellow citizens.
The Florida League of Cities will:
23
~
,
f .
. ~
¡
í
,
"
..
.
601.1 Support legislation which would remove municipal
employees' personal records, similar to those exempted
for law enforcement personnel, from coverage under
the pUblic records law.
601. 2 support legislation which excludes locally appointed
boards, other than those which are quasi-judicial,
from financial disclosure requirements.
601.3 Oppose any expansion of financial disclosure
requirements for elected officials of municipal government.
Employer/Employee aelations
602 Alternatives to collective bargaining, such as
strikes, binding arbitration and using the "end run"
to obtain pay and/or benefits, are unacceptable to
locally-elected representatives in Florida.
The Florida League of Cities will:
602.1 support existing constitutional provisions which
prohibit public employee strikes, in that they seriously
disrupt delivery of services to citizens. ¡
602.2 Oppose any efforts to establish compulsory binding
arbitration as a resolution to impasse under the
collective bargaining law. The injection of an
independent third party into the process of setting
community priorities and levying taxes is alien to a
representative form of government.
602.3 Support legislation which provides for uniform
application of the Chapter 447.203(4), F.S.
definition of "managerial" employee. Also support
legislation which recognizes the potential conflict
of interest between a "confidential" employee and a
collective bargaining agent.
602.4 Support legislation to allow cities and local elected
officials to opt out of the Florida Retirement system.
602.5 Support the preemption of retirement benefits from the
scope of collective bargaining.
602.6 Support legislative repeal of the presumption that
firefighter disabilities claimed from hypertension and
heart disease are accidental and suffered in the line
of duty, and oppose any expansion to include other
employee groups.
602.7 Support legislation which allows a public employer
to petition the Public Employees Relations Commission
for an election when the union lacks continued
24
.
.
I .
~
. i
(
,
Ò\
,¡
.
majority status.
.
602.8 support legislation that would prohibit representation
of law enforcement and correctional officers by unions
whose membership includes non-law enforcement
personnel.
,
Recall of Elected Officials
603 The Florida League of Cities supports
the rights of citizens to recall their
elected officials for unacceptable
actions, and will support legislation
which clarifies statutory authority to
nullify recall petitions which are based
upon frivolous charges.
,
25
.
~
,
, .
~
. ;
t
. . ,
,
.
,
RESOLUTION NO. 24-90
il A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
I, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, RECOGNIZING AND COMMENDING
I JAMES MELVIN PENDERGRASS FOR 18 1/2 YEARS OF DEDICATED
I
II SERVICE TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA.
'I
!I
'.j
"
II WHEREAS, James Melvin Pendergrass was hired by the City of
!I Delray Beach as a temporary employee on April 26, 1971, and as a perma-
il nent employee on June 10, 1971; and,
'i I
I
il WHEREAS, James Melvin Pendergrass has been a faithful and \
Ii dedicated employee of the Department of Community Improvement (Building
I
I Department) for 18 1/2 years, having served as Electrical Inspector from
June 10, 1971 to June 6, 1977, Chief Building Inspector from June 6,
1977 to April 17, 1989 and Deputy Building Official from April 17, 1989
to February 16, 1990; and,
WHEREAS, James Melvin Pendergrass retired from employment with
the City of Delray Beach effective February 16, 1990,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, hereby expresses its thanks and sincere appreciation to
James Melvin Pendergrass for 18 1/2 years of dedicated service to the
City of Delray Beach.
PASSED AND ADOPTED regular session on this the 27th day of
February, 1990.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
I
City Clerk
I
I
.
7e
.
I
-
~ I
0
..
. ._---_.__..._-.~- ---- .__..- -~..-~_._-- ._- -
--- -
OR,:8INANCE NO. ~,-90
ÞJ'! ORD!NANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRJI.Y BEACH, FLORIDA, AMEND:::NG TITLE IX, "GENERAL
, REG'TJLATIONS", CHAPTER 102, "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS",
i\ OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
Ii BEACH, FLORIDA, BY ENACTING A NEW SUBCHAPTER,
d
" "SIDEWALK CAFES" AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 102.60,
,I
il "DEFINITIONS", TO PROVIDE FOR DEFINITIONS; BY
\i ENACTING A NEW SECTION 102.61, "PERMIT REQUIRED", TO
II PROVIDE FOR PERMITTING OF SIDEWALK CAFES; BY
I ENACTING A NEW SECTION 102.62, "PERMIT FEES", TO
I
i PROVIDE FOR A PERMIT FEE OF FIFTY ($50) DOLLARS PER I
,
I YEAR TO BE PAID CONCURRENT WITH THE RENEWAL OF AN ,
,
OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE; BY ENACTING SECTION 102.63,
"PERMIT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS" , TO PROVIDE FOR I
I SUBMISSION OF PROOF OF AN OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE, I
CERTAIN SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS, PROOF OF INSURANCE
i! AND HOLD-HARMLESS AGREEMENTS AT THE TIME OF APPLICA-
il TION FOR A PERMIT; BY ENACTING SECTION 102.64,
"PROCESSING OF APPLICATION", TO PROVIDE FOR REVIEW I
, ENGINEER AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY I
, BY THE CITY
I COMMITTEE AND THE IMPOSITION OF RESTRICTIONS AND ,
I I
\
I BY ENACTING SECTION 102.65, "GEOGRAPHIC ,
CONDITIONS;
i LIMITATION", TO PROVIDE THAT PERMITS SHALL BE ISSUED ,
\
i IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) ~LY; BY
I ¡
ENACTING SECTION 102.66, "REGULATIONS GOV ING THE ,
j USE, DESIGN AND MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALK CAFES", TO
\1 PROVIDE FOR LOCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS, SIGNAGE, THE
,\ SERVING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, HOURS OF OPERATION,
'I APPEARANCE, AND SAFETY RESTRI CTIONS" , BY ENACTING
"
;j SECTION 102.67, "LIABILITY AND INSURANCE", TO
,I PROVIDE SPECIFICS ON INSURANCE, HOLD HARMLESS AND
'I
,I INDEMNIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; BY ENACTING SECTION
,I
il 102.68, "DENIAL, REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF PERMIT;
r¡ REMOVAL AND STORAGE FEES; CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OF
il CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD", TO PROVIDE FOR SUSPENSION,
,¡ DENIAL, OR REVOCATION OF A PERMIT BY THE CITY
'I
, MANAGER OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE UPON NOTICE IN NON-
:1 EMERGENCY SITUATIONS; TO PROVIDE FOR REMOVAL AND
il STORAGE FEES IF THE PERMITEE FAILS TO REMOVE THE
:1 VESTIGES OF THE SIDEWALK CAFE, TO PROVIDE THAT
II
II APPEALS OF THE ORDER OF THE CITY MANAGER ARE TO THE
"! CITY COMMISSION, TO PROVIDE THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
!j
:1 BOARD WITH CONCURRENT JURISDICTION BUT ONLY TO MAKE
'¡ FINDINGS OF GUILT AND TO ASSESS FINES FOR NONCOMPLI-
':) ANCE; BY ENACTING SECTION 102.69, "APPEALS", TO
I
" PROVIDE THAT APPEALS OF AN ORDER OF THE CITY MANAGER
II
I OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE SHALL BE TO THE CITY COMMISSION
;,
¡¡ AND APPEALS FROM THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD SHALL BE
II TO THE CIRCUIT COURT, TO PROVIDE FOR NOTICE AND TIME
FOR THE' APPEAL, TO PROVIDE THAT FILING AN APPEAL
SHALL NOT STAY THE ORDER OF THE CITY MANAGER;
,I
<I PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A GENERAL
~ j
, REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
q
:\ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
"
!I Section 1. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
" "Streets and Sidewalks" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
II
t
II
,
:1
¡ '8
i !
,
_J _ ~. '~~.i£;:'7k,:: ---- ------. -~_._- -
I Ii
, ,
Ü·~ ~,
, ,
. '. :.., \,;,.,/
-~-_._-~. ------ "
._-._--_.~_..~._- --",. .._--'--.-
il
!I Beach¡ Florida, be and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
I subchapter ¡ "Sidewalk Cafes"! and section 102.60, "Definitions", to read
il as follows:
'I
:\
,¡ SIDEWALK CAFES
1 102.60. Definitions
i For the purpose of this subchapter, the following definitions
shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different
meaning.
"Person" . A person, corporation, partnership or other legal
entity.
"Sidewalk". That portion of the right-of-way between the edge
of the roadway and the adj acent property line provided for
exclusive or primary use by pedestrians.
"Sidewalk Cafe". A group of tables and chairs and permitted
decorative and accessory devices situated and maintained upon
, the sidewalk used for the consumption of food and beverages
sold to the public from or in an adjoining business.
,
Section 2. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
1 "Streets and Sidewalks" of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
I Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amende¢ by enacting a new
Section 102.61, "Permit Required", to read as follo\fs:
,
II 102.61 Permit Required ¡
Ii I
:1 It shall be unlawful for any person to establish a sidewalk :
!I cafe at any site unless a valid permit to operate a sidewalk cafe has I
¡ been obtained for that site, from the City pursuant to this subchapter. i
The permit shall be requested on a form which shall be provided by the ¡
; Ci ty Engineer upon request. No permit shall issue until all the :
I requirements of this subchapter have been met. Permi ts shall not be :
¡¡ transferable. '
:: I
ï Section 3. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
"Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
:i Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
:: Section 102.62, "Permit Fee", to read as follows:
, 102.62 Permit Fee
I
"
'i An applicatión fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) shall accompany a
permit request. Thereafter, an annual fee of fifty dollars ($50.00)
shall be paid concurrent with the renewal of an occupational license for
the business which holds the permit.
Section 4. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
"Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting Section
102.63, "Permit Submission Requirements", to read as follows:
102.63 Permit Submission Requirements
In addition to the required permit application and permit fee,
the fOllowing must be provided at the time the application is submitted.
(A) A copy of a valid occupational license.
¡
!
2
ORD. NO. 3-90
¡I ... __,
, ~~,.~~.,":;"#.~.~..:,, ______ __ ~__ "U____ "....
0 ~
(......
, - u
---.---.---.----- -- .-----..-
----- .. --
(B) Site plan of the area between the store front and vehicu-
lar travel surface, drawn to a minimum scale of (One
fourth inch equals one foot) which shows:
( 1 ) The store front and all openings (doors, windows). i
1 ( 2) The location of curb, sidewalk, and any utility
poles, fire hydrants, landscaping, or other items,
within the right-of-way and private property,
between the curb and the store front.
I
I ( 3 ) The location of any of the, above items which are I
i
\ within six feet (6') of the ends of the proposed use ,
1
I area; and the location of parking spaces (or use of I
I
I the street) adjacent to the proposed use area.
I
( 4) Clear delineation of the boundary between private
¡
property and the right-of-way.
( 5) Delineation of uclear pathwaysu and "clear dis- \
tancesU as required by Sections 102.66{E) and (F) , I
of this subchapter.
!
( 6) Proposed location of chairs, tables, and other I
private features. i
¡ ( 7 ) Photographs and/or manufacturer/brochures depicting
the chairs, table, umbrellas and other private
I features including, but not limited to, lighting to
be used in the proposed sidewalk cafe area.
I ( C) Proof of Insurance
! (D) Hold Harmless Agreement in a form acceptable to the City.
I
I
I
.1 Section 5. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
·1
II "Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
II Beach, Florida, be and the same is hereby amended by enacting Section
II 102.64 to read as follows:
Ii 102.64 Processing of the Application i
I
\1 The City Manager or his/her designee shall review the perIni t
application for compliance with this subchapter and issue permits
'Ì accordingly. The applicant may appeal the City Manager's denial of the
¡I
issuance of a permit pursuant to Section 102.69.
II Section 6. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
"Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
1\ Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
Section 102.65, "Geographic Limitation", to read as follows.
.1
;\ 102.65 Geographic Limitation
¡\
A permit for a sidewalk cafe shall be issued only within the
II
'I Central Business District (CBD) zoning district designation.
!
i Section 7. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
,I "Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
,I
:1
:1
¡
i
:\ !
:1 3
:I ORD. NO. 3-90 ¡
~ I ,
i!
i\ !
J ,'1'_;';;::;;';'; --- -.. -- .....
,. -'. ...--...::. .
:.\
C· "'. I~ "
'".' .
· u
." - ----.- .---.
Section 102.66, "Regulaticns Gov~rning the Use, Design, and Maintenance
i of Sidewalk Cafes", to read as follows:
102.66 Regulations Governing the Use, Design and Maintenance
of Sidewalk Cafes
(A) A sidewalk cafe shall only be established in conjunction
with a legally established restaurant and/or takeout food
store, where the food product is prepared, processed, or
assembled on the premises (for example: deli, ice cream
store, sandwich shop).
(B) A sidewalk cafe may only be established in front of the
business and such businesses immediately adjacent to the
business with which the sidewalk cafe is associated. The
sidewalk cafe operator must receive the permission, in a
form acceptable to the City, from adjacent businesses
before establishing the sidewalk cafe in front of such
, adjacent businesses.
,¡
': (C) Alcoholic beverages may be consumed at a sidewalk cafe.
I
\,
:1 (D) The use of the tables and chairs at a sidewalk cafe shall
:¡ be only for the customers of the business with which the
I! sidewalk cafe is associated.
¡¡ (E) A clear pathway with a minimum widt:'9- of five feet (5')
i! shall be maintained for through pe<testrian traffic. A
, greater width may be required as a condition of
approval.
(F) A clear distance with a minimum of five feet (5') shall
be provided from any alley, crosswalk, fire hydrant, or
. similar situation. A greater clear distance may be
, required as a condition of approval.
(G) In addition to previously approved business signs, the
sidewalk cafe may have the following advertising signs:
a menu board and logos upon table umbrellas. These items
shall not require further Community Appearance Board
approval and are an exemption to requirements with the
City's sign code.
(H) Use area and/or seating capacity realized through a
sidewalk cafe use and contiguous outdoor dining areas
shall not invoke provisions of the zoning code as they
pertain to parking or other matters.
(I) Food may be carried to tables by patrons or served by a
table waiter. Food shall not be prepared in the sidewalk
cafe area.
(J) Hours of operation shall be the same as the associated
businesses.
(K) The permit may be suspended upon written notice of the
City Manager or his/her designee of the sidewalk cafe,
and removal may be ordered by the City when repairs
necessitate such action. The City however, may immedi-
ately remove or relocate all or parts of the sidewalk
cafe or order said removal or relocation in emergency
situations, without written notice.
,
,4
ORD. NO. 3-90
I
i
: I ,jf~~':"':M ,.,.. -, ,--, .. '" '
'J.... "'., ,." ,
.~,...- -......-......
11
(,) 0
.u _~, _ __ . ...... - - .- -_..
l (L) ~a:~e~·, - . chairs, urnbre lla~~d any other obj ects provided
I within a sidewalk cafe shall be maintained in a clean and
:1 attractive manner and shall be in good repair at all
:¡ times, ensuring a tidy and neat appearance.
I
'! (M) The sidewalk area, covered by the permi t, shall be
Ii maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times and
i the area shall be cleared of all debris on a periodic
~ bases during the day and again at the close of each
i business day, ensuring a tidy appearance.
(N) No tables, chairs, or any other part of sidewalk cafes
shall be attached, chained, or in any manner affixed to
any tree, post, sign or other fixtures, curb or sidewalk
within or near the permitted area.
Section 8. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
"Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
Section 102.67, lILiability and Insurance", to read as follows:
102.67 "Liability and Insuranc-e
,
I
(A) Prior to the issuance of a permit, the applicant shall
furnish a signed statement that the permitee shall hold
harmless the City, its officers and employees and shall
indemnify the City, its officers and employees from any
claims for damages to property or in~hry to persons which
may be occasioned by any activity carried on under the
terms of the permit.
(B) permitee shall furnish insurance and insurance certifi-
cate and maintain such public liability, food products
liability, and property damage insurance from all claims
and damages to property or bodily injury, including
death, which may arise from operations under the permit
or in connection therewith. Such insurance shall provide
coverage of not less than three hundred thousand dollars
($300,000) for bodily injury, and property damage respec-
ti ve ly , per occurrence. Such insurance shall name the
City, its officers and employees as additional insureds
and shall further provide that the pOlicy shall not
.. terminate or be cancelled without thirty (30) days
'I written notice to the City.
'i Section 9. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter 102,
, "Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray
Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new
Section 102.68, "Denial, Revocation, or Suspension of Permit; Removal
and Storage Fees; Emergencies", to read as follows:
102.68 Denial, Revocation, or Suspension of Permit;
Removal and Storage Fees; Concurrent Jurisdiction of the
Code Enforcement Board
(A) The City Manager or his/her designee may deny,
revoke, or suspend a permit of any sidewalk cafe in
the City if it is found that:
( 1) Any necessary business or heal th permit has
either been suspended, revoked, or cancelled or
has lapsed.
5
ORD. NO. 3-90
¡ .
'I
_ ,_ d_
-- .:~~~~~7_··::~·~:.,.- :-:- -- - ----. ~..
,I
ü; /" ~....
U
'.
- -~._----~ . .--"-..---. -.--." ,-- ._----
~l ----..- - Th~ . permJ.t~e dO:S not have insurance which is 1
( 2 )
:1 correct and effective in the minimum amount
I! deacribed in Section 102.67 of this subchapter.
,I
I:
" I
( 3 ) Changing conditions of pedestrian or vehicular I
i
traffic cause congestion necessitating removal i
of the sidewalk cafe, in order to avoid danger !
to the health, safety or general welfare of !
pedestrians or vehicular traffic. i
I
( 4) The permitee has failed to correct violations
of this subchapter or conditions of permitting
within three ( 3) days of receipt of written
notice of same.
(B) The City may remove or relocate or order the removal
or relocation of tables and chairs and other
vestiges of the sidewalk cafe and a reasonable fee
charged for labor, transportation, and storage,
should the permitee fail to remove said items within
thirty-six ( 36) hours of receipt of the written
notice from the City Manager ordering removal or
relocation. However, in the event of an emergency,
no written notice of relocation or removal shall be
given and relocation and/or removal shall conunence
immediately.
(C) The permitee may appeal the lorder of the City
Manager pursuant to Section 102~69.
( D) The Code Enforcement Board shall have concurrent
jurisdiction over violations of this subchapter, but
may only assess fines for noncompliance with the
requirements of this subchapter.
Section 10. That Title IX, "General Regulations", Chapter
102, "Streets and Sidewalks", of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
! Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the same is hereby amended by enacting a
new Section 102.69, "Appeals", to read as follows:
102.69 Appeals
.¡ ( A) Appeals of the decision of the City Manager or
his/her designee shall be initiated within ten (10)
days of a permit denial, revocation, or, suspension,
'! or of an order of removal or relocation by filing a
I
I written notice of appeal with the City Manager.
( B) The City Manager shall place the appeal on the first
available !regular City Commission agenda. At the
hearing on appeal, the City Conunission shall hear
and determine the appeal, and the decision of the
City Conunission shall be final and effective immedi-
ately.
I
I (C) The filing of a Notice of Appeal by a permitee shall
not stay an order of the City Manager or his/her
designee regarding the suspension, revocation,
denial of the permit or the relocation or removal of
the vestiges of the sidewalk cafe. Vestiges of the
sidewalk cafe shall be removed as set forth in this
subchapter, pending disposition of the appeal and
the final decision of the City Commission.
