Loading...
09-29-81SpMtg 163 SEPTEMBER 29, 1981 A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was held in the Council Chambers at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, September 29, 1981, with Mayor Leon M. Weekes, presiding and Interim City Manager Robert H. Fisk, City Attorney Roger Saberson, and Council members James H. Scheifley, Charlotte G. Durante, Leo A. Blair, and Malcolm T. Bird, present. Mayor Weekes called the meeting to order and announced that this meeting has been called for the purpose of considering: (1) adop- tion of Resolution No. 74-81 readopting and ratifying Resolution No. 71-81 re: Tentative Budget; (2) Public hearing and Second and FINAL Reading of Ordinance No. 67-81 to adopt a millage rate; and (3) Public hearing, Second and FINAL Reading of Ordinance No. 66-81, adopting 1981-82 Budget. 1. The City Attorney presented Resolution No. 74-81: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, READOPTING AND RATIFYING RESOLUTION NO. 71-81 MAKING TENTATIVE APPROPRIATIONS OF SUMS OF MONEY FOR ALL NECESSARY EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA AND RENUMBERING SAID RESOLUTION AS RESO- LUTION NO. 74-81. (Copy of Resolution No. 74-81 is on file in the official Resolution Book) Mr. Bird moved for the adoption of Resolution No. 74-81, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Scheifley -' Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Blair - Yes; Mr. Bird - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. 2. The City Attorney reported that the public hearing on Ordi- nance No. 67-81 and Ordinance No. 66-81 will be held at the same time as one combined public hearing. The City Attorney presented Ordinance No. 67-81: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, TO LEVY A TAX ON ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION, AND TO LEVY A TAX FOR THE PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON BONDED INDEBTEDNESS, AND TO ALLOCATE AND APPROPRIATE SAID COLLECTIONS THEREUNDER. (Copy of Ordinance No. 67-81 is on file in the official Ordinance Book) The City Attorney read the entire ordinance. Ordinance No. 67-81 has been amended by adding "Section 5. That this ordinance shall take effect as of October 1, 1981." 3. The City Attorney presented Ordinance No. 66-81: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, MAKING FINAL APPROPRIATIONS OF SUMS OF MONEY FOR ALL NECESSARY EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, FOR THE PERIOD FROM THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1981, TO THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1982; TO PRESCRIBE THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE ITEMS OF APPROPRIATIONS AND THEIR PAYMENT; AND TO REPEAL ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES WHOLLY IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE AND ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT WITH THIS ORDINANCE TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH INCONSISTENCY. (Copy uf Ordinance No. 66-6i is on fiie Ordinance Book) 164 The City Attorney read the caption of t~e ordinance. A public hearing was held having been legally advertised in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida and the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Florida. Mr. David Huddleston, Finance Director, reported that the increase over the rollback rate was 5.1%. This amounted in a total tax revenue of $270,000 over the rollback rate. The primary reasons for the increase were the increase in personnel, police and fire operations, emergency medical and additional facilities, also the 10.9% inflationary increase and the increase in electrical and fuel costs. Mr. Fred Blaser, 1590 Gallinule Drive, stated that he feels that the cutback from 7.7 mills to 7.0 mills was a farce; it could go back one more mill. He felt that cuts could be made in personnel ser- vices. He discussed contract services for garbage and trash pickup and stated that these contract services would amount to approximately a 13% reduction in City personnel. He discussed the Central Garage fund which, in the proposed budget, is $280,000. He recommended that the City remove one-third of the Central Garage employees. Mr. John Murphy, 2525 Florida Boulevard, objected to a 120% increase in his City taxes and asked for an explanation. Mayor Weekes stated that, except for the 5% increase, for every dollar your taxes increase, someone else's taxes decrease one dollar. The City has no control over the appraisal process that brings that about. Mr. Alfred Straghn asked if the three proposals tonight are really being considered or is City Council following due process of law to have the public hearings and then do what it wants to do anyway. Mayor Weekes replied that the Council considered the budget in detail at two workshop meetings. At those meetings, each Council member came to the Administration with reductions that they felt should be made in this budget. They mandated that the Administration reduce the budget from 7.75 mills down to 7.0 mills and that was done. The consensus of the Council was that they had reduced the budget as far as they could reasonably expect to reduce it. Speaking for himself alone, he feels that the budget will be adopted in its present form. Regarding the tax which is raised by applying a millage