6
ORD. NO. 3-90
,I
Ü ,,__~,.:0i7ü~__·....M;: .---- -~ .. -._-- --.-.--.- - .... ~-
" ¡
c' ~' "
~ \
U
~_... -,- -- ~- - --,- -- ,-~."---- -- - . --- -.- _.._-
--.- --.-- _.--
-1 ( D) Appeals from the decision of the Code Enforcement
I' Board shall be to the Circuit Court and not to the
,I City Commission.
\!
I
¡ Section 1l. That should any section. or provision of this
I ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be
declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
I Section 12. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
I
I conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
! Section 13. That this ordinance shall become effective ten
I
I (10) days from its passage upon second and final reading.
!I
:\ PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
! reading on this the day of . 1990.
I
I
I
\ MAYOR
i ATTEST:
I
I
1
I'
.1 City Clerk
,I
'I
\,
"
" /
"
¡\ First Reading /
I'
II Second Reading
"
II
,I
'I
'I
I¡
i!
:1
"
:¡
I
:I
I
,
:1
I
,I
Ii
,\
'I
'I
¡
I
,I 1
'., I
,I i
,¡
q I
II I
,
¡
I \
I
I
I, I
I
I, i
:1 I
j
I! ¡
'I
, I
'I
:)
',!
!
1¡
. 7
:1
I ORD. NO. 3-90
,
"
:1
·1
'I
__J ~~~~~:~;,:,:. --.'- -- -~~. ---... - . -~
I
~.~.- ut'!l"
V-' ¡
. \-.J
.-.-..
on:':'~P\~~C:E NC' L~ ··90
AN ORDINANCE OF '1'HE CITY COI"lMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELR~ Y BEACH, -.::'LOR:7. DA , M1F.NDING TITLE 11, "BUSINESS
REGUL~TtONS, CHAPTER 11.", "]\LCOHOLIC BEVERAGES", OF
THE CODE OF ')RDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
BY REPE~L!.NG SE~T10N 113.02, "CONSUMPTION PROHIBITED
IN PUBLIC PLACES", BY ENACTING þ, NEW SECTION 113.02,
"PROHIBITION OF CONSUMPTIon OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
IN PUBLIC PL,ACES; PROVIDING THAT IT SHOULD BE
lLLEG~L TO CONSUME 1I.LCOHOL IN PUBLIC PLACES; PRO-
VIDING EXCEPTIONS THERETO; PROVIDING THAT THE CITY ,
MANAGER MAY GR~T WAIVERS THERETO AND PROVIDING, AN
APPEAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY MANAGER'S
DENIAL OF A '~AIVER REQUEST; PROVIDING A SAVING
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A GENERÞ.L REPEALER CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING ~ EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TrlE CITY COMMISSION OF', THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. T'ha't Title 11, "Business Regulations", Chapter
113, "Alcoholic Beverages", of the Code of Ordinances of the Ci ty of
Delray Beach, Florida, be and the same is hereby ~ended by repealing
Section 113.02, "Consumption Prohibited in PUblic P~aces\l.
Section 2. That Title 11, "Business Regulations", Chapter
113, "Alcoholic Beverages", of the. Code of Ordinances of the Ci ty of
Delray Beach, Florida, be and the same iB hereby amended by enacting a
new Section 113.02, "l')rohibi tion of Consumption of Alcoholic Beverage$
in PUblic Places'! to read as ·follows:
Section, 113.02 PROHIBITION OF CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLI C BEVERAGES IN
PUBLIC PLACES.
(A) Wi thin the Ci ty of Delray Beach it shall be unlawful for any
person to consume alcoholic beverages:
( 1 ) on the, public streets, sidewalks, alleys and other
rights-of -way with the exception that seated patrons of a permitted
sidewalk cafe may consume alcoholic beverages;
(2) on the beach;
( 3 ) i.n public parks, wi~h the exceptiœn that patrons of the
restaurant located at. t.he Delray Beacn t1unicipal Golf Course, may
consume alcoholic beverages on the Delray Beach Municipal Golf COUl: se
when they are golfing;
( 4) in motor vehicles or trailers;
( 5) or on business property outside the building with the
exception that patrons seated at permanent tables provided by the
business may COnS1.1me alcoholic beverages.
(B) Any perso~ may request that the City Manager waive the appli-
cability of. Section 113.02(1\) for certain publi.c functions or affairs.
The City Manager shall have seven (7) days to consider such a request I
and if denied" the applicant may appeal the denial of the request to the ,
City Commission. Such appeal to the City Commission must be made. within I
I
(7) days and will be considered by the City Commission wi thin I
seven I
thirty (30) days of the denial. ,
Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which 9
are in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
!
I
.
.
" --.;.-,; ., . ~ .~~
..' .., ..... .
Section 3 . Tñ.at: ShOtlld any section or, provis'ion.- of, this
ordinance' or any portion thereof, any paragraph., sentence): or' word, be
declared by a CO\1rt of competent jurisdiction, to" be invalid) such
decision shall not affect the validity or the remainder hereof as a.
whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
section 4. That this ordinance shall become effective, upon
passage on second and final reading,
PASSED AND JlJ)OPTED in regular session on second, and final
reading on this th~ _ day of , 1990.
NAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
First Reað.ing
Second Reading
/
/
/
/
.
!
í
¡
I
I \
i ,
¡
I
.
.-
, -
') ORD. NO. 4-90
..
,....,.. ...... . -~- ---
.
(~ l1n.~P
, --"', ~ Q:,,,. '".
£IT' OF DELAR' BER£H
CITY A""ORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.E. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
"I I 407/243· 7090 TELECOPIER 407/278-4755
MEMORANDUM
Dat~: Febr~ary 7, 1990
To; Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manager AytC,
F1:om: J e f f rey S. K\irt z , Ass i stant City At to rney ~/I
Subject: Ordinance on Prohibition of Consumption of Alcoholic
Beverages in Public Places
/
This ordinance was drafted as a companion ordinance to the í
ordinance allowing sidewalk cafes, as pursuant to Section
102.66 it is intended that alcoholic beverages may be consumed
at a sidewalk cafe. This ordinance, therefore, will elimin~te
the apparent conflict between the ordinances by specifically
exempting seated patrons at a sidewalk cafe from being subject
to arrest for consuming in public. In addition, the revised
ordinance will also eliminate the threat of arrest from golfers
at the municipal golf course and allows a mechanism by which
the city manager could waive the application of the ordinance
for special events, such as Old School Square grand opening,
Delray Affair and the like. It also provide for an appeal
process to the City Commission for an applicant who has been
denied the requested waiver. The ordinance also closes an
apparent loophole in the previous ordinance by including
streets and right-of-ways in the areas where there is a
prohibition on consumption
If this ordinance is acceptable to staff and City Commission,
it would be suggested that it be placed on an upcoming agenda
for Commission consideration at the time of the sidewalk cafe
ordinance so that there is no possibility of a conflict between
the ordinances.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do
not hesitate to contact our office.
JSK:sh
Attachment
cc: City Commission
Chief Charles Kilgore, Delray Beach Police Department
(
,
! .
t
.
I
,
~ .
·
H
'ii ORDINANCE NO. 5-90
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
, OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, CORRECTING THE ZONING
: CLASSIFICATION FOR A PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND
i BEING IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 43
I EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, FROM RM-10
¡ (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) DISTRICT TO GC
I (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT, SAID LAND IS
i LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF N. E. 8TH
! STREET AND N.E. 8TH AVENUE, AND CORRECTING
: "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1983",
¡ PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSEr PROVIDING A
I
I SAVING CLAUSE, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the subject property is shown as being zoned
RM-10 (Multiple Family Dwelling) District on the Zoning District
Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April 12, 1983,
and,
WHEREAS, a review of City records indicates that such
zoning classification was inadvertently applied to said propertyr
and,
WHEREAS, this error has been brought to the attention
of the City and it is appropriate that the Zoning District Map of
the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated April 12, 1983, be
corrected to reflect the proper zoning classification of GC
(General Commercial) Districtr and,
WHEREAS, this matter was considered by the City Commis-
sion at a Public Hearing and it was determined that the RM-10
(Multiple Family Dwelling) District zoning classification was, in
fact, inadvertently applied to the subject property,
I
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION I
OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Zoning District Map of the City of
Delray Beach, Florida, dated April 12, 1983, be, and the same is
hereby corrected to reflect a zoning classification of GC
(General Commercial) District for the following described
property:
Lot 1, less the South 8 feet thereof as road
right-of-way, and all of Lot 2, Block 4, SOPHIA
FREY SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof
recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the
I Circui t Court in and for Palm Beach County,
Florida, in Plat Book 4 at Page 37, together
with the North 109.70 feet of the South 124.70
feet of the West Half (W 1/2) of the abandoned
alley lying Easterly of Block 5, SOPHIA FREY
SUBDIVISION, per Plat Book 4, Page 37, Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City
shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, change the
Zoning Map of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provi-
sions of Section 1 hereof.
Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances
in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
10
II
ec any sec 10n or prov1s10n 0
this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence,
or word be declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be
I invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part
declared to be invalid.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and
final reading on this the day of , 1990.
I
MAYOR i
ATTEST:
!
!
City Clerk
First Reading
Second Reading
i
!
I
- 2 - ORD. NO. 5-90
C I T Y COM MIS S ION DOC U MEN TAT ION
TO: CHERYL LEVERETT, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT III
D.Ü^-£ ~ ) C>-1'\1~
\"< ~J..f'¡..J·-S
FROM: DAVID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SUBJECT: MEETING OF FEBRUARY 13, 1990
CONSIDERATION OF A CORRECTING ORDINANCE AFFECTING
ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THE 8TH STREET MARKET
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City Commission is that of
approval on first reading of an ordinance which corrects an
apparent error on the zoning map.
The property involved is commonly known as the 8th Street
Market. The zoning map shows RM-10; the appropriate zoning
appears to be GC.
BACKGROUND:
This property was zoned as C-2 upon annexation in 1971. Since
that time, the zoning map has shown three different designations
and one map showed no designation even though there have been no
site specific rezonings of the property.
Please see a staff memorandum and the request letter for more
detail.
The Future Land Use Map designates the property as Commercial;
thus, the original zoning of Commercial is still appropriate.
In similar circumstances, when it has been shown that an apparent
error has been made on the official zoning map, the situation has
been corrected by an ordinance.
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION:
Since this is a clear case of correcting an apparent error,
Planning and Zoning Board review is not required.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion, approval of this correcting ordinance on first
reading.
Attachments:
* Staff memo and letter exchanges with Sam Fisher
* Ordinance by others
c:
Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manager
DJK/#59/CC8TH.TXT
"
.
..----.
~r- , .
[IT' OF DELAR' BER[H
100 N.W.1st AVENUE DE LRA Y BEACH, F LOR I DA 33444 407/243· 7000
February 1, 1990
Sam P. Fisher
901 N.E. 8th Street
Delray Beach, Florida 33483
Re: 8th Street Market Zoning Verification (SOPHIA FREY ADDITION
LOT 1 (LESS THE SOUTH 8 FT. OF ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY), LOT 2 AND
THE NORTH 109.70 FT. OF THE SOUTH 124.70 FT. OF THE WEST 1/2
OF THE ABANDONED ALLEY LYING EASTERLY THEREOF BLOCK 5)
Dear Sam:
This letter is in response to your request of January 18, 1990,
regarding the zoning verification of the subject property
described above.
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 27-71, the subject property was annexed
to the City of Delray Beach on September 13, 1971, with a zoning
designation of C-2 (General Commercial). The City Clerk's
records do not indicate rezoning of the property since the date
of annexation.
The 1989 zoning map indicates the property as being zoned RM-10
(Multiple-Family Dwelling District). In order to change the
zoning map, a correcting ordinance must be drafted and approved
by the City Commission. The correcting ordinance requires a
. public hearing. We will initiate the appropriate actions to
correct this matter.
However, until such time as the zoning is officially changed, the
site is considered to be RM-10, as shown on The Official Zoning
Map.
Attached is a copy of Ordinance No. 27-71 for your records. If
you have any questions, please contact me at 243-7040.
Sincerely, ,.-
ý:& / (l;d
Jeffrey A. Costello
Planning Technician II
c: Attachment
. -
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
~,
,.
~:
.~
"
.;$:
"
i ~
, ¡
" "
~,
v
.
",'
"
f
~... - ----..
ff
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: DAVID J. KOVACS, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
FROM: JEFFREY A. COSTELLO, PLANNING TECHNICIAN I I 71ft ,
RE: 8TH STREET MARKET ZONING VERIFICATION (SOPHIA FREY
ADDITION LOT 1 (LESS SOUTH 8 FT. OF ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY),
LOT 2 & THE NORTH 109.70 FT. OF THE SOUTH 124.70 FT. OF
WEST 1/2 OF ABANDONED ALLEY LYING EASTERLY THEREOF
BLOCK 5)
DATE: JANUARY 29, 1990
.
This memo is in reference to Sam Fisher's letter of January 18,
1990, regarding the zoning verif~cation of the subject property
described above.
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 27-71, the subject property was annexed
to the City of Delray Beach on September 13, 1971, with a zoning
designation of C-2 (General Commercial). The City Clerk's
records do not indicate rezoning of the property since the date
of annexation..
The following discrepancies have been identified on the zoning
maps located in the Planning and Zoning Department:
* 1971 - C-2
* 1976 - RM-15
* 1978 - GC
* 1980 - GC
* 1983 - No zoning designation indicated
* 1985 to Present - RM-10
The 1990 Land Use Map indicates the subject property as General
Commercial. --
In light of the above, I suggest the City initiate a correcting
ordinance and amend the zoning map to correct the apparent
inadvertant change.
Attached is Ordinance 27-71, the request letter and a copy of the .
draft response letter to Sam Fisher for your review. Please meet
with me to discuss this memo and the response letter.
.
·-
/
....
"
,- - - ... - ._~
] ([
January 18, 1990
To: City of Delray
Planning & Zoning Dept.
Fr-om: 8th Str-eet Mar-ket 901 N E 8th Street
Delr-ay Beach, FL 33483
Building Owner
901 - 905 N E 8th Str-eet
4
. '-. --_. - --.,.- --
Legal Descr-iption:
SOPHIA FREY ADD LOT 1 (LESS S 8 FT RD R/W), LOT 2 8<
N 109.70 FT OF S 124.70 FT OF W 1/2 OF ABND ALLEY LYG ELY
THEREOF BU< 5.
This is a wr-itten request for zoning restrictions for
the above described lot. We have operated this grocery store
for the last twenty years and this building was a grocery
store twenty years prior to that. We believe this lot was in
the county prior to sewer installation approximately 10 to 15
years ago, at which time it was annexed into the city. The
main structure was remodeled and enlarged around 1960 at
which time there were three additional bays built for various
tenants, two of which have been rented as food services and
one as a clothing store.
Our main concern is to determine the zQning restrictions
for these bays and allowable tenants. We WOllI d like to know
if and when the zoning wa.s changed. If it was changed, we
would like to know what the restrictions were before and
after the change, and why it was changed.
We do not understapd why this property would ever ha.ve
been zoned anythi ng bllt GC because to the best of our
knowledge it has a.lways been operated as a commercial
business. If it is not zoned this way, we also reqllest
information to change the zoning to GC. Thank You. RECE\VED
Respectfully Submitted, JAN 1 8 90
PLANNING & ZONING
.(
Mr & Mrs Sam Fisher
,-J ~.., F :; k.';{, _
-.
-. z
, '
l IV-£; 8-fh-A-VENt.::/£ I
.. ~ 19'ptavlng
, .
rn
.
~ C()/1~
t'O,,~ ... mon. ""
/" l7'1on. ,
. -'
I Ilf ~.. //6.7Z'
. ..
I ~c:s> .
~'" I
I
1.0' ,
I !
I I
r1) I
.t ~~5..1 1
I
I
~
t I
~ I i
I
~ ~ " Ùj,
~ RECEIVED !'JI
I~ ~ \11
IS: Q¡ ..
~ ~ \ JAN 1 8 90
~
~ I PLANNING & ZONING
~ I~
I~
I .
,.-..
I~ A "
I ,.
~ I "
I I
~ I '--
&
t?¡/ERHð'''''o Pt?¡1/E"~ L/N'El..vCRð'" <"HESl
~
~. I
,,[J~ .
t I
/'5~"'I P-
I //r ,P f ¡p-116.72'-p P ........-
I 25·-P-=-r~. R/W4,'mpr"'~d) I
1 '"""'- 33' ~"'....,.~ /
16' A/ley
mo/? í
uno-'r9round ~ll?phon«
1- ,DREPARéO ,,¿JÆ': 7T1crKer
I ¿"/(ßNr¥ s rR'£~r Mt4R~¿"'r; /,v~. ..
I
¿;). 'S é'. ¡: /0# I
. -. ~ !~££ t~e So~~h E !~et, and all of Lot 2, Elo=k ~, This drawing not
4-f"'~", _,
. ~:::i-:r;.. :F.!:Y S~:=Dl\':£!or;, acccrèir,ç to t.~e Fht. Lr-.~;:,e:;f valid without an
:~=crèe¿ i~ ~~e c:~ice 0: the Cjer;' of the CiT=~it r.c~r~ embossed seal.
~ i:. ë.."1c; :or Fëlr:: =-eë~h Cou.;t}', florida, in Flat i:>oo)~ " DATE OF PRiNT
:ë:::e 37.
'f 3t)#ðY.I5i7€3 SCAl! /',If 2'0' ,1..4 T lOOK No. 4 'AG! No, 37 ~ t> Q. e.. :::1!-
.
O'BRI EN, SUITER & O'BRIEN, INC.
ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS
,
C':~~A y 2 ~;,:H FLORIDA BOYNTON BEACH
---
I HEö¡E8Y CERTIFY Ihol Ihe pial .hown hereon i. 0 true and correct ,epr..enIOlion of a .ury.y
'r\od. under my dirfClion, and Ihol .oid lurvey i. accurale 10 Ih. be. I or my Ir.nowledge and belief, ed land SUNeyor
:Jnd, un/'ll or;'"",i,e ';,':)",n, Insre are no vi.ibl. encroQChmenl.. ':ertificate No. ; \tt
.-
IlflO 'oo( 0/70 ".C! NO. '9 olon NO. ?B - d/ø Z
'(:' '1
..- - --
ORDntWCE NO. 27-71.
i\N ORDn~l.NCg OF THE CI'l'Y COUNCIL OF THE CI'l'Y OF DELRAY BEÞ.CH,
F'LORID.I\, ANNEXING TO THE CITY OF DELR.T\Y BEACH LOT .1 LESS THE
SOU'l'H 8 F'r~ET, ALL OP LOT 2, AND THE WEST 8 Frm'r Of' 'l'HE ABAN-
})()NED ALLEY LYING BE'IWEEN LOTS 1 ANIJ 2 AND LOTS 10 AND 11,
nLO::~K 5, SOPHIA FRl~Y SUBDIVIS IOl:, ~'rnICI-I L1\ND IS CON'l'IGUOUS
'1'0 E:<IS'l.'ING MUNICr PAL LI;wUTS OF' SAID CI'rY: R1::DEF1NHiG TIU::'
BO\JNr>7-.l1!ES OF SAID CITY TO Il~CLUDE SAID LJ\.ND; PROVIDIl1G l'OR
'l'HB IUGH',¡,'S AND OBLIGA'I'IONS 01" SAID LA~D: 1\l'1D PROVIDING FOR
'J.'i IE ZON U1G TI-I1::HEOF.
.
WHEREAS, \qALTim H. SI1-1S01-1, is the 'fee simple o~er of the land here-
inafter described, and
WHEREAS, HAP.RY T. NE;\vETT, Attor¿'lC:Y in Fact, for \"1alter H. Simson,
hùs pet i t.ioned and given permis'sion for the annexation of said land by
the city of Delray Beach, and
WHEREAS, the City of De1ray Beach has heretofore been Ðuthorized to
anr.ex lands in accordanct! with Section 185.1 of the City Charter. of said
City granted to it by the State of F10ridaÞ and
I
WHERFoAS, the ann~xation of this land hereinafter described, in the
C-2 General Commercial District, has been recommendea by the Planning
and Zoning Board in action taken at its meeting held on August 17, 1971:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAI~ED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DBLRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of De1ray Beach, Palm
Beach County, Florida, hereby annexes to said city the following describ-
ed tract of land located in Palm Beach County, Floridû., which lies con-
tiguous to said City, to-wit:
Lot 1 less the South 8 feet, all of Lot 2, and the West 8
feet of the abandoned alley lying bet\.¡een Lots 1 and 2 and
.
Lots 10 and 11, BI~ck 5, SOPHIA FREY SUBDIVISION, per Plat
Book 4, Page 37, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Floridn.
SECTION 2. That the boundaries of the City of Delray Be«ch, Florida,
are her.cby redefined so as to include therein the above described tract
of land, and said lanc1 is hereby declared to be \llithin the corporate lim..
its of the City of Delray Beach, Florida.
SECTION 3. That the land hereinabove described is hereby declared
to be in Zoni.ng District C-2 as defined by exi~ting ordinnnc'~s of the
City of Delray Beacn, Florida.
SECTION 4. That the land hereinabove described shall iMnediate1y
become subject to all of the franchises, privileges, immunities, d~bts,
obligations, liabilities, ordinances and laws to which lands in the City
of Dclray Beach are nO\-1 or may be, and persons residing thereon shall be
dcC?med citizens of the City of De1ray Beach.
SECTION 5. That if any word, phrase, clause, sentence or part of this
ordillance shall be declared illegal by a court of competent jurisdiction,
suc:h :r.t..!c:orà of illegality shall in no way affect the remaining portiom3.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular !iession on the second and final reading
on the 13th day of September , lr7\~¿;, .,,_,
~.¡- ../ ~
~~./ /
I.;' ./ Ó M-' 1\ (..,p... , -
1\ 'I'TE~'l' : f-,.' \
ër7 ~ "/ IJ . '_ ~-.
~ & Jl~-~
City ·rk
f.i.rsl: Re<1cJing August 23, 1971. Second Reading_, sept!mber 13, 1971.
'J -
\.
G'~
t".\
,::,}
-- -'-'--- .----- - .-..- --~-- ,......--.- -Y'--
OP.DINÞ.NCE NO. 6-90
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ~1ENDING CHAPTER 33, "POLICE
AND FIRE DEPARTMENT", OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING
SECTION 33.66, "FINANCES AND FUND MANAGEMENT",
SUBSECTION (E} (2), DELETING SUBPARAGRAPHS (b) AND
(c), DELETING THE PROVISION TF..AT A CORPORATION IN
WHICH PENSION FUND ASSETS ARE INVESTED MUST HAVE
PAID CASH DIVIDENDS FOR A PERIOD OF SEVEN FISCAL
YEARS PRECEDING THE DATE OF ACQUISITION; DELETING
PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE ANNUAL EARNINGS OF SUCH
CORPORATIONS; DELE:I'ING THE PROHIBITION ON INVEST- I
MENTS IN WHICH ANY' INTEREST OBLIGATIONS ARE OR HAVE
BEEN IN DEFAULT DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS; AND
RENUMBERING SUBPARAGRAPH ( d) AS SUBPARAGRAPH (b),
AND AMENDING SAID SUBPARAGRAPH TO PROVIDE THAT THE
\ AGGREGATE INVESTMENT IN COMMON OR CAPITAL STOCK IN
, ANY ONE COMPANY SHALL NOT EXCEED 5% OF THE OUT-
,
. STANDING COMMON OR CAPITAL STOCK OF THAT COMPANY;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A GENERAL
REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
'I Section 1. That Chapter 33, "Police anþ' Fire Departments",
Section 33.66, "Finances and Fund Management", Subsection (E)(2) of the
! Code of Ordinances of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, be, and the
I same is, hereby amended to read as follows:
I (2) The Board of Trustees may invest and reinvest the assets
! of the Trust Fund in bonds, stocks, or other evidences of indebtedness
I' issued or guaranteed by a corporation organized under the laws of the
United States, any state, or organized territory of the United States or i
I the District of Columbia, provided: \
(a) The corporation is listed on any lone or more of the I
I recognized national stock exchanges and holds a rating in one of the
. three highest classifications by a major rating service.
tbt--~he-eer~era~~ea-has-~a~à-eaaa-à~v~åeftàs-£er-a-per~eà
e£-sevefi-£~seai-years-flex~-~reeeà~ft~-~he-da~e-e£-ae~~s~~~eftT
tet--'Ð1e -eer~era~~eft -£\:l3::£~iis -e~~her -e£ -~he -£eiiew~ftg
s~aaàaràs,:,
~T---ever -~he -~er~eà -e£ -~he -sevea -£~sea% -years
iftl]'fteà~a~ely -þl"eeeà~ftg -þ'\:u!ehase¡ -~he -ee!.'1'era~iea -m't1s~ -have -eal"fteà -a£~er
£eàerai-~fteeme-~axes¡-aft-average-ame\:la~-~er-aaa~ï-a~-3::eas~-e~a3::-~e-~we
~~Jftes -~he -ame~fi~ -e£ -~he -yearly -~ft'eeres~ -ehal"~es -'t1~eft -~'es -:beaås, -!'1ð'ees¡
¡ er--e~her--ev~àeaees--e£--~ftàe:¡'~eàaeaa--e£--e~a3::--er--grea~er--see't1r~~y
I e't1~a~a!'1à!:a§-a~ -àai!e -ef -rl'\::irehase¡ -aftd -eal"fted -a£~er-£eàel"a1: -~aeeme -~axes¡
aft-ame't1ft~-a~-ieas~-e~\:la3::-~e-~we-~~Jftes-~he-ame\:lft~-e£-~e-~!'1~eres~-ehar§es
~a-eaeh-e£-~he-~hree-£isea3::-years-tmmeà±a~e3::y-~reeeà!A~-~\:lrehase¡-er
~~---~he--ee!.'~e!.'a~~eH,--eve!.'--~ae--~erieà--e£--sevea
£~sea3:: -yeal"S -~mmeà~d~ely -þl"eeed~n~ -þtirehdSe -JftHS'e -have -eal"fteà -a£~er
£eàeral-iaeeme-~axesï-aft-aVerd~e-ametift~-þer-aftft~~-a~-lea5~-e~'t1al-~e-6%
e£-~he-~dr-valtie-e£-~~s-beftàsï-fte~es¡-er-e~her-ev~àe!'1ees-e£-~!'1àeB~eàftess
e£-e~'t1al-er-~rea~er-see\:lri~y-eti~S~aHdift~-a~-da~e-ð£-þ't1rehase,-aaà-earaeà
II a£~er -£eàera,l -ifteeme --eaxes, -an -ame'\:ift-e -at: -1:eas'e -e~al-~e -6% -e£ -'ehe -par
ii
i
¡
II n
J, _____. _~
. , _:::.:;~;;...,<.1) f" -~
·\
0 { -
"\
:; ~ U
--_.~ -.~--~.-. ,.- .,.--- -- - .,
..- .- ....~ -
val~e-e£-atieh-e51~~a~~eR-~R-eaeh-e£-~fte-~ft~ee-£~~ea%-yea~~-~mme6ia~ely
~~eee6~ßg-þti~eftaSe7
I 3~---Nð-~nve8~fflen~-shall-5e-made ·tißàe~-àiv~s~eß-tEt
t~t-tet-e£-~ftis-~ee~ieR-ti~eR-wftieh-aßy-iR~~~es~-e51~~a~~ea-~s-~ft-6e£atil~
e~-wfi~eft-as-5eeß-~ß-de£a~1~-w~~ft~ß-~fte-~mmed~a~ely-~~eee~ft~-£~¥e-yea~
~e~~eà7
tàt The Board of Trustees shall not invest more than 5% of
its assets in the cornman or capital stock of anyone issuing company,
nor shall the aggregate investment in common or capital stock in one
company exceed 3 2% of the outstanding common or capital stock of that
company; nor shall the aggregate of the Fund's investments in common or
capital stock at cost exceed 50% of the Fund's assets. Assets of the
Fund not invested in common or capital stock may be reinvested in
corporate bonds or other legal investments as provided in F.S. Chapters ,
175 and 185. .
Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances which are in
conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 3. That should!any section or provision of this ordinance
or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence or word be declared by a
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid such decision shall not
effect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole part thereof
other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 4. That this ordinance shall becomi effective ten (10)
days after its passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the day of , 1990.
HAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
¡ First Reading
;
I Second Reading
I
I
,
I
,
,
!
I I
,
I I
I
2 ORD. NO. G-90
I
:t~·~.:..~,·~.;.:;a.: r ,- .... I"~...q¡: -_._-~ ..--.-- - ' ....,
;",-.;.~
,þ ,
..-.-'--
. ' .~.~-.\.
.' "\
£1" OF DELAR' BER£H ; }
," /
.' , "
~.,';.'~ ~t
'.,...,}. .4#!t"""I"
. ~ '. .,. '..' ..
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.E. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
407/243-7090 TELECOPIER 407/2784755
MEMORANDUM
Dal~; February 8, 1990
To; City Commission 1AML {o r }ff
From~ Herbert W.A. Thiele, City Attorney
Subject: Limitations on Investments of the Police and
FirefighterPension Board .
At its worksh¿p meeting of February 1, 1990, the Police and
Firefighter Pension Board reviewed the attached ordinanca which
expands the scope of equity investments that the Board can
make. I have also attached a copy of my previously transmitted
memorandum explaining the changes in the ordinance. After
reviewing the ordinance, the Board unanimously recommended' that
the Commission adopt the ordinance as soon as possible.
Should any Commission have any questions about the proposed
ordinance, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
HT: sh
Attachments
cc: Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manager
John Elliott, Assistant City Manager
David M. Huddleston, Director of Finance
Marty Ritchason, Personnel/Labor Relations Director
, Administrative Assistant III
Members, Police and Firefighter Pension Board
t .. ..-
j ~
!
,
f i..,
,
. ¡
.
f;
,
!
,
--...----..--
~ - , -z..~
. . .
.
£1" OF DELAR' BER[H
.
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE ,1 Iii SI I" STHFLT. Sl~ITI, 4 DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
.\(17/24].71190 TI-:LECOPIER 407/2784755
11: : :~Jl(..'H~:,U:1
Da '-t~, .:r.'ìnu.äl".ll 22 r J ~1 :~:1
To: Ch:Üt'mal1 ar,d ME!:Tìbers, Pc;lic(> an1 Fqrcfightcr's
Pc.:~.:»iol1 Board of '}·(ï.lstfI23
From: Herbert \V,A. Th l c' 1 ~-' I ~ :'. ':j' A t 1-,Orn(~y
Subj er;t- ~ Response to InGuiry C0nc~rninq Pot~ntial Modification
of F1nancial Requirements for Pol.i.cp. and Firefighter
Pens~Qn System
I I
Some weeks ago, the Police 'Ánd Firefighter 'Pension Boa.rd of
Trustee.:; requested that the City Attorney's Office conduct
research on potential modifications to the ordinances governing
the financing and fund management, for the Police and Fire
Pension Fund. After exhaustive research and consultation
with our outside counsel, this memorandum is to set. forth some
of our findings and to provide you with a proposed ordinance
that we believe would be in accordance with your direction.
The premise upon which the City Attorney's Office proceeded was
that. the Police and Fir0.fight€:r Pension Board of Trustees
believed that, in par t , returns on our investments could be
enhanced by modifying or eliminating certain restrictions on
pension fund invcstments contained in the ordinances of the
city. It is our understanding thr:! t the Pension Board was
interested in amending or removing any investment restrictions
which were overly restrictive or which go beyond the
restrictions provided in Florida Statutes Chapters 175 and 185.
I n our opinion, the m05t rc.str ict, i ve investment provisions of
the Police and Firefighter Pension Ordinances are contained in
Section 33.66 of the Code of 01'<:3 .Lnanc(~s . In subsection
33.66(E) (2), the ordinanc~:)s pnwide restrictions on pension
fund investments in corporate st:ocks and bonds to be:
1- corporations listed on anyone or more of the recognized
national stock exchang~s, and holding a rating in one of
the three highest classifications by a major rating
service. This provision is essentially identical to
language set forth in Florida Statutes Sections
175.071(1)(b)4(a) and 185.06(1)(p)4(a).
. p-
.
I t
\
. .
1
( l.
, .
.
~
I .
,
I
. ... ~- ..~-~
,-...
)
-
Jñnuary 22, 1990
Page 2
2. Corporations which hëwe pai'J ~rìsh dividends for a period
of sev~n flsca.l years pl'eceding the da te of acquisition,.
There is no similar provision in either Chapters 175 01'
185, Florida Statutes.
I
3 . Those corporations \.¡hich have after-tax earnings in an
average amount equal t.O at least two times the amount of
yearly interest charges on their bonds, and. an amount at
least equal to two times the amount of interest charges in
each of the three fiscal years immediately preceding
purchase; where those corporations which over the seven
fiscal years immediately precedin.g purchase have
after-tax earnings in an average amount equal to at least
six percent of the par value of their bonds, and equal to
at least six percent of the par value of their bonds in
each of kfe three fiscal years immediately preceding
purchase.! Again there arc no similar provisions in
Florida Statutes Chapters 175 or 185.
4 . Those corporations which are not in default or which have
not been in default. wi thin tbe immediately preceding five
year period. There is no similar provision in the Florida
Statutes at Chapter 175 or 185.
5 . The Pension Board is prohibited from investing more than
five percent of Pension Fund assets in the stock of any
one issuing company, or from acquiring more than three
percent of the outstanding stock of any one company.
These restrictions are similar to those provided in
Florida Statute Sections 175.071 and 185.06, except that
the Florida Statutes prohibit an investment in any one
issuing company which exceeds five percent of the
outstanding stock of that company.
;
6 . The Pension Board is prohibited from investing more than
fifty percent of fund assets and stocks. Florida Statutes
Sections 175.071 and 185.06 contain a maximum thirty
percent limitation on stock (equi.ty) investments.
However, the sb1tutes specifically state that
municipalities with "l.ocal la"J" pension plans may modify
the investment pt'ocedures contained in the statutes
through a municipa.l ordinance. Although municipalities
with local law pension plans such as ours are not required
to comply with most of the pr.ovisions of the statute
concerning pension fund investments, we have, attached
hereto, submitted a proposal which we believe would
nonetheless accomplish your stated objectives.
I
, ~ ..-
j l
( l
. t
t
It
!
1
",I I
I
--~ ---- ~
~
'...-'
January 22, 1990
Page 3
While Section 33.66, Delray Beach Code of Ordinances, could be
repealed in its entirety and replaced with totally new language
governing pension fund finances i nvestrnents) we believe that
Section 33.66, Delray Beach Code of Ordinances, can be amended
to modify or delete only those investment provisions which are
more restr icti ve than those in Flat" ida Statutes Chapters 175
and 185.
In that regard, we have pr8parect ~ draft ordinance (attached)
whicb follows this approach of modifying or deleting the
investment provisions which arc more restrictive than the
Florida Statutes. The ordinance thus amends only those
provisions of Section 33.66, DE~lr-3.Y Beach Code of Ordinances
which place great,er restrictions on pension fund investments
then are current.ly contained in Flor ida Statutes Chapters 175
and 185, which/ihe provisions of the ordinances which are now
less restrictiP¿ than the statutes have been retained in their
current. form.
It would be appreciated if you could place this matter before
the next meeting of the Board of Trustees for further
discussion and direction to the City Attorney's Office. In the
interim, if you have any questions concerning the materials set
forth in this memorandum or the attached draft ordinance,
please contact the me personally at YOUl' earliest conveni,enca.
/~
/... HT .
:c~
Attachment
cc City Co~nission
, Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manage~
John Elliott, Assistant City Manager
Marty Ritchason, Personnel/Labor Relations Director
David M. Huddleston, Director of Finance
b:::c Jim Úv"b / PI (!5~ .
~
(
t-
.
,
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
!
To: City Commissioners
Via: Malcolm Bird, Interim City Manager
From: Nancy Davila. Horticulturist/Special Projects Coordinator 'Íy')I~~
Re: NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY LANDSCAPE PLANS
Date: February 16, 1990
BACKGROUND
In December of 1989 the Commission was apprised of the fact that the
F.D.O.T. would not permit the installation of the landscaping designed by
H.Kurt Kettelhut & Associates without the reconstruction of all of the
median curbing. The construction of nonmountable curbing was estimated at
$160,000.00. It was the consensus of the Commission that the landscape plan
would be redesigned by staff with 'non-impacting' plant materials which
would be accepted by F.D.O.T. without changing the existing curbing.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PLAN
- -
The basic restrictions on the design are that none of the plant materials
will be of a type that will have a trunk diameter greater than four inches
at maturity unless they can maintain a 10 foot off-set from the face of the
curb and that visability must be maintained between a height of 30 inches
and 6 feet.
This project includes the medians between N.E. 8th Street and Gulfstream
Boulevard and the utility strips along the sides of the road. The medians
will be irrigated, the sides of the road will not.
Beginning with the large median just north of Plastridge Insurance - this
median is wide enough that Royal Palms and substantial shade trees can be
used. This is the median in which one of the new City entrance signs will be
located. The existing Seagrape will be saved, the Sabal Palms will be
relocated, shrub massing will be used to create focal points within the
median.
Median II 2 has three existing Black Olives which the D.O.T. has said we
could leave, even though they do not meet the current requirements for set-
backs. This median will, therefore, be atypical, but will carry the plant
materials and theme of the rest of the medians as much as possible.
Medians # 3 through # 13 are using Paurotis Palms as the central theme. The
medians alternate the types of plants but maintain a similar design for
continuity. As an example, one median will have Silver Buttonwood
connecting the Paurotis Palms and Cattley Guavas in a curvilinear fashion.
1
.
I
I .
t-
.
I \~
,
~
The Buttonwood is faced with Ìndian Hawthorne and Liriope. In the following
median, Myrsine will be used in place of the Buttonwood, Silver Buttonwood
standards will be used in place of the Cattley Guava, Yellow Lantana will be
used in place of the Liriope and Ilex vomitoria will take the place of the
Indian Hawthorne.
Kettelhut's original plans did not include any sod. I have maintained a
minimum of 5 feet of sod along the length of the medians and typically 100
feet from the ends of the medians are sodded. The shrubs massings are
consolidated around the larger materials. This will allow a better contrast
between the shrubs and ground covers and will reduce maintenance with
respect to the amount of weeding that will have to be done within the
planting beds.
The utility strips along the sides of the road will have the existing weeds
removed and have drought tolerant Bahia planted flush with the curb. I have
selected Carrotwood Trees to be planted approximately every 60 feet, unless
there is a conflict with a light pole or existing vegetation. Carrotwoods
are very drought tolerant, do well in poor soil conditions, and will be able
to be maintained below the powerlines as they mature at about a 25 foot
height.
Plans are being sent to F.D.O.T. for permitting, upon their approval we can
go through the bid process and expect that the project could begin
construction in May with completion by July or August.
Slides of the proposed materials will be presented for your review at the
Commission meeting on February 27, 1990.
2
.
.
, I .
~
. r
,
í
- ~
~
~
.
I
í
"
CHANGE 'ORDER
No. 1
Dated February 7 , 19 90
Project No. Bid # 89-20, Funding Code 333-4141-572-61.15
Project Name: Landscaping, Linton/I-95 Interchange
Owner . City of Delray Beach, Florida
.
Contractor: Brian Tuttle, President, Tuttles Nursery, Landscaping and Lawncare Service, Inc.
Contract Date: April 6, 1989
To: Brian Tuttle
You are directed to make the following changes in the subject contract:
1) Additions per Attachment "A" Additional sod and replacement of Materials killed in freeze.
2) Deletions per Attachment"B" Deletion of St. Augustine at Interchange, reduction in price
of Black Olives
which changes are more specifically described in the attached amended plans, drawings
and specifications.
The reason for the change is as follows . 1) Increased areas to be sodded, 2) Deletion
.
of St. Augustine from Interchange, reduction in unit cost of Black Olives.
The contract price and contract time shall be adjusted because of the changes as follows:
A. Contract Price
l. Contract price prior to this change order: $107,193.00
Page one of two Pages
.
I
f '.
.
~
. í
í J'-f
t
~ .
"
CHANGE ORDER No. 1 Project name Linton/I-95 Landscaping - Tuttles
2. Net increase resulting from this change order: $11.219.50
3. Net decrease resulting from this change order: N/A
,
4. Current contract price including this change order: $118.412.50
B. Contract Time
1. Contract time prior to this change order: 120 days
2. Net increase resulting from this change order: 20 days
3. Current contract time including this change order: 140 days
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FLORIDA. OWNER
By:
Doak S. Campbell, III - Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City of Delray Beach
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
The above changes are accepted on , 19 . 1 understand that
all the provisions of the Contract Document related to Project No.
which are not inconsistant with the terms of this change order shall remain in effect
and apply to all work undertaken pursuant to this change order.
Witness:
, Contractor
By:
As to Contractor
Title
Page Two of T~o Pages
~
I
I .
t
.
I
,
Ò!
.
LINTON/ 1-95 INTERCHANGE
ATTACHMENT "A" - ADDITIONS
.
68,000 s.f. Bahia Sod at interchange cloverleaf @.20@ $ 13 , 600. 00
10,975 s.f. grading & excavation in utility strips $.15 @ 1,646.25
Additional grading intercahnge areas 1,500.00
4,500 s.f. St. Augustine Sod in medians at Interchange $.20@ 900.00
4,500 s.f. grading medians at interchanges $.15@ 675.00
$ 18,321. 25
Replacement of plant materials that died in 12-24-89 freeze
5 - 12' O.A. Black Olives @ $135.00 $ 675.00
5 - Bags Mulch $2.25 @ 11.25
$ 686.25
ATTACHMENT "B" - DELETIONS
Deletion of 28,440 s.f. of St. Augustine Sod from interchange $ 5,688.00
Reduction in price of Black Olives , 70 @ $30 2,100.00
$ 7,788.00
Original Bid Awrd amount $107,193.00
Total Additionals + 19,007.50
Total Deletions - 7,788.00
New Contract Price $118,412.50
~
p-
.
,
,
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
.
To: City Commissioners
Via: Malcolm Bird, Interim City Manager
From: Nancy Davila, Horticulturist/Special Projects Coordinator '00
Re: FREEZE DAMAGE - ATLANTIC AVENUE/I-95 INTERCHANGE
Date: February 21, 1990
An inspection was made of the Interchnage at West Atlantic Avenue to
ascertain plant materials that were killed due to the December 24, 1989
freeze. The following materials were killed in the freeze:
33 Black Olive Trees @ $130.00 $ 4,290.00
1,105 Cocoplum shrubs @ $7.50 8,287.50
10 Royal Poinciana Trees @ $120.00 1,200.00
2 Jacaranda Trees @ $150.00 300.00
22 Pink Tabebuia @ $135.00 2,970.00
---------
$17,047.50
There are a few sections of the Cocoplum that are not entirely dead and that
could come back by summer. I would prefer to replace all the Cocoplum with a
more cold tolerant selection, such as the Myrsine, which I will have slides
of at the February 27, 1990 Commission meeting. Cocoplum is recommended for
planting in this area, but it is recognized that it is subject to cold
damage at temperatures sustained below 28 degreess for over 6 hours. Since
South Florida's '100 year' freezes seem to be happening about every three
years, I would rather use a more cold hardy material. The Myrsine will cost
an additional $.50 per plant or $552.50 extra.
The Pink Tabebuias have been practically wipped out from nurseries at any
decent size, and I am suggesting that we relocate the remaining Tabebuias to
maintain some sense of design. All but 3 Tabebuias are dead west of the
overpass. I would like to replace the Tabebuias on the west side with Nerium
Oleander Standards which will compliment the plantings in the median. The 3
remaining Tabs can be relocated to the east side, which would require
locating only 5 Pink Tabs, since only a total of 8 died on the east side.
Materials replacements that I am recommending are as follows:
18 Nerium Oleander Standards @ $90 $ 1,620.00
.33 Black Olives @ $135 4,290.00
1105 Myrsine guianensis @ $8.00 8,840.00
10 Royal Poinciana @ $120 1,200.00
5 Pink Tabebuia @ $135 675.00
2 Jacaranda Trees @ $150.00 300.00
---------
$16,925.00
~
I
~ It)
.
\
J
..
..
.
CHANGE ORDER
No. 2
Dated . 2-21 19 90
,
Project No. Bid 89-21 Funding Code 333-4141-572-61.22
Project Name: West' Atlantic Avenue/ 1-95 Interchange - Landscaping
Owner . City of Delray Beach, Florida
.
Contractor: Tuttle's Nursery, Landscaping & Lawncare Service, Inc.
Contract Date: 4-6-89
To: Brian Tuttle - President
You are directed to make the following changes in the subject contract:
Additions per attachment "A" to replace freeze damaged materials.
which changes are more specifically described in the attached amended plans. drawings
and specifications.
The reason for the change is as follows : Not a change, an extra
The contract price and contract time shall be adjusted because of the changes as follows:
A. Contract Price
1. Contract price prior to this change order: $139.429.50
.
Page one of two Pages
¡
,
, I
~
.
- .
..
,.
CHANGE ORDER No. 2 Project name West Atlantic/I -95 Landscaping
2. Net increase resulting from this change order: $16,915 00
3. Net decrease resulting from this change order: none
4. Current contract price including this change order: $156.354.50
B. Contract Time
l. Contract time prior to this change order: 130 days
2. Net increase resulting from this change order: N/A - already accepted
3. for substantial completion.
Current contract time including this change order:
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, OWNER
By:
Mayor - Doak S. Campbell III
Attest:
City Clerk
City of Delray Beach
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
The above changes are accepted on , 19 . I understand that
all the provisions of the Contract Document related to Project No.
which are not inconsistant with the terms of this change order shall remain in effect
and apply to all work undertaken pursuant to this change order.
Witness:
, Contractor
By:
As to Contractor
Title
Page Two of Two Pages
.
I
~ .
.
I
;
.
.
.
[IT' OF DELAR' BER[H
.
'00 N W 1,· ':"vENUE DELRÞY BEACH. !=LORIDA 33444 407'243,7000
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manager
FROM: Lee R. Graham, Risk Management Director
THRU: John W. Elliott, Jr., Asst. City Manage~
DATE: February 20, 1990
SUBJECT: Renewal of the Group Health Plan
The renewal of the City's Group Health Plan is March 1, 1990. The Plan is
primarily one of self-insurance in which the City pays for its OYTI claims.
Any individual claim which exceeds $60,000 in the policy year then triggers
full insurance for any excess of that amoun t . It will be cost efficient to
increase this self-insured maximum to $75,000 for the coming year.
The Plan is knoYTI as an A.S.O.+ (Administrative Services Only Plus) Contract.
The City, on a monthly basis, pays for three categories of charges:
l. Administrative Fee - Claims handling, recording, commission, etc.
2. Pooling Fee - The insured specific loss portion over the self-insured
maximum per claim.
3. Utilization Review/PPO Fee - A cost control service through review,
certification, claims management, and provider fee negotiation.
Charges for these three categories are factored times the number of "Units"
consisting of employees, retirees, and former employees covered under
C.O.B.R.A. , the federal law which mandates that the City must allow former
employees to remain covered on the group health plan for 18 months while
making their monthly payments to the City. The monthly charges per unit
currently and projected are:
1989-90 1990-91
l. Administrative Fee (Retention 591-34-64) $9.92 $12.48
2. Pooling Fee (Specific Loss 591-34-67) $7.96 $ 7.96*
3. Utilization Review/PPO (591-34-68) $2.45 $ 2.45
*(Pooling fee remains constant by increasing the self-insured retention from
$60,000 to $75,000.) Additionally, there is an annual aggregate premium of
$13,700 (591-34-66).
THE E¡::FORT ALWAYS MATTERS
.
,
I '.
~
. ¡
J~
(
,
"
'.
.
Malcolm T. Bird
February 20, 1990
Page 2
The projected rates were negotiated down from the original quote received
initially this renewal period. Dave Huddleston and I together met with
Steven Belcher, the Regional Group Manager for American General. We told him
the initial renewal quote was not acceptable and directed him to renegotiate
with underwriting to improve the service renewal prices. (See Exhibit I for
the initial quote.) The prices were then revisited and improved at a later
meeting (See Exhibit II. ) Still not satisfied, we pressed for further
improvement (See Exhibit III) and are now satisfied that the price increase
is minimal. (The Administrative fee now includes a new state premium tax of
$2.06 which was not included last year; therefore, the increase in the amount
of the Administrative rate is $0.50, an increase of only 5%. Exhibit IV is a
monthly rate worksheet.
Claims
Claims in the most recent past year have increased significantly over the
prior year in both number and severity, registering a 42.4% increase in cost.
With projections of an even higher cost for the coming year, it becomes
prudent to institute several cost-cutting changes.
1. Co-insurance. A change from the present 90%/70% P.P.D./Non-P.P.O. to
80%/70% would be a claims saving of approximately 4.6%.
2. Out-patient surgery and pre-admission testing is currently paid at 100%.
Applying a $200 deductible and applicable co-insurance would represent a
claims saving of 2.4%.
3. Hospital confinement. The application of a $200 deductible for
non-P.P.O. confinements would result in a claims saving of 1.9%.
4. Maximum out-of-pocket expense. Currently at a level of $1,000 P.P.O.
(plus $200 deductible), and $2,000 level non-P.P.D. (plus the $200
deductible). A suggestion was made to increase those maximums to $2,000
and $3,000 respectively.
The theory in each of these proposed changes is that it is desirable to keep
the health care user involved in the payment of claims, thus adding a degree
of control.
The health claims for the calendar year 1989 totalled $1,397,791 and the
projection for the next 12 month period is $1,822,733.
Rates
The monthly rates necessary to sustain the claims of the projected future
policy period should be:
Employee Dependents
$181.20 $171.40
Current rates are $74.60 for each employee and $130.00 for a dependent unit.
~
,
I .
~
.
:
,
.
M.a1Co1'ln 't. ~i:rd
feD~ùa~1 20, 1990
'Page '3
<e a<ed and fo<wa<ded fo<
1-ss1-on an agenda «quest ,,;.11 be t~ along ,,1-tb tbat of tM
~1-th you< ~er& 1 . fo< <ene"a1 of the oont<ao f the f1-fth oonseout1-~e
c~ss1-on a~~<o~a 1-ns unohanged 1-n <ate 0<
L.1.»' oont<aot "h1-oh <e~
~.
l..RG I s'ln
Át.t.acb.'lnent.s
cc~ »a~1-d ~. \!udd1eston. »1-<eoto< of y;.nanoe
\
I
\ .'.
t
\
.
~
,
....
Malcolm T. Bird
February 20. 1990
Page 4
Addendum: Progress of the Renewal Price Negotiations
December 22, 1989 Initial Quote
Administrative Fee . · · · · · · · $17.59
Pooling Fee @ $60,000 · · · · · · 11.66
Utilization Review/PPO . · · · · · 2.45
January 16, 1990 First Revision
Administrative Fee . · · · · · · · $13.01
Pooling Fee @ $60.000 · · · · · · 9.84
Utilization Review/PPO . · · · · · 2.45
January 23. 1990 Second Revision
Administrative Fee . · · · · · · · $12.48
Pooling Fee @ $75,000* . · · · · · 7.96
Utilization Review/PPO . · · · · · 2.45
* Changing self-insured retention from $60,000 to $75,000 is a practical
cost-saving measure which allows the rate to remain the same as that of
last year.
.
,
, I '.
~
.
1
!
. ,
~
E~~,b·\t l
I
American General tIC 2 6 8('
Group Services Corporation .
2665 South BayshOre Onve. SuIt. 900 . Coconut Grove. Florida 33133 · 305-285-1805 A WIIidIrt 01
ÑIIII1CM GInn! CorporMJon
Steven F. Belcher
Regional Group Manager David M. Huddleston.
cc:
December 22, 1989 Director of Finance
Mr. Lee R. Graham, CIC, Risk Management Administrator
City of Delray Beach
100 N. W. 1 Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
RE: Group No. 5414
Dear Lee,
Pursuant to our recent discussion and in accordance with the advanced 60 day
notice requirement under your policy, I am providing you with notification of
the proposed renewal action to be effective March 1, 1990. The new rates are
included in the attachments with this letter.
As you review the renewal information, you will note that both the Maximum
Annual Paid Claims Liability and the Run-Off Claim Cap have increased
substantially. During the first 9 months of this current policy year, paid claims
were running at approximately 89% of the maximum claims attachment point~
This is considerably higher than is desired given that the annual claims attachment
point resresents expected claims plus a 25% margin.
Of the paid claims during the last 12 months, only 1 claim exceeded the current
$60,000 specific stop-loss. Generally, the specific stop-loss coverage is established
at approximately 1096 of expected claims. Given that your paid claims for the
last 12 months have run at nearly 1.4 million dollars, you may want to consider
increasing the specific stop-loss which would afford considerable savings with
regards to the monthly fixed cost of your plan.
With regards to the claim deposit, it appears that your account has been operating
in a deficit position on a regular basis. Based on your past pattern of claim
deposits, the account needs to be funded for approximately 11 t days worth of
expected claims. Going forward into the next policy year, this would equate
to a required claim deposit of approximately $87,200. This is considerably higher
than past required deposits. Naturally, this required deposit can be lowered
given a more frequent reimbursement pattern.
Lee, in light of this anticipated increase, I requested the underwriter provide
some suggested plan alternatives which would both lower the needed increase
and also offset future claims costs for your group. These suggested changes
are outlined in Exhibit III attached to this letter.
I.I~ ~ I -----.-------
14. ............... ~ ~",.........~......................,. Gull LIlt...... ~
.
,
I ".
~ .
. t
I
,
~
.
.
Page 2
.
I will contact you during the week of January 1st so that we can arrange a
convenient time to discuss this renewal action in more detail and investigate
all possible alternatives which would be in the best interest of the City. In the
meantime, should you have any specific questions please feel free to give me
a call.
Very Sincerely Yours,
~
Steven F. Belcher
SFB/ms
.
c ~
,
~
. ¡
.
¡
í
;
~
,,'I· I
,
,
Exhibit III
City of Dekay Beach
Group No. 5414
Plan Alternatives
Renewal Effective 3-1-90
Medical Pooling - if changed from $60,000 to:
Monthly Rate Effect. on Max
Per Employee Annual Liability
$ 75,000 $9.52 + $31.10
$100,000 $5.95 + $31.10
Claim Savings
Change out-patient surgery and pre-admission
testing, apply deductible and applicable co-insurance. -2.4%
Change PPO/non-PPO Co-Insurance from 90%/70%
to 80%/70%. -4.6%
Apply $200 hospital deductible fro non-PPO confinements. -1.9%
lI]~1
-.
.
I
, .
~
. ,
,
í
,
~
. .
Exhibit II
City of Delray Beach
Group No. 5414
Renewal Factors and Calculations
Effective 3-1-90
Paid Claims $1,397,791
Pooled Claims - 12,076
Experience-Rated Clms. $1,385,716
Trend x 1.30
Trended Claims $1,801,431
A verage Enrollment . 631
Current Enrollment x 664
Expected Claims $1,895,642
x 1.25
Maximum Claims $2,369,554
. 664
Annual Cap $ 3,568.60
Renewal Factors
Experience Used: December 1, 1988 to December 1, 1989
Annual Trend: 24% - 15 months used
Pooling Level: $60,000
Average Enrollment: 631 employees
Current Enrollment: 664 employees
~a=e-I
--
.
¡
-~
. r
í
"
,
~
~
,
r
.
.
Exhibi t I
City of Delray Beach
Group No. 5414
Renewal Effective 3-1-90
Current Cost versus Renewal Cost
Current Renewal
M.A.P.C.L. $2,453.49 $3,568.60
Run-Off Claim Cap $ 670.35 $ 981.37
Minimum Enrollment 577 598
Administrative Fee $ 9.92 $ 17.59
Aggregate Premium $12,400 $14,400
Specific @. 60,000 $ 7.96 $ 11.66
UM/PPO Fee $ 2.45 $ 2.45
[Il~-I
.
,
, I '~
,
. t
t
, - ,
ÌI!
~
í
~,<~L~t")t:-
.
"
AmerIcan General .
Group ServIces Corporation
2e85 ScUh ...... Drive. ~ 100 . Cocoru GIv\Ie. FIoridII 33133 . "215-1806 A~tII
...... CJeøn ~
,
......,. .....
Regìcø Gn:Iup ...".,
January 16, 1990
.
Mr. Lee R. Graham, CIC, Risk
Management Administrator
City of De1ray Beach
De1ray Beach, F10rida 33444
RE: Group No. 5414
Dear Lee,
Pursuant to our last meeting, I asked the underwriting department to revisit ¡
our rate projections for your upcoming renewa1 on March 1, 1990. Attached
you will find our revised projections.
As you review the exhibits, you will note that our projections have been reduced
considerably. As we have discussed, the MaximumAMual Paid C1aims Liability
is simply a function of paid cIaims plus inf1a·tionary trends and margin. With
regards to this component, we have reduced our annualized trend from 2496 to
20%. Fifteen. months of trend is stUl utilized as we are basing our projections
off of c1aims trom 12/1/88 to 12/1/89. We will review the claims experience
tor the 12 month period 2/1/89 to 2/1/90 at the end of this month. It the 12
month c1aims figure for that time period proves to be more favorable we will
revise our Maximum Paid Claims Liability factor to reflect the improved
experience.
As I mentioned in our last meeting, the underwriter has agreed to offer a $75,000
Specific Pooling Arrangement at the existing rate of $'1.96, which is currently
being charged for a $60,000 pooling point. Should you elect to maintain the
existing $60,000 level, our fee hBs been reduced to $9.84 from the origina1
projection of $11.66.
As a result of the revised expected c1aims projection, the aggregate premium
has been reduced slightly to $14,100. The UM/PPO fee remains at $2.45 per
employee per month.
Finally, you will note that our administration fee has been reduced considerably.
Please note that of the $13.01 that is being requested, $2.06 represents
State/Federal premium taxes. For your information, Exhibit IV specifically
illustrates the components of our administration fee. Less the premium taxes,
the total increase represented by tIúø new fee is 1096 over 1ast year's fee. In
light ot the fact that total paid c1alma have increased by 42% over the last 12
months, and the actual number of claims paid has increased by 2596, this would
seem to be a reasonable projection.
101-- ~ , -----.-----.-
. .. 'œ&. _____.-.,- ~..... _...__......-_
. .
I
I ,~
.
. i
í
t
~ .
~
i
~.
.
Pace 2
Alter you "ve had an opportunity to review the attanced Information, please
feel free to give me a can it you should have any specific questions. It has been
a pleasure workin¡ with you during this last year and I look forward to a continued
reJationship.
Very Sincerely Yours,
~
Steven F. BeIcher
--
SFB/ms
!
I
I
I
I
~
,
, .
t
,
.
I
;
~
#
Exhibi t I
City of Delray Beach
Group No. 5414
Renewal Effective 3-1-90
Current Cost versus Renewal Cost
Current Renewal
M.A.P.C.L. $2,453.49 $3,431.35
Run-off Claim Cap $670.35 $943.62
Minimum Enrollment 577 598 -
Administrative Fee $9.92 $13.01 (2.06 Tax) ~~,%
Aggregate Premium $12,400 $14,100
Specific @ 60,000 $7.96 $9.84
UM/PPO Fee $2.45 $2.45
!
~_rl ¡
.
I
I ..
,
t
.
I
,
..
.
Exhibit II
City of Delray Beach
Group No. 5414
Renewal Factors and Calculations
Effective 3-1-90
Paid Claims $1,397,791
Pooled Clai ms - 12.076
Experience-Rated CHams $1,385,716
Trend x 1.25
Trended Clai ms $1,732,145
A verage Enrollment . 631
Current Enrollment x 664
Expected Claims --, $1,822,733
x 1.25
Maximum Claims $2,278,416
. 664
Annual Cap $ 3,431.35
Renewal Factors
Experience Used: December 1, 1988 to December 1, 1989
Annual Trend: 20% - 15 months uRed
Pooling Level: $60,000
j
Average Enrollment: 631 employees 'I
i
;
Current Enrollment: 664 employees
ì
I
!
I
:
I
I
[1]--\ I
I
.
,
t '.
t
;
.
\
t
.,
.
.
I
/
Exhibit UI
City of Delray Beach .
Group No. 5414
Plan ^1ternatives
Renewal Effective 3-1-90
Medical Pooling - If Changed from $60,000 to:
Monthly Rate Effect. on J\'lax ¡
Per Employee Annual Liability
$ 75,000 7.96 29.90
Claim Savings
~ Change out-patient surgery and pre-admission -2.4%
testing, apply deductible and applicable co-insurance.
Change PPO/non-PPO Co-Insurance from 90%/70% -4.6%
to 80%/70%.
Apply $200 hospital deductible for non-PPO confinements. -1.996
[IJ~rl I
..W1ß. ,
, .
t
,
l~ .
,
. t
- .
~
..
.
'I
¡
.
.
,
Exhibit IV
City of Delray Beach
Group No. 5414
Administration Fee Breakdown
Service % of Expected Claims Cost
Claims Adjudication 1.7% $ 30,986
~
Underwriting/Actuarial! Administration 2/10% $ 3,000
Federal/State Taxes 1.0% $ 18,295
'Direct Pay/Computer 8/10% $ 14,960
Overhead, Miscellaneous · 2.0% $ 36,432
Total Expenses 5.7% $103,673
* Includes Contracts, Printing, Profit, Sales Expense and Miscellaneous Expenses.
I
;
)
!
I
I
[l]n.rl I
-.
,
,
I "
.
. f
í
~
, .
~
.
,
r
E'J(h,\;t~ jlL
. American General
Group Services Corporation
2865 South Bayllhore Qtive, Suite 900. Coconut Grove. Florida 33133.305-285-1606 A ScàIdIIoy 01
AI!IIIan Oenn CoIpoq Ion
. Steven ,. .....,
RegiOnal Group Mønager
January 23, 1990 ;"-"""--
- L!~(êleO~
! JAN 2 5 I)
Mr. Lee R. Graham, CIC
Risk Management Administrator ~''';~ ~
City of Delray Beach \.
100 N.W. 1 Avenue -.
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
RE: Gro~ No. 5414
Dear Lee,
As was requested in our last meeting, I asked my underwriter to take one last
look at the administration fee projection for your gro~'s upcoming renewal to
be effective March 1,1990.
,
I am pleased to inform you that the underwriter has agreed to further reduce
the administration fee to $12.48 per employee per month. You will recall in
my letter to you dated 1-16-90, the administration fee was quoted at $13.01
per employee per month. This further reduction is primarily related to a
re-evaluation of the expenses related to actual claims adjudication for your gro~.
Please note that this fee also includes $2.06 per employee per month for
State/Pederal premium taxes. As you know, due to American General's domestic
status in the state of Florida your group has been essentially insulated from state
premium taxes in the past. Unfortunately, this will not be the case in the future
and therefore state premium taxes do apply and have been incorporated into
the administration fee accordingly. At any rate, the actual increase in the
administration fee, excluding premium taxes, is equal to 5% over last year's
figure.
Lee, I hope that this revised fee proves to be an acceptable and satisfactory
offer. After many lengthy discussions with the \U'lderwriter, I am convinced
that we have obtained a reasonable fee and feel comfortable that this is the
best possible rate for your group. Please share this information with the
appropriate individuals and give me a call should you have any specific questions.
Very SIncerely Yours,
~Bd-'
BPB/ms
101 t= ':-1---==::..'"::.."::.."':.':====:.":""__
,
,
I .
~
. i
t
;
~
~
TOTAL E"PlOYEl DEPENDENT Ex ~, b; t :rs:r==
--------------------------------------
ClAI" $'S PAID
1986 $643,308 $384,225 $259,093
1987 $706,ó63 $3bó,900 $339,9b3
1988 $981,303 $717,70b $2b3,597 0.3b672292 0.00867387
1989 $1,397,791 $908,428 $489,362 0.33219652 0.23612894
CURRENT RENEWAL
-----------------------------
RUN OUT LIABILITY $943.62 PER E"PlOYEE PER "ONTH
SPECIFIC POOLING FEE
$60,000 $7.9b $9.84 PER EIIPlOYEE PER IIONTH
$75,000 $7.96 PER EIIPlOYEE PER KONTH
A6GRE6ATE lOSS FEE $12,400.00 $14,100.00 PER ANNU"
AD"INISTRATIVE COST $8.23 $12.48 PER E"PlOYEE PER KONTH
EXPECTED IIEDICAl INFLATION RATE $1.18 $1.25 PER ANNU"
Fl HEALTH NETWORK COST $2.45 $2.45 PER E"PlOYEE PER IIONTH
(IF NOT INCLUDED ABOVE)
"ARGIN FOR CAP 1.25 1.25 %
EXPECTED CLAIMS PER E"PLOYEE $2,745.08 PER ANNUM
"AXI"U" ANNUAL CLAI" LIABILITY $3,431.35 PER ANNUM
PER EMPLOYEE
E"PLOYEE DEPENDENT
RATE RATE
PRIOR YEAR LOSSES $908,428.00 $489,3b2.00
NUIIBER OF UNITS 644 253
LOSS PER UNIT/YEAR $1!410.60 $1,934.24
LOSS PER UNJT/IIDNTH $117.55 $161.19
SPECIFIC POOLING FEE $9.84 $9.84 50.00
AGGREGATE LOSS FEE/UNIT/" $1.82 51.82 $0.00
ADIIINISTRATlVE FEE $12.48 $12.48 50.00
FL HEALTH NETWORK FEE $2.45 $2.45 50.00
BASE KONTHLY COST $170.73 $161.19
PROJECTED INTEREST EARNINGS $23,000.00
IIONTHLY COST ALLOWANCE $2.18 $3.78
FOR INTEREST EARNINGS
OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3
ADJUSTED "ONTHLY COST/UNIT $lb8.55 $157.41
WEEKl Y COST $3b. 33
BlMEEKlY COST $72.bb
RATES WITH INFLATION CONSIDEREÐ
IAS PER INSURANCE Cn.--18%}
A )~USTE ) "OMTHLY COST/UNIT $198.89 $185.74 ($3.87) 1$7.41) 1$3.(6) $171.39
ItEEKL Y COST t42.8b
\ BlMEEKL Y COST $85.72
,.,~,".¡
, '~';....
. . . '}~ ¡
: .....~
··-f~ .
t
.
I
,~
,
. f
f
,
~
~
~
'!
r
American General
Group Services Corporation
2665 SauIh ~ Drive. SuiIe 900 . Coc:onuI Grove. RoridII33133 · 305-285-1605 A fiuIIIId .,y aI
~ GeMrII CorporIIIon
-,......
RegioneI Group Manøger
February 14, 1990
Mr. Lee R. Graham, CIC
Risk Management Administrator
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1 Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
RE: Group No. 5414
Dear Lee,
You will recall that in conjunction with the March 1st renewal of your group,
we agreed to review the claims through the month of January and adjust our
renewal projections, if the updated claims were favorable.
In fact, the 12 month period from 211/89 to 2/1/90 has proven to be more favorable
than the original 12 months which was utilized in our renewal projections. Below,
I have ouWned our revised figures on both a $60,000 Specific Stop-Loss and an
alternative $75,000 Specific stop-Loss. Please note that there is no change in
the utilization review fee, administration fee, and the specific stop loss rate.
Coverage $60,000 $75,000
Aggregate Cap $3,291. 83 $3,321.98
Run-off Cap $905.26 $913.55
Annual Aggregate Premium $13,700.00 -
Lee, after you have had an opportunity to review these figures please give me
a can should you have any specific questions. Thank you tor your attention in
this matter.
.
Very Sincerely Yours,
g:.
Steven F. Belcher
SFB/ms FE8 1 6 I)
I.I.~ ';/JP'I -----.-------
11&1' -II. ~ GIMIII", ~ 0IIIfIIIr"...... . CIØI...:b. ............. LIlt ....... ~ . .. LIlt...... 0IIIfIIIr
.
I '.
~
. t
.
í
,
~
,
,
í
David & Sheila Turner
Post Office Box 2913
Pompano Beach, FL 33072
Mr. Malcolm T. Bird
City Manager
City of Delray Beach
lOa, N.W. lst. Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 334444
February 13th. 1990.
Dear Malcolm,
It has now been forty five days since the contract has
been signed. To bring you upto date with our progress in
obtaining financing, there appears to be some reluctance from
the local banks in making a quick decision. Due to not having
a commitment as of this date there has not been a formal
appraisal made from a banking institution. The first
application that was made prior to the fifteen day requirement
was submitted to choice funding in Boco Raton, as of this date
we have not had a loan acceptance from them.
Wi th time coming down the path we submitted two more
loan applications, one to NCNB Bank and the other to Sun Bank,
both instit~tions seem favorable after looking over our
application, but due to the recent flurry of publicity
regarding banks having so many bad loans, and it appears any
new business goes in with a strike against it, also as new
residence of Florida it is taking longer than anticipated in
securing a mortgage, if only the banks could get over this
hurdle quickley and realize that this is our third venture in
this business and understand we have been successful twice
before we would be approved immediately.
We hope to hear from them in the next seven days, at
this time we are requesting an extension of our proposed
closing date to March 30th. 1990. It is our firm belief we
will not require all of this time, but please be assured we
will keep intouch with our progress.
If you should have an alternative idea which would
bring us to~earlier closing we are open to discussion.
,16¥srsjJ1ce e ,
~~~ ~---
)~Y,,-(~
David and Sheila Turner Extension Accepted
DJT. SET/jb
.
I
, I '.
~
. .
I
. ; 17
~
,
r
'r
'_I I ¡ ¡ , , , ! 1'_' .
.,i. ~ I I I_J I I L_ I
I " ~,'. ....
..
~h'
1 ... , .. . . . . ··ti;~~' . .
[ITY DF DELAAY BEA[II·~·· ..
i
'<@~:
," .,"".... :..,.~~.~~~, .~".-,þ"'"
J CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.!. 1st STREET. SUITE 4 DELRA Y BEACH. FWRIDA 33483
407/243-7090 TELECOPŒR 407/21&~ 755
ME1'vfORANDUM
Date: Februal"Y 27, 1990
To: Malcolm T. Bird, Inter.im City (VIana~~r
Fr,Qm: .,' HerbertW. A:, Thiele, ,City- Attorney
Subject: Additions! Comments Regarding Bond Counsel Selection for
Water and Sewer Issue
This memorandum is being generated. in response to your inquiries concerning
some additional infQrmation and recommendations with re.gard to the proposed
selection of bond counsel that is on tl}e Citv: Commission's agenda for
February 27, 1990. Additionally., this mè.morandum is to give you some
further thoughts; given the situation occurring with regard to' my pendinp:
resignation. effective at tbe end of April, 1990 (in order to assume the
responsibilities of Leon 'CountY' Attorn~y, on April 30th).
.. In that~~t'.~y·' gre~te~t' co~ce~n, ~~h ~egal"d to the'sel~ctJon of bon~
'-
- counsel for the upcoming water and sewer issue (which Is to be set on an
accelerate pace). is the tact that I wiD probably not be ELvaUable after the
end of April to assist in any great measure with the bond documents. the
potentia] negotiations or discussions with a negotiated purchaser/competitive
bidder, . potential court validation. and the subsequent drafting of the closing
documents. While it has been my practice over the years to have at least two
of the three lawyers in the office fsmUiar with almost every subject matter
and file, unfortúnately in the past number of bond issues this has been an
area of law and practice which has generally been ac~omplisheð. only by
myself.
Given the scenør.io that neither Susan Ruby nor Jeff Kurtz will have very
much fsmiliarity with the subject of a' water and sewer bond issue on the
document drafting. and given the selection of a new bond counsel with
unknown procedures and methQdologies. it would seem to me to be the most
cost-effective and prudent course to continue to retain the firm of Mudge,
Rose, Guthrie, Alexandex- & Ferdon for this next water and sewer bond issue,
and then go through the process of formulating the requests for proposals for
bond counsel fol" futul"e issues if that is still desired. Please note that I had
previously transmitted to the City Commission a draft of an RFP for such
purposes, leaving the selection purpose of general bond counsel, counsel for
a specia1 issue, or a rotation basis for the City Commission to consider.
'", I,
I~
, '1 ," I ¡ 'II I' . 'III I ¡ : ' ,II I I I,
1.1 i, III IUI· ,IL '., UII jl.L ILL 1-11.1. '1" ,I'.' l 1_'_' -. ,
\ ,..... ,.
.
, ';"~~ :. ' ,... . . . ": ' :':, "::" .. , . "
. Memo to Malcolm T. Bird, . , . ..', '.,. ",'.'" ë},>'~'
February'21, 1990 ,
Page 2
As to the other persons/firms who had submitted proposals~ since the City
Commission has not designated any specific criteria by which, to compare these
firms, a "rankingt' or comparison is very difllcult. However, let me say that
based upon my experience with some of the other firms on the list and
knowing their work product, it would appear to me that,. the proposals
submitted by Mudge, R.ose. the Greenberg, Traurig 'firm, and the joint
propC'lsaJ from Holland & Knight with the Gunster, Yoakley fIrm a11 evidence
the type of experience, background. expertise. and familiarity with the City
of Delrny Beach and its bond issues that would bring them to the top of the
selection group. It is mostly ba9~d upon my familiarity with the quality of
tyork lind my' concern with having ctintin1.1ity foUówmg "mý~ leaVúlg· the City
that I recommend to ~rou the further retention nt the Mudge,' Rose firm.
While 1 do not doubt that the other persons who submitted proposals in
response to our request, as well as the unsolicited proposals. are from firms
who could generally handle the City's public finance matters, I am personally
unfamiUar with any of their work on such issues8nd would be concerned
about recommending them,. to you without having reviewed same or without
having some criteria established by the. City Commission with which to Judge
:their proposals.
It you have ,any further questions ,nth regard to this matter, please
immediately contact me personally.
~!:'~';~'f''''/':'''(''''~'-,:''' ',..,;.,:,,;,.~,:,~, ".. ... ;', ,," :;-.--:.:,;,',;,.,.....:,:' ..,....,
;..., '~
. - ~:jw
cc: City Commission
Robert A. Barctnski, Assistant City Manager
~ David M. Huddleston, Director of Finance
;', ··Or_' ,
I,
".
'.
,',
·t~· t~:'" ' : ,fi'" .~..,I. ". ,~; '~. ' .:. '> ,."
~---------- -.-----------
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.E. 1st STREET, SUITE 4 DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33483
407/243-7090 TELECOPIER 407/2784755
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 15, 1990
To: City Commission
Malcolm T. Bird, Interim City Manager ..........-
David M. Huddleston-, Director of Finance
From: Herbert W. A. Thiele, City Attorney
Subject: Heceipt of Proposals for Bond Counsel
In accordance with the City Commission's direction, the City Attorney's Office
issued letters on February 2, 1990 to various firms throughout the South
Florida area who had contacted the City Attorney's Office expressing an
interest in either becoming or being retained as the City's bond counsel,
either in general or for specific issues.
The letter sent to each of these firms which was copied to the City Commis-
sion indicàtè"d that any of these firms who wish to be considered needed to
submit proposals to the City Attorney's Office on or before 4:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, February 14, 1990. Since no requirements or standard qualifica-
tions were previously approved by the City Commission, we had only
indicated that proposals should be presented if these firms were interested,
and such proposals to contain the information and criteria which these firms
thought appropriate to be considered by the City. With the exception of the
firm of Caldwell 81 Pacetti, each of the firms whom we had sent letters
presented a proposal (although the firms of Holland & Knight and Gunster,
Yoakley, & Stewart presented a joint proposal) , as well as two firms
(Hodgson, RUBS, Andrews, Woods & Goodyear, as well as Livermore, Klein &
Lott, who did not receive such letters) submitted proposals.
Copies/Originals of each of the proposals are now avaiJable in the City
Manager's Office for your review. Since the City Commission has not
established any criteria or qualifications for review of these proposals, the
City Attorney's Office has not presented any analysis or recommendations on
the proposals which have been submitted. However, if ~70U would like the
City Attorney's Office to provide you with any recommendations, suggestions
or criteria, or any other information on the subject, please contact me
personally. We do have a serious concern with the proposed retention of the
Moyle, Flanigan , Katz, Fitzgerald & Sheehan firm in that they are currentJy
representing some of the defendants in our ongoing toxic waste litigation
involving Aero- Dri. We are requesting that this matter be placed upon the
City Commission's agenda for Tuesday, February 27, 1990 for your regular
.
,
I .
~ J~ .
. .
i
,
..
.
- ---- '.---- - - . --
Memo to the City Commission
February 15, 1990
Page 2
agenda for your consideration and further direction to the City Administration
and the Cit:y Attorney's Office for proceeding with bond counsel for the
upcoming bond issues.
;rr;
HT : JW
Attachment
'-
--
-
t .
I (~
~
. !
f
,.
,
I
~
.
'f
r
Bond Proposals received by 4:00 p.m. on 2-14-90:
Letter sent Received Firm Copies
-
yes 2/13/90 Feaman, Adams, P.arris, Fernandez 81 4 sets
Deutch
yes 2/13/90 nreen burg, Traurig, HoffmAn, T.ipoff, 6 sets
Rosen & Quentel
yes 2/14/90 Polland 81 Knight/Gunster, Yoakley 81 3 set s
Stewart
yes 2/13/90 Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, Fitzgerald 81 10 sets
Sheehan
yes ?/13/90 Mudge, Rose, Guthrie, Alexander 81 9 sets
Ferdon
yes no Caldwell & Pacetti n/a
no 2/14/90 Hodffson, Russ, Andrews, Woods & 7 sets
Goodyear
----
no 2/12/90 Livermore, Klein &: I.ott 1 set
.
,
I '.
. r
f
"
,
,
':
.
1
i
,-
ME M 0 R A~D U M
TO: Malcolm Bird ,
Interim City Manager
FROM: 0) David M. Huddleston
Director of Finance
SUBJECT: Bond Counsel Selection Process
DATE: February 22, 1990
We had a discussion today with Tom Holly, a representative from Public
Financial Management, Inc. (PFM), our newly appointed Financial Advisory
Firm in regards to the upcoming General Obligation Bond Issue and the Water
and Sewer Revenue Bond Issue. I indicated that we were starting to
schedule meetings for the General Obligation Bond Issue and would schedule
a calendar for the Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Issue once the Bond Counsel
was selected. He advised that the Bond Counsel selection process could
have a very serious impact on the City and that PFM will be available to
establish criteria and assist in the selection process, if so desired. Mr.
Holly advised that the responsibility of Bond Counsel is to review the
conformity of legal requirements and to assist in the bond process to
ensure that bond covenants are in the best interest of the City.
He indicated that, aside from Bond Counsel's technical support, it is
highly advisable to have a nationally recognized Bond Buyer Red Book firm
with significant previous experience in municipal finance. He indicated it
would be inappropriate to not use a nationally recognized firm. In the
competitive bidding process, it is necessary to access as many buyers as
possible. He indicated that many potential buyers will not accept a
Non-Red-Book firm. In the marketing of bonds, it will be necessary to have
a well recognized firm so potential buyers will not have to ask "who is
this firm?" Potential buyers desire the highest comfort level (less
questions/less risk) and correspondingly a lower interest rate for the
City. The following table depicts possible costs to the City if the
interest rates varied by 0.05%, 0.10% or 0.15%:
Amount Borrowed: $15,000,000
Term: 20 Years
Additional Interest Average Annual Cost Lifetime Cost
0.05% $ 5,507 $110,140
0.10% $11,014 $220,280
0.15% $16,521 $330,420
Mr. Holly indicated that the City should also consider in the selection
process who it is assigned, the number of attorneys in the firm and the
availability of the primary attorney and each representative (in the event
(
I
~
.
~
.
.
Malcolm Bird, Interim City Manager
Page Two
February 22, 1990
.
the primary attorney is not available). He stated that the primary and
back-up representatives should be Red Book attorneys. He advised of the
advantages of having a national firm and that this becomes more apparent in
larger complex issues where Bond Counsel has access to similar issues
nationwide.
DMH/sam
cc: Rebecca S. O'Connor, Treasurer
~
I
~
.
.
~
.
;
February 21, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: MALCOLM T. BIRD, INTERIM CITY MANAGER
FROM: LULA C. BUTLER, DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT
RE: REQUEST FOR WAIVER TO THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY
CODE ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION NOTICES
BACKGROUND:
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 91-88, amending Chapter 173, Zoning
Code, Section 173.001, passed and adopted by the City Commission
on August 9, 1988, staff is submitting waiver request to the
Definition of Family for two (2) households. This request is in
compliance with provisions provided for within the Ordinance for
Commission waiver to the definition based on undue hardship on
such persons cited under this code requirement.
Case #1 - ROBERT JOSEPH, 6 ANGLER DRIVE
The current occupancy is in violation by one person, who is
reported to be the sister of the owner. Mr. Joseph
indicated that she is residing in the house with him because
both of her parents are out of the area and she is in
school. The sister attends Atlantic High School.
Case #2 - OSTAC VINCENT, 930 SE 2ND AVENUE
The current occupancy is in violation by three ( 3) persons,
two (2) adult brothers and an unrelated adult female. Mr.
Vincent indicated the above parties are residing with him
due to financial reasons.
RECOMMENDATION:
Commission consideration of hardship request is required for each
case. The head of household for each family will be present to
represent their hardship to the Commission. A copy of the waiver
request form executed by occupants is attached for reference.
B: Agenda.227/LY3
.
,
I '~
~ 19
. t
¡
í
"
~
Ì!
~ ,
"
. . .
, REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF TilE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH I S DEFINITION OF FAMILY
,
'Case fI B9- 3578 Date: tJJ- 23 - 90
I, tJ~ac. Y/nC~.l;7'- , owner of record of a single family
dwelling located at 930 5£ and /Ý've , hereby state that the
occupants and relationships of the occupants residing at the above single
family dwelling are as follows:"
NAME RELATIONSHIPS
-
1. 0~+ac. VI. n ¿!, t!! ~ 7" r
ðW/7~Y
2. E¡an;/~e -.J06tEbA wi£ oP e..g'¡ de v
/ V
. 3. 5 ;m/Jhom/71¡t.:>_ ø -fõrt h~o'¡her of &7h~_
4. 1-; SSa. \-1 'n~e n7- br(J¡'A~Ÿ pI (!J6~
5. :Tean V, 'n~e7J¡- II " I'
6. 13 ~ ,.. n a dt!?.f}-e;.. ~ I · }~J
J~ð".? 5 SlY
7 .
8.
9.
10.
ll. .
12.
1 hereby request that the City Commission waive the City of Delray Beach's
definition of family as contained in Ordinance 91-88 for the following
occupants residing at the above single family dwelling on the basis that the
definition causes úndue hardship on the family.
1. S 'm;I¿()mP7~ s + ..ç;;,.. L:- 4.
.
.
2. .:J e.a.n VI ncenr 5.
3. (3 er"nad ~ -rre. .
6.
Denial of the waiver will create a hardship because +he.v do no+ p?8k
/
~YJO~.9h J77one.y 7tJ ~pp(Jrd .dn f}Þrl;;-/77~n.1f 1?!3 'SOOn .a~
.Jhf/ -f7y,~ -a .6A HÆY . /0h; ";-)e 0/ w/)) .I7J-o v~ 0 t./-t
J /'
. Yours ~ruly, i
~~~ ~/G- ~ ~;r
Cod Enforcemen Officer Property Owner
Phone fIZ,/rP~(!)?-ÚŠ
9STItc.. VI '¡VŒ:J1JT , personally_ appeared before me this ;;;{-?1J. day of
~ ' ~.lr90
Notary Public, Statè'of Florida at Large ~~~.
My commission expires: NotIFy Publit. Stitt 0' Rorid. Signed:
. M, Commission hpi,~ Feb, 4, 1992
.
~
.
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BE^CII'S DEFINITION OF FAMILY
.
Case (I G- 9~ 7-l1 Date: f-¡5-r'l
.
I. ~~~~~_~.l . owner of record of a aingI~family
dwelling located at ¡;, ~' &,{. . hereby state that the
occupants and relationships the occupants residing at the above single
family dwelling are as follows:"
NAME RELATIONSHIPS
./
I.
./
2.
/
3.
.
/
4.
./
5.
6. \
7.
8.
9.
10.
II. .
12.
1 hereby request that the City Commission ~aive the City of Delray Beach's
definition of family as contained in Ordinance 91-88 for the following
occupants residing at the above single family dwelling on the basis that the
definition causes undue hardship on the family.
.
1. h1~_~§ÅÞP~ 4.
.
2. 5.
3. 6.
Denial of the waiver will create a hardship bec¡]use ~ ~
(lA1 /11~-hAL ~ ~µ.~~ .
,
Yours truly,
.
¡J¡L / ¡?;1.-- ~6-vé'L ~~,/
Code Enforcement Officer Property Owner .
Phone fI Q-7£-(~-7/
,
¥ør-, ) personally appeared before me this ¡..!5 day of
198', i I
.
Notary Public, State'of Florida at Large _ '»1 ~d~k...
My commission expires: . tlotwv Pubk State of 'AoñcSa Signed:
My Comm¡n~~ hDÌrcs Dee. t. 1992
[IT' OF 'DELAR' BER[H
i -JC .~ ill ~ ~ - ~ 'j ~ '\~ lj E :JE:.L~~,:,-'( ,~'::,~CH :=-i....()HIDA JJ"¡44 407 242 7000
,
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION
FROM: ~*7 MALCOLM T. BIRD, INTERIM CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CRA REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNER
DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 1990
If the City were to hire a planner as proposed by the CRA the person.
hired would be subject to all City personnel policies and procedures.
These include hiring, firing and disciplinary procedures including
Civil Service Rules. The City would need to do the hiring. It would
also require that we provide all fringe benefits given to other
employees to include health, life, disability, retirement, workers
compensation benefits, all vacation, sick leave and other benefits.
The City would also be financially responsible for any awards of
unemployment compensation which might arise from this employment
arrangement. The employee would also be eligible for pay raises and
performance increases.
As proposed, the employee would be under the policy direction of the
CRA, thus we would have all the responsibilities without authority over
the work element. These responsibilities would also include any
liability issues that might arise from the employee's actions.
I would think that the 5% to 10% benefit that might be derived by the
City could be better put to use by the CRA in the planning process for
redevelopment projects.
Based on all of the above it would be my recommendation that the CRA
hire the planner directly.
MTB:rab:kwg
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
~
I .
,.
.
, 20
~
C I T Y COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION
TO: CHERYL LEVERETT, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT III
~E OF THE CITY CLERK
~~~
FROM: DAVID J. OVAC, ~I~
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
SUBJECT: REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27, 1990
NAMING OF "MINI-PARK" ASSOCIATED WITH "THE FIVE SITES"
HISTORIC MARKER
ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION:
The action requested of the City commission is that of
officially naming the small (378 sq. ft. ) area at the
southwest corner of the Greater Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist
Church 5th Avenue parking lot.
The requested name is "B.F. James and Frances Jane Bright
Park".
BACKGROUND:
The naming is requested by representatives of The Community
Churches of Delray Beach United. The request has been reviewed
by the Historic Preservation Board and it has endorsed the
naming. The selected name represents the first two teachers of
School No. 4, Delray Colored.
The "mini-park" is actually on land owned by Mt. Olive Baptist
Church upon which the City has obtained an easement for the
purpose of erecting a historic marker. As a part of the easement
agreement, the City has agreed to provide perpetual maintenance of
landscaping improvements which are to be installed by others.
ISSUE:
The City Commission does not have a formal policy for the naming
of facilities. In this case, the facility is not an official
City park but is only the site of a historic marker. Having the
concept of the site being a "mini-park" by naming it as a "park"
may be misleading.
As an alternative to the requested action, it may be appropriate
to name the site as "The Five Sites Historic Marker" dedicated to
B.F. James and Frances Jane Bright.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Commission discretion.
c:
Susan Ruby, Assistant City Attorney
Pat Healy, Chairperson, HPB
Spence Pompey, Representative of CCDBU
REF/DJK#58/CCNAME.TXT
Z\
-
.
F~TTORNEY'S OFFICE TEL t··jo. 407 273 4755 ~eb 23,90 11:36 p, ()2
£IT' OF aELAR' IEREN
...
CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE 310 S.E. lIt STREET. SUITE 4 ut;LKAY BI::At.:Ii. FLORIDA H483
401/243· 7090 TELECOPŒR 401/278-47SS
MEMO~ÐUK
Date: Febr uary 23 ( 1990
':to: City Commission
From: Jeffrey S. Kurtz, Assi~tant City Attorney
Subject: McCracken v . City of·· Delray Beaeh
The, Mccracken case, is on a current trial docket'a.nd; a.t the time
of calendar oall, attorneys' representing the plaint'iff
lndicateO their willi~gness to settle this case for the'payment
of $15,000.
To refresh your recollection, this, case' involved a. police K-9
bi ting Mr. McCrack.en in the. facial· region during, his arrest.
The, charge's aga1.nst. Mr. Mc<:racke.n' did not resu~t in a convic-
t10n and· Mr. McCraoken has allegeddamagea, inc.ludi.ng.peDlaDent
scarrin~ the area of his ear. The, City· has previously
rejected offers ot $20,000 to. settle this case., as it is the
City's position that the" officer and the dog acted in an
entirely appropriate manner. Therefa:z::e,', our o!fice and, Fred
Gelston, ,outside caunsa~ who. is represent 1ng, the. City in this
matter, recommends against accepting the sett1.ement.
Should you have any further questions ,concerning the matter,
please do not hesitate to contact our office.
JSIt:. sh '
cc: Malc.olm T. Bird, Interim City- Manager
Chief' Charles K~190re, Delray Beach pOlice Department
Officer Williams, Delray Beach Pol~ce Department
Cheryl Leverett, Administrative Assistant :I:II
~
I
,. 22
.
\
,
"!
.
.
February 23, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: MALCOLM T. BIRD, INTERIM CITY MANAGER
FROM: LULA C. BUTLER, DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ~
RE: REQUEST TO ERECT TEMPORARY TENT/AMES DEPARTMENT STORE
FEBRUARY 28, 1990 THRU MARCH 19, 1990
BACKGROUND:
Ames Department Store, located at 14550 S. Military Trail is
requesting City Commission approval to erect a temporary tent in
the southwest corner of the store's parking lot. The purpose of
the tent is to accommodate customers for a proposed Promotion
involving the sale of furniture. The store manager is requesting
a total of 20 days for this activity (2/28 - 3/19/90).
According to Chapter 150.100 under our Code of Ordinances, the
approval to erect a temporary tent may be granted by the City
Commis s ion. The Commission is requested to approve the tent
location and purpose of assembly. The code allows for the use of
a tent for the sale of seasonal items which when protected from
the sun, provides for a less hazardous product for public use.
RECOMMENDATION:
The store manager has made application for permit to erect the
temporary tent in compliance with policies and procedures. The
tent size is estimated at 25' x 80'. Staff recommends approval
to erect the temporary tent for the designated time period.
B:AMES.MB/LY3
~
I
~ I .
~
.
I
- ~ 2~
.
.
AMES 2645
14550 S. MILlT ARV TRAIL
DELRA Y BEACH, FL 33445
~o the City Of Delray Beach,
Ames would like to have a promotion in our parking lot
from 2-31-90 through 3-19-90. This would necessitate
us erecting a tent the size of 25' x 80' in the southwest
corner of the parking lot. The fire information is
included. Ames maintenan0e will erect this tent.
Sincerely,
(/~
Je y Vanscoy
Store Manager #2645
~
I
~ .
.
~
.
.
.
. I
~nvliffl'If'lf'I\('~h""l\'nm~j\n1\imIT' .~ ·"·fin~relr/f'lrírt\""~¡¡ll\'nYJl'[r«~
~ I I I Iii í I'.¡ .i ¡Ii : i \.hi \í í i I í ¡I' " " \ I í Iii " I î ; í I Î í íl "-
Q1~rttfirutr nf lJilul1tr iftr ntøtultrr
REGISnRED ISSUEO If '.
Da'. t,.ar.eI 0,. -
APPlICA TION ~
JOHN BOYLE & COMPANY, INC. manufac1uf.d -
-I
CONCERN No. .....
SALISBURY ROAD -
-.
I I STATESVILLE. NC 28511 -
-
A·217 ;;.:.
-
70HH2-8151 -,
-
....
,This ;s 10 certify ,ha' 'he materials described on the reverse side herecl' have been name- -,
--
-
-,
relardant treated (or are inherently nonflammable).
FOR Thrif-Tent Rentals. Ine. ADDRESS PO Box 935 -
CITY '~a.1kertovn , STA TE lIC 27051
Certification' is hereby made that: (Check "a" or lIb") . : '1 . .'
f _." '.
0 (0) The articles described on Ihe reverse side of thh Ce{lifìcale hove b~~n trealed 'oVilh a Oame:relnrdant
d,emical approved and registered by the Stule fire Marshal and that the application of said
chemical was done In conformance wilh the laws of the State of California and the Rules and
Regulations of the State Fire Marshal. : . :.. . . ! . .!: ' t
.
Name of chemical used Chem. 'Reg. ,N~.
.. .....-
Method of appJication____._.__m _...._.--...-------_.-'!~_....-.--...-.....
,.
2J (b) The articles desctibed on the reverse side hereof ere mode from a f1ame~resistent fabrIc or material
registered and approved by the State Fire Mars~al for such use. . '
Trade name of flame-resistant fabric:. or material used-1l1g..Tap.__~.._...Rtg. No..r=l2l...~__
The Flame Retardant Process 'Used WILL NOT Be Removed By Wash~ng
'.. .. f. " ~ .. . t -:. :'. dOHN:;¿E & C~NY"INC. --
-)
-
-
sý. .~_. _~ -)
JOHN BOYLE & COMPANY. INC. -
-
-)
- .------------------------ - -
H__ ., -""nNfoM _ '~vctl" s..,..""'..,,.... -
",. -
..-
-
...
- .
. "
.
,
¡
I
..
.
.
~
.
.
I I I I -
-
J '--- .J \ \ 1
'---~--_._- I
/ --- ,-, - -
- - --- - C ..4 »
, ,~~~l-j~ ~~ ===',::- - -_.,¡~::¿:; ~~~~-~,;~' ~-.: · ~- :- ~~;~ - mA u:
r-01
~~3:
-
II ~I~~~:x::rmmlllljllllj'i:~".. ~,' r -<snm
tDi: -
m-cn rr
~ \. 1 1J.U l' ' . "~ r '" I , I ~' r, "1 ~ >r-
. ¡:-=- t.=Tilllllllilllll~~~~;~~ '-'-~ ~ 0"...,____, ~ O:::¡
, I >- .,... . - , ,-" ~ :z: ~ I\)
- I' , I ~ ::D
~ ~=.~~l1UllU~~.--....:.:J· I Þ__, .." -< 0) \:
I r-~
, I I ~c l>: iTiTíiîTffimF:'-:-; i nJ iX"'0' . ."/. ~ ::D .þ. r-
~ ,- ~ 1/: ~~: ~~. ",: " .,.//,
· I I ..- I '/ ',. .. ~/ t~U1
,\ ..... "= I, ! 1'1 ULlli 11'1' ,. ')1- - I "//.,., ", ,','. "
~ ,I ~ \-~.... ." ~==:.~:::r_~: /;// /':}~'. /'. I (J1r- ~
I '¡ ,~ -~" ,"', iT:",.. ,"" " ....; . " I
I -.... /'.
. ,i, I I ~'!'" I1I1 I ~ I I ' , ''fI~ i). ' , -
,.' - '-- - - ' . ¿,
's 'I' .....---.. -.. "
\' 1.\,1 ¡·I _:¡""I,;¡,IIIIII¡:,:,,·'L'U '; "ä
":R "1 ,~,. ,
I , .. _~ of ''''
. ,- v I r-: ,1 ' '1'1 .,.' . , . , "'r": ~ ~ "
/' -.., -===-=~. . ~
I ;t' ~,.
", t- ~ I \ . I.. I . I . , . I I . ....:
........... , ,
( f ~:~~ "r~l"l'" .,.,,' ..,/" I
, --4'. .' ~~~____I> .'
I .- -, '. " -~-~...- --.-. .13, '. " I
" 'f -'1'1 ,~""";I", ,·':1 . I
¡ .::~ ~ . I ~ . , .
~;' . =1 .~~!) 'ìsi!I"' " ~õ.;
I -' I. ¡ ----.-.----.-...., CII,
r r _ : -- 4' ----. - -- -. ". ~.
, '~"_ F j10 , , I I 1 , I , , .\.,.
. _ . ,". (f)
" ' - ~
. I'! "rIII'!"I!I" .......~~ ~
j , "', , ,...... - . . . - ,. -, ' ,- n
. -, ~ ~ ._,__- ..~iil';i:::.. ,}! ~ .
} I " -
a' . *'" - '.
... . ..,
....... . _ ",.....-.. -;-. ~J . ~ ~ ~ :. t:'
, ,¡ r j, ;.C . , ,. ¡, . ¡r. n l' t I 0 I
;..: --1 ,_ -.- - -' I:;
. 'q- _, ¡ :t: ::£~ :':- ',':' W' l~~ ~ i
,..J 1- -.~ -'.- .,.. ; 1" - i
:~ ~ ~ t ¡:-:- :-:;.: :':.. .-::- ,0 = : I .
, ; . '.' -, , J I . - - .- .. " ... I' .. " · ~ ,
..I - .. ,'.. . ..- -<0'- -.. -.. ,-- . ,
. J'. ' : l . 1 ~- _ 1'_ . _ _.. _ - f . '
I ,. ~ ) .... i - _-<I", -.. - .. - "J ~ ,
.~ .. ,S ~. i 1· :;= ~:... -::, ~ ::' ~. ~:: .:-: ; ;
.
... ,"". . ~ _ . _ t I-- __ . ~ _ . . . f ,
\ \: ' ,- . ,,- -. - ,- . -~:-: ' .
\. . ' ..~-- r~"...., c¡ - -... --.
_ ,-' . ,i OC I ,:I. ; :r- T; Y ::; =-- - .. ...
\:",f/,~.. .. ¡~-= == ::~:. =:=-_ _::.:.: :::
\ .", I' - -.. - ,- '- -, t-- .~. -
\ ,', lit", ,"- ---f~_ -.- ..þ. - .... -.,
\ ," .... ._ ........ __.._ ___ __._.u
\ . .~~:;\ ';.; E ~:~ ~~ t:~U- ~-~: ' ,
, .., ~. I ~ _4_ --...- --.. .
, ... -
, , , ''''"- --- -..- -.- -"' - --.
,. ¡II :"'- -.- --- -.-- --.. r--'-' .
\ .~-.: .- -_. -. __0.- -- . -1--·'
· ' .' - ,.....!- ª - . ~'. . - .. -, .
, ' . - ~, ..... \ \0 ,~ !':..:' £-- ~ !: ~ ,
: , ! ::-~ ; I . _ : _ ~
· . ~... ~ . .. .-. .
" ':' --; __;' , Cj~'--==-~- - ~ ~ __u_, ~ ---- - --1 ·
t. r- 1-1
' I' - : - ..
-" ~ ." ... .
..-....""\- ---"- ----- -f'" --.., ~
, . -
I ~- ,
?> - ;) ~ 'ij~ l
. :0
, .- :jl ¡:. j .
. . I
. -- -- ~- -11 .
,- -1 >- " f
,- --- ~ ~ I
I, - -; _. :j. -
- -, .- -< ' I
- - ¡ >- -11
t - , ...... -., : I
- --4 ~_ =11 I
t . ~..... :
- -- :ji ,
- -. - , ,I
-= , =- ::> c=. ~ -- i
..
_~-~~_J,..J, '4 -.
.. . --J
.- --- - ...... -- --. -'
') ..., .. .' - -. ..
~
,
I
. ~
\
,
~
.
·
RESOLUTION NO. 17-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 165, OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DEL RAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
I FOR ABATEMENT ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON
!
LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; SETTING
OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
I ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION; PROVIDING
J FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST
I ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
I SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
I THE MAILING OF NOTICE.
I
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances, declared the
existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or parcels of land,
I described in the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for
violation of the building codes and building requirements adopted by
I Chapter 165 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code of Ord-
inances; and,
I pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances of
WHEREAS,
the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his designated
representative has inspected said land(s) and has determined that an
unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 165 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish
the respective owner(s) of the land ( s) described in the attached list
II with written notice of unsafe building and detailed report of conditions
and notice to vacate as the Building Official determined that the
building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard to life and
public welfare pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances
I describing the nature of the violations and sent notices that the build-
ing was to be vacated and that the building was to be repaired or
demolished; work must be begun within sixty (60) days and all work must
be completed within such time as the Building Official determines, said
notice also advised that all appeals must be filed within thirty (30)
days from the date of service of the notice and failure to file an
I appeal or to make the repairs required that the Building Official would
have the authority to have the building demolished from the date of the
said notice; and,
WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained within Chapter
165 have been complied with; and,
I'
I WHEREAS, neither an appeal to the Board of Construction Appeals
or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
Chief Building Official; therefore pursuant to Section 165.41 the Build-
ing Official caused the abatement action to be done; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the Ci ty. of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Section 165.42 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costs
incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, s aid report indicating
the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
WHE REAS , the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said condition against said property owner(s).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: I
!
-1
I
I Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
as shown by
the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereo f , are hereby levied against the
parcel (s) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within
thirty (30) days after mailing of the notice described in Section 165.42
become a lien upon the respective lots and parcel (s) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
I hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
\ return receipt requested, to the owner(s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an assess-
.ment against said property for the cost of abatement action regarding an
unsafe bui lding by the thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said
notice of assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said proper-
ty, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum,
plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums.
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
herein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing
date of the notice of said assessment(s) , after which a lien shall be
placed on said property(s), and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
percent (6%) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of
collection.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing date
of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
County, Florida, and upon the da te and time of recording of the certi-
fied copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on the
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 6%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
of , 1990.
MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
,
I
.
- 2 - Res. No. 17-90
-
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
Date , .
TO: Perry G. Stokes
ADDRESS: 1100 SW 4th Avenue Bldg. 15A, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
PROPERTY: 239 NW 8th Avenue, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: N127' of W135' of Block 2, Town of Delray according to
Plat Book 1, Page 3 of the official records of Palm Beach County, Fl;
~~
You, as the record owner of, or holder of an interest in, the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of $2,379.35 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated
J 1989, has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given notice on 6-14-89
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiated on an emergency basis by the City.
x You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board of Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
An emergency action was undertaken at the above described
property to remove an unsafe condition. An appeal was not
received 30 days after the action was taken although you may
still have an appeal right as to the cost of the action.
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the above-described property on 1-5-90
at a cost of $2,379.35 which includes a ten' percent (10%) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days, that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County, Florida against
the above-described property.
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of the Building Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION. i
.
City Clerk
.
II
1\ IS-90
II RESOLUTION NO.
I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
I BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 165, OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
FOR ABATEMENT ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON
LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; SETTING
OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION; PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST
ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
THE MAILING OF NOTICE. i
I
i
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances, declared the
existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or parcels of land,
described in the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for
violation of the building codes and building requirements adopted by
Chapter 165 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code of Ord-
inances; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his designated
representative has inspected said land(s) and has determined that an
unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 165 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish
the respective owner(s) of the land (s) described in the attached list
with written notice of unsafe building and detailed report of conditions
and notice to vacate as the Building Official determined that the
building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard to life and
public welfare pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances
describing the nature of the violations and sent notices that the build-
ing was to be vacated and that the building was to be repaired or
demolished; work must be begun within sixty (60) days and all work must
be completed within such time as the Building Official determines, said
notice also advised that all appeals must be filed within thirty (30)
days from the date of service of the notice and failure to file an
appeal or to make the repairs required that the Building Official would
have the authority to have the building demolished from the date of the
said notice; and,
WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained within Chapter
165 have been complied with; and,
~7HEREAS , neither an appeal to the Board of Construction Appeals
or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
Chief Building Official; therefore pursuant to Section 165.41 the Build-
ing Official caused the abatement action to be done; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Section 165.4~ of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, submitted to the City Cormnission a report of the costs
incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, said report indicating
the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said condition against said property owner(s).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
~~
I
i
I
!
.
.
,
I Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
I
as shown by I
the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the
parcel (s) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within
thirty (30) days after mailing of the notice described in Section 165.42
become a lien upon the respective lots and parcel (s) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the owner(s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an assess-
ment against said property for the cost of abatement action regarding an
unsafe building by the thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said
notice of assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said proper-
ty, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum,
plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums.
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
herein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing
date of the notice of said assessment(s), after which a lien shall be
placed on said property(s), and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
percent (6%) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of
collection.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing date
of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certi-
fied copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on the
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 6 %, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
of , 1990.
MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I
- 2 - Res. No. 18-90
\
.
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
.
Date .
TO: Errol Gayle
ADDRESS: 20 SW 6th Avenue. Delray Beach. Fl 33444
PROPERTY: 20 SW 6th Avenue. Delray Beach, Fl 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: South 50 feet of North 250 feet of East 135 feet of
Block 13, Town of Delray according to Plat Book 1, Page 3 of the official records
~~ of Palm Beach County, Fl.
You, as the record owner of. or holder of an interest in, the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of $3.272.50 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated
, 1989, has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given notice on 8-31-89
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiated on an emergency basis by the City.
x You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board of Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
An emergency action was undertaken at the above described
property to remove an unsafe condition. An appeal was not
received 30 days after the action was taken although you may
still have an appeal right as to the cost of the action.
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the abòve-des~ribed property on 1-26-90
at a cost of $3.272.50 which includes a ten percent (10%) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days, that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County, Florida against
the above-described property.
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of the Building Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION. i
City Clerk
.
II
I
I
I
I
I RESOLUTION NO. 19-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 165, OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
FOR ABATEMENT ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON
LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH¡ SETTING
OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION¡ PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTRREST
ASSESSMENTS¡ PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS¡ PROVIDING FOR
THE MAILING OF NOTICE.
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances, declared the
existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or parcels of land, I
described in the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for I
I
violation of the building codes and building requirements adopted hy I
Chapter 165 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code of Ord-
inances¡ and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his designated
representative has inspected said land(s) and has determined that an
unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 165 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish
the respective owner(s) of the land(s) described in the attached list
II with written notice of unsafe building and detailed report of conditions
and notice to vacate as the Building Official determined that the
building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard to life and
public welfare pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances
describing the nature of the violations and sent notices that the build-
ing was to be vacated and that the building was to be repaired or I
demolished¡ work must be hegun within sixty (60) days and all work must I
\
be completed within such time as the Building Official determines, said i
notice also advised that all appeals must be filed within thirty (30) I
i
days from the date of service of the notice and failure to file an
appeal or to make the repairs required that the Building Official would
have the authority to have the building demolished from the date of the
said notice¡ and,
WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained wi thin Chapter
-165 have been complied with¡ and,
I WHEREAS, neither an appeal to the Board of Construction Appeals
or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
Chief Building Official¡ therefore pursuant to Section 165.41 the Build-
ing Official caused the abatement action to be done¡ and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of De lray Beach has,
pursuant to Section 165.42 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costs
incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, said report indicating
the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said condition against said property owner(s).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY CO~lISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLm.¡S·
.
2~
.
.
,
Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
as shown by
the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the
parcel(s) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within
thirty (30) days after mailing of the notice described in Section 165.42
II become a lien upon the respective lots and parcel (s) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
I with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the owner(s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an assess-
ment against said property for the cost of abatement action regarding an
unsafe building by the thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said
notice of assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said proper-
ty, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6 %) per annum,
plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums. I
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
herein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing
date of the notice of said assessment(s) , after which a lien shall be
placed on said property(s) , and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
percent (6 %) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of
collection.
I Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
I ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing date
I
Ii of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
I,
II a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
I County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certi-
\ fied copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on the
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
II the rate of 6%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
II
1\ PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
ji of , 1990.
I
I
I
I
I
II MAY 0 R
I
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I .
i
- 2 - Res. No. 19-90
.
I
I,
.
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
.
Date ,
TO: Ethel Mackey c/o Shirley M. Wallace c/o Shirley Fuller
ADDRESS: 234 NW 7th Avenue, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
PROPERTY: 129 SW 5th Avenue, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S~ of Lot 5, Block 30, Town of Delray according to
Plat Book 1, Page 3 of the official records of Palm Beach County, Fl.
~~
You, as the record owner of, or holder of an interest in, the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of$l,809.50 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated
, 1989, has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given notice on 9-7-89
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiated on an emergency basis by the City.
x You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board of Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
An emergency action was undertaken at the above described
property to remove an unsafe condition. An appeal was not
received 30 days after the action was taken although you may
still have an appeal right as to the cost of the action.
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the abòve-des~ribed property on 1-26-90
at a cost of which includes a ten percent (10%) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days, that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County, Florida against
the above-described property.
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of the Building Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION. i
City Clerk
,
II
'i
'i RESOLUTION NO. 20-90
!I
Ii
II A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
!I BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 165, OF THE CODE OF
\ ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
I
! FOR ABATEMENT ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON I
: LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; SETTING ,
I OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
I
I ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION; PROVIDING
\ FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST
I, ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
II TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
¡. THE MAILING OF NOTICE.
'I
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
:1 has, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances, declared the
II existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or parcels of land,
described in the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for
violation of the building codes and building requirements adopted by
\i Chapter 165 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code of Ord-
I inances; and,
NHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his designated
I representative has inspected said land(s) and has determined that an ,
,
, unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
! Chapter 165 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish
¡¡ the respective owner(s) of the land(s) described in the attached list
.,
¡I with written notice of unsafe building and detailed report of conditions
II and notice to vacate as the Building Official cì.etermined that the
II building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard t.o life and
Ii
:1 public welfare pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances
Ii describing the nature of the violations and sent notices that the build-
ing was to be vacated and that the building was to be repaired or
I demolished; work must be begun within sixty ( 60) days and all work must
II be completed within such time as the Building Official determines, said
notice also advised that all appeals must be filed within thirtv (30)
:! days from the date of service of the notice and failure to file an
11
11 appeal or to make the repairs required that the Building Official would
" have the authority to have the building demolished from the date of the
I·
I said notice; and,
'I
'I
II WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained within Chapter
II
,I
, 165 have been complied with; and,
"
'I
"
WHEREAS, neither an appeal to the Board of Construction Appeals
or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
Chief Building Official; therefore pursuant to Section 165.41 the Build-
ing Official caused the abatement action to be done; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Section 165.42 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costs
incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, said report indicating
the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
NHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delrav Beach,
pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said condition against said property owner(s).
I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOt^lS:
I ;:¿7
il I
II ,
"
·
,
I
I Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
as shown by
the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the
parcel (s) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within
thirty (30) days after mailing of the notice described in Section 165.42
become a lien upon the respective lots and parce 1 (s ) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and"
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the owner(s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an assess-
ment against said property for the cost of abatement action regarding an
unsafe building by the thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said
notice of assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said proper- I
ty, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6 %) per annum, I
plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums. I
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty I
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
herein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing
date of the notice of said assessment(s) , after which a lien shall be
placed on said property(s), and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
percent (6 %) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs Qf
collection.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing date
of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
I County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certi-
I fied of this resolution lien shall become effective the
I copy a on
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 6%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
of , 1990.
I
MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
- 2 - Res. No. 20-90
.
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
Date .
TO: Mary Green Trust
c/o AmeriFirst Fla-Trust Co.
ADDRESS: PO Box 026029
Miami, FI 33102
PROPERTY: 429 West Atlantic Avenue, Delray Beach, FI 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: E~ of Lot 14 less S20 feet of Block 28, Town of Delray
according to Plat Book 1, Page 3 of the official records of Palm Bea'ch County, Fl.
~-
You, as the record owner of, or holder of an interest in, the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of $1,072.50 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated
, 1989, has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given notice on 9-21-89
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiated on an emergency basis by the City.
x You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board of Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
An emergency action was undertaken at the above described
property to remove an unsafe condition. An appeal was not
received 30 days after the action was taken although you may
still have an appeal right as to the cost of the action.
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the abóve-desçribed property on 1-26-90
at a cost of $1,072.50 which includes a ten percent (107.) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days. that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County, Florida against
the above-described property.
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of thè Building Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION. i
,
City Clerk
.
II
II
I RESOLUTION NO.21-90
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DEL RAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 165, OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
FOR ABATEMENT ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON
LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DEL RAY BEACH; SETTING
OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION; PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST
ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
THE MAILING OF NOTICE.
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances, declared the
existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or parcels of land, I
described in the list attached hereto and made a part hereof, for
violation of the huilding codes and building requirements adopted by
Chapter 165 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code of Ord-
inances; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his designated
representative has inspected said land (s) and has determined that an
unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 165 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish
the respective owner (s) of the land (s) described in the attached list
with written notice of unsafe building and detailed report of conditions
and notice to vacate as the Building Official determined that the
building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard to life and
public welfare pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Orcìinances
describing the nature of the violations and sent notices that the build-
ing was to be vacated and that the building was to he repaired or
demolished; work mnst be begun within sixty (60) days and all work must
be completed within such time as the Building Official det.ermines, said
III notice also advised that all appeals must be filed wi thin thirty (30)
II days from the date of service of the notice and failure to file an
'I appeal or to make the repairs required that the Building Official would
I have the authority to have the building demolished from the date of the
:\ said notice; and,
il WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained wi thin Chapter
I' 165 have been complied with; and,
il . h 1 h .ç: .
'Ii NHEREAS, ne~ t er an appea to t e Board 0-,- Construct~on Appeals
II' or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
! Chief Building Official; therefore pursuant to Section 165.41 the Build-
\1 ing Official caused the abatement action to be done; and,
WHEREAS, the City Manager of the City of Delray Beach has,
pursuant to Section 165.42 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Delray Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costs
incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, said report indicating
the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said condition against said property owner(s).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF 'THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
~8
ii
·
!I !
I
, ;
¡
i1 Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
i i
as shown by
the report of the City Manager of the City of Delray a copy of which is I
attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the
parcel(s) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within I
I
thirty (30) days after mailing of the notice described in Section 165.42
become a lien upon the respective lots and parcel (s) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
with the same penalties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and-
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach is
hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the owner(s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an assess-
ment against said property for the cost of abatement action regarding an
unsafe building by the thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said
notice of assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said proper-
ty, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6 %) per annum,
plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums.
Section 4. That this resolution shall become effective thirty
(30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment(s) contained
Ii herein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing
I date of the notice of said assessment(s), after which a lien shall be
placed on said property(s), and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
percent (6 %) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of
collection.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing date
of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certi-
I fied copy of this resolution a lien shall become effective on the i
subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 6%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
fee.
1\ PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the day
II of , 1990.
II
I
MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
- 2 - Res. No. 21-90
I \
I
~ j
.
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
.
Date .
TO: GRS Pension Trust
ADDRESS: c/o Mona Simpson 360 NE 4th Street, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
PROPERTY: 227 NE 7th Avenue, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 5, Block 122, Wellbrock according to Plat Book 24,
Page 219 of the official records of Palm Beach County, Florida
--
You, as the record owner of, or holder of an interest in, the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of $82.50 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated
, 1989, has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given notice on l-R-QO
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiated on an emergency basis by the City.
You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board of Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
x An emergency action was undertaken at the above described
property to remove an unsafe condition. An appeal was not
received 30 days after the action was taken although you may
still have an appeal right as to the cost of the action.
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the above-described property on 1-10-QO
at a cost of $82.50 which includes a ten percent (10%) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days, that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County, Florida against
the above-described property.
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of the Building Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
City Clerk
-
·
!
t
, RESOLUTION NO. 22-90
I
I
i A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
¡ BEACH, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 165, OF THE CODE OF
I ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ASSESSING COSTS
I FOR ABATEMENT ACTION REGARDING AN UNSAFE BUILDING ON
LAND(S) LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH; SETTING
OUT ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH SUCH
ABATEMENT AND LEVYING THE COST OF SUCH ACTION; PROVIDING
I
II FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR A DUE DATE AND INTEREST
jl ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDING OF THIS RESOLU-
I TION, AND DECLARING SAID LEVY TO BE A LIEN UPON THE
II SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR UNPAID ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
THE HAILING OF NOTICE.
WHEREAS, the Building Official or his designated representative
has, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances, declared the
existence of an unsafe building upon certain lots or parcels of land,
described in the list attached hp.reto and made a part hereof, for
violation of the building codes and building requirements adopted by
Chapter 165 and those Codes adopted in Chapter 96 of the Code of Orð-
inances; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Delray Beach, the Building Official or his designated
representative has inspected said land (s) and has determined that an
unsafe building existed in accordance with the standards set forth in
Chapter 165 and/or Chapter 96 of the Code of Ordinances, and did furnish
i the respective owner(s) of the land(s) described in the attached list
i with ,.¡ritten notice of unsafe building and dp.tailed rp.port of conditions
i and notice to vacate as the Building Official determinen that the
I building was manifestly unsafe and is considered a hazard to life and
il public welfare pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances
L describing the nature of the violations and sent notices that the build.-
I! ing was to be vacated and that the building was to be repaired or
II· demolished; work must be begun wi thin sixty (60) days and all -work must
" be completed wi thin such time as the Building Official determines, said
!i notice also advised that all appeals must be filed within thirty (30)
! days from the date of service of the notice and failure to file an
i appeal or to make the repairs required that the Building Official would
ii have the authority to have the building demolished from the date of the
:1 said notice; and,
t'¡
I
Ii WHEREAS, all the notice requirements contained within Chapter
ii 165 have been complied with; and,
:1 WHEREAS, neither an appeal to the Board of Construction Appp.a1s
i or corrective action was undertaken in accordance with the order of the
I] Chief Building Of ficial; therefore pursuant to Section 165.41 the Build-
\1 ing Official caused the abatement action to be done; and,
II
ì\ WHEREAS, the Ci ty Manager of the City of Delray Beach has,
I pursuant to Section 165.42 of the Code of Ordinànces of the City of
I Delray Beach, submitted to the City Commission a report of the costB
I incurred in abating said condition as aforesaid, said report indicating
the costs per parcel of land involved; and,
~ifflEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
pursuant to Chapter 165, of the Code of Ordinances desires to assess the
cost of said condition against said property owner(s).
I
I
I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF' THE
I CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
I ~
!
,
I
i
I . Section 1. That assessments in the amount of
as shown by
the report of the City Manager of the City of De1ray a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby levied against the
parcells) of land described in said report and in the amount(s) indi-
cated thereon. Said assessments so levied shall, if not paid within
thirty (30) days after mailing of the notice described in Section 165.42
become a lien upon the respective lots and parcells) of land described
in said report, of the same nature and to the same extent as the lien
for general city taxes and shall be collectible in the same manner and
,.,i th the same penal ties and under the same provisions as to sale and
foreclosure as City taxes are collectible.
Section 2. That such assessments shall be legal, valid and
binding obligations upon the property against which said assessments are
levied.
Section 3. That the City Clerk of the City of Delray Reach is
II hereby directed to immediately mail by certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the owner (s) of the property, as such
ownership appears upon the records of the County Tax Assessor, notice(s)
that the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach has levied an assess-
I ment against said property for the cost of abatement action regarding an
\ unsafe building by the thirty (30) days after the mailing date of said
I notice of assessment, after which a lien shall be placed on said proper-
I ty, and interest will accrue at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum,
I plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting said sums.
II Section 4. That this re¡::;olution shall become effective thirty
ii (30) days from the date of adoption and the assessment (s) contained
'i herein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing
,j date of the notice of said assessment (s), after which a lien shall be
II placed on said property (s), and interest shall accrue at the rate of six
II percent (6%) per annum plus reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of
I collection.
Section 5. That in the event that payment has not been re-
ceived by the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the mailing date
\1 of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
t a certified copy of this resolution in the public records of Palm Beach
I County, Florida, and upon the date and time of recording of the certi-
Ii fied copy of this resolution a lien shall become effec+:ive on the
II subject property which shall secure the cost of abatement, interest at
the rate of 6%, and collection costs including a reasonable attorney's
I
II fee.
II . . . h d
I PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular seSS10n on thlS t e av
~I of , 1990.
II
"
'I
II
I MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
,
1
I
- 2 - Res. No. 22-90
!!
NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT
Date
TO: Leon and April L. Humphrey
ADDRESS: 602 SW 9th Court, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
PROPERTY: 602 SW 9th Court, Delray Beach, Fl 33444
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 36, Delray Manor Addition according to Plat Book 12,
Page 69 of the official records of Palm Beach County, Fl
;-
You, as the record owner of, or holder of an interest in, the above-
described property are hereby advised that a cost of$881.50 by resolution
of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, dated
, 1989, has been levied against the above-described property.
The costs were incurred as a result of a nuisance abatement action
regarding the above-described property. You were given notice on 12-15-89
that the Building Official has determined that a building located on the
above-described property was unsafe. You were advised in that notice of the
action that would be taken to remedy that unsafe condition and that the action
would be initiated on an emergency basis by the City.
You failed to appeal the decision of the Building Official to the
Board of Construction Appeals although you were informed of your
right to an appeal and of the procedures for obtaining appeal.
You have also failed to take the corrective action required by
the notice of the Building Official.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals. You were given written notification on
that you were required to take the corrective action
required by the decision of the Board of Construction Appeals
within a stated period of time. You failed to take the action as
required by the order of the Board of Construction Appeals.
You appealed the decision of the Building Official to the Board
of Construction Appeals on . The Board of Construction
upheld the decision of the Building Official.
x An emergency action was undertaken at the above described
property to remove an unsafe condition. An appeal was not
received 30 days after the action was taken although you may
still have an appeal right as to the cost of the action.
The City of Delray Beach has therefore taken remedial action to remove
the unsafe condition existing on the above-described property on 12-20-89
at a cost of $881.50 which includes a ten percent (107.) administrative
fee. If you fail to pay this cost within thirty (30) days, that cost shall
be recorded on the official Records of Palm Beach County, Florida against
the above-described property.
Copy of all notices referred to in this notice are available in the
office of the Building Official.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
.
City Clerk
.
RESOLUTION NO. 2 3- 9 0
\
I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 54-89
'I WHICH ESTABLISHED THE EDUCATION BOARD OF THE CITY OF
I
,;
<! DELRAY BEACH AS AN AD-HOC ADVI SORY BODY TO THE CITY
'i
Ii COMMISSION, BY AMENDING SECTION 2 OF RESOLUTION NO.
'I
\1 5 4- 8 9 WHICH PROVIDES THAT THE EDUCATION BOARD SHALL
i CONSIST OF SEVEN (7) MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE CITY
Ii
\1 COMMISSION, BY ADDING AN EIGHTH (8TH) , NON-VOTING
MEMBER FROM NORTH BOCA RATON TO THE EDUCATION BOARD;
I PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
I
I WHEREAS, at the meeting of August 22, 1989, the City Commission
I adopted Resolution No. 54-89, establishing the City of Delray Beach
Education Board, assigning it duties, and setting a sunset date; and,
WHEREAS, at the meeting of February 13, 1990, the City
Commission considered and approved a request from the Education Board to
add an eighth, non-voting member from North Boca Raton to the Board; and,
1 City Commission
I WHEREAS, the approval granted by the at the
meeting of February 13, 1990, requires amendment of Resolution No. 54-89,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 2 of Resolution No. 54-89 be, and the I
same is hereby amended to read as follows:
I
I
Section 2. That the Education Board shall consist of I
seven (7) members who shall be appointed by the City I
I
Commission. Initial appointees shall be as made by
the Ci ty Commission at its meeting of June 27, 1989.
There shall also be an eighth ( 8th) member of the
Education Board who shall be a non-voting member and a
resident of North Boca Raton, and who shall be
appointed by the City Commission. Vacancies shall be
filled by appointment of the City Commission.
Section 2. That this resolution shall become effective
immediately upon its passage.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the 27th day of
February, 1990.
MAY 0 R
ATTEST:
City Clerk
30
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO. Malcoll"l T. Bi rd , Interil"l City Manager
THROUCaH: John W. Elliott, Jr., Asci~tant City M.n.~
Man.agel"lent Services
FROM I Ted Glas, Purchasing Director ~~
DATE: Feb rua ry 21, 1990
SUBJECT!: DOCUMENTATION - CITY COMMISSION MEETING -
FEBRUARY 27, 1990 - BID AWARD - BID. 90-21
IRQfl C _l~I..E;_nReltfAt!~. ..::_ et:fêlE;. .11
lì!FLÐf:fgr.tLt;.i. 't~. J';grJOi2Iii12DJ.
The City COl"Il"lission is requested to award contract to low
bidder, Hardrives of Delray, Inc., at a cost of "'67,273.75.
Per th~ BU3r~t Office, funding is frol"l .account .~1~~~-L-J(rl-'/.H
1!/)/-L.C--. I<--~~-Æ_:"_ ('Ifr~_..tI'¡4.'t:.I1·· -~.._---_.._-----).
Ð.~kg.nl\~DdJ.
Scope of Work:
Furnish all labor, Material~ and ~quipl"lpnt for construction
iMprov.Ment of Tropic Isle Phase II, including pav~Ment and
drainage la~atpd along Tropic rsl~ Subdivision.
Bids on the project were received on February 13, 1990 froM
nine (9) contractor~, all in accordance with City purchasing
procedures. (Bid .90-21. Docul"lentation on file in tnQ
Purchasing Offic..) A tabulation of bids is &\ttélched for
your revi@w.
The low bid was subMitted by HardrivE.'s of Delray, Inc. at .
cost of $67,273.75. Engineering's estiMate for the work i 'õ
$83,162.
Bill;. Ql:!.1ogmi.:t i QD.=.
Staff rEfcol"I"'E"nds award to the low bidder, Hardrives of
Delray, Inc. for the total cJl"lount o'F "67,273.7:5. per thQ
unit pricps and estiMatpò quëmt it ies. Funding as outlined
cJbove.
A~ìgS;bO!!r.tì~!
labulation of Bids
RecoMMendation FroM City Engine@r
pc YvonnE.' I<incaide
Goates Ca"itle
3J^
,
TABULATION OF BIDS
BID '90-21
TROPIC ISLE DRAINAGE PHASE II
February 13 1990
VENDOR:
ITEM DESCR I PTION Bardrives Gateway Token
. & an, Construction DevelomEnt Inc. RegIa Construction
1. TYPE T INLETS 1.025.00 I
850.00 I 1.375.00 I 1.500.00 I
14 EACH 14.350.00 11 ,900.00 19.250.00 21.000.00
1a. CONFLICT INLET 2,500.00 I
TYPE T 1.280.00 I 1.475.00 I 1.600.00 I
1 EACH 2,500.00 1,280.00 1,475.00 1.600.00
-- ----
2, 15' R,C,P, DRAINAGE 19.00 I
PIPE 19.00 I 14.50 I 19.00 I
705 L.F. 13.395.00 13,395.00 10,222.50 13.395.00
--- ------------------ - -- -.
2a, 18" R.C,P, DRAINAGE 23.00 I 24.00 I
PIPE 23.00 I 17.00 I
le~ U. 4.140.00 4,140.00 3.060.00 4,320.00
-- --------- ---
2:. 2" R.C,P, DRAINAGE -
PIPE 30.00 I 30.00 I 22.00 I 25.00 I
11C L .G, 3,300.00 3.300.00 2.420.00 2.750.00
. 24' P,v.C, DRAINAGE
;"
PIOE 28.00 I 29.00 I 31.00 I 26.00 I
220 l.F. 6.160.00 * 6.380.00 6.820.00 5.720.00
----- ----------------------- ~--- ------ ---------- "-----
4. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
REPLACEMENT 20.00 I 25.00 I 19.50 I 20.00 I
_____1350 ~______________ 7.000.00 8.750.00 6.825.00 7.000.00
~--------------- -
I 5. ¡ CONCRETE APRON 300.00 I 210.00 I 105.00 I 70.00 I
19 EACH 5.700.00 3.990.00 1.995.00 1.330.00
---- ------------ ----- ------
6. CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS 2.10 I
3.00 I 5.50 I 2.20 I
500 S,F. 1.050.00 1.500.00 2.750.00 1.100.00
- --- --- -
5a. ASPHALT DRIVEWAy 2.75 I
3.00 I 2.50 I 2.00 I
1.125 S.F. 3,093.75 3,375.00 2.812.50 2.250.00
-- --- ---- --
6b, CHATTAHOOCHEE DRIVEWAY
4.25 I 5.00 I 9.50 I 3.80 I
~GG S.F. 1.700.00 2.000.00 3,800.00 1.520.00
Page 1
.
.
t '.
t
. !
f
,
~
,
..
TABULATION OF BIDS
BID 190-21
TROPIC ISLE DRAINAGE PHASE II
February 13, 1990
'iENDOR: Charles S.
ITEM DESCRIPTION A.O. B. Finton
Telcon, Inc. Underground Construction Man Con Whiteside
1 , cn.
. TYPE T INLETS 1,000.00 I 1,447.00 I 930.00 I 1,100.00 I
' . 675.00 I
14,000.00 20,258.00 13,020.00 15,400.00
U EACH 9,450.00
: a. CONFLICT INLET 1,770.00 I 3,000.00 I 1,447.00 I 1,385.00 I 1,800.00 I
TY PE "C' 1,770.00 3,000.00 1,447.00 1,385.00 1,800.00
1 ~ÅCH
--- ------------------
2. ' ~ 5' R. C . p, DRA INA GE 37.00 I 21.00 I 22.30 I 39.00 I 35.00 I
PIPE 26,085.00 14,805.00 15,721.50 27,495.00 24,675.00
705 U.
---- ----------------------- ------------------- ---------
2a. 18' R.:.P. DRAINAGE 42.00 I 24.00 I 24.95 I 41.00 I 40.00 I
PIPE 7,560.00 4,320.00 4,491.00 7,380.00 7,200.00
ISC L.F.
---------------------- ---------- - --
----
;.., 24' R.C.P. DRAINAGE 46.00 I 30.00 I 30.25 I 45.25 I 50.00 I
om 5,060.00 3,300.00 3,327.50 4,977.50 5,500.00
110 L.~.
3, 24' P.~.C. DRAINAGE 39.00 I 60.00 I 29.55 I 47.80 I 50.00 I
PIPE 8,850.00 13,200.00 6,501.00 10,516.00 11,000.00
220 L,F,
---------------------- ----------- 1--------- ~--
--- 27.00 I
. . BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 9.50 I 25.00 I 15.00 I 20.00 I
REPLACEMENT 3,325.00 8,750.00 9,450.00 5,250.00 7,000.00
350 U,
---------------------- ------------------- ---- --- ~-
----
5. CONCRETE APRON 190.00 I 250.00 I 250.00 I 375.00 I
3,610.00 4.750.00 450.00 I 4,750.00 7,125.00
19 EACH 8,550.00
---- -------- e----------- -------------------
6, CONCRETE DRIVEwAYS 2.00 I 2.25 I 3.00 I 5.00 I 4.00 I
1,000.00 1,125.00 1.500.00 2,500.00 2,000.00
500 S.F,
r-.--------- -------- ---------
- 2.00 I
6a. ASPHALT DRIVEWAY 2.00 I 2.50 I 5.00 I
2,250.00 2.00 I 2,250.00 2,812.50 5,625.00
1.125 S,F. 2,250.00
-~----- - -
-- --------- f---------- 4.00 I
6b, CHATTAHOOCHEE DRIVEWAY 2.00 I 10.00 I 7.00 I
6.00 I 800.00 1,600.00 4,000.00 2,800.00
400 S.F. 2,400.00
- ---
Page 2
.
I '.
,
~
. t
I
f
.'
, - ,
Ò!
,
-
,
TABULATION OF BIDS CONT......
- ------ VENDOR: Begla CoD.tructio~1
!TEl DESCRIPTION Gateway Token
. & QTY, Bardrives Construction Develoument Inc.
7, GRASS SOD 1.50 I 4.00 I 1.50 I 2.00 I
1,500.00 4,000.00 1,500.00 2,000.00
toce S.Y.
~, REPLACE OR REPAIR 3.00 I 1.00 I 4.00 I 4.00 I
SPRINKLERS 1,035.00 345.00 1,380.00 1,380.00
345 L,F.
- -----------------
9. TIE TO EXISTING 450.00 I 400.00 I 500.00 I 550.00 I
CATCH BASIN 1,350.00 1,200.00 1,500.00 1,650.00
3 EACH
--- ----------------------- ------------------------- -----
11. GRADE SïAlE AREAS .10 I .20 I .30 I .45 I
1,000.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 4,500.00
10.000 l.F.
---- ----------------------- ---------- ----
GR~.HD TOHL $67,273.75 $67,555.00 $68,810.00 $71,515.00
CO"HEHTSiEXCEPTIONS * JM permaloc Complete all Complete all Complete all
storm drainage work fully work fully work fully
pipe . within 100 within 60 within 50
CoIIplete all calendar days calendar days calendar days
work fully after notice after notice after notice
within 60 to commence to cOllDence to commence
calendar days work. work. work.
after notice Bid Bond Bid Bond Bid Bond
to cOllDence Submitted. Submitted. Submitted.
work .
Bid Bond sub-
mitted .
Page 3
"
~
I .
~ .
.
t
,
'"'
.
,
.
TABULATION OF BIOS CONT...."
_________________________VE~ DOR:______________ ___
!TEM DESCRIPTION -- - ------- ---------~---
A.O.B. Finton Charles S.
. &_.jIY . Telcon, Inc. Undersr:round Construction Man Con Whiteside
~ GRASS SOD
' .
1.30 I 2.00 I 1. 00 I 2.25 I 2.25 I
'000 S.Y. 1,300.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 2,250.00 2,250.00
e. ~EPLACE OR REPAIR
SPRINUERS 1.00 I 5.00 I 2.00 I 2.00 I 2.00 I
345 L,F, 345.00 1 , 725 . 00 690.00 690.00 690.00
--- -------------------
9. TIE TO EXISTING
CATCH BASIN 625.00 I 750.00 I 750.00 I 250.00 I 500.00 I
3 EACH 1,875.00 2,250.00 2,250.00 750.00 1,500.00
---- ----------------------- ------------------- ------------------- --------------- -
'1 GRADE SWALE AREAS ----
I, .
.27 I .15 I .10 I .25 I .20 I
1C,~OO U, 2,700.00 1,500.00 1,000.00 2,500.00 2,000.00
---- ----------------------- ------------------- ----------- ------------------ -'
GRAND TOiAl $77,310.00 $77,775.00 $80,036.00 $90,276.00 $96,565.00
COMMENTS/EXCEPTIONS Complete all CoIIIplete all Complete all Complete all QJIIpl.e t e a1.1.
work fully work fully work fully work fully work fully
within 60 within 90 within 60 within 120 within 90
calendar days calendar days calendar days calendar day ; calendar day~
after notice after notice after notice after notice after notice
to cOllllllence to co.mence to cOllBllence to cOllBllence to c01IIIIence
work. work. work. work. work.
Bid Bond Bid Bond Bid Bond Bid Bond Bid Bond
Submitted. Submitted. Submitted. Submitted. Submitted.
Page 4
~
,
" .
I
t-
. f
!
,
~
'. ,
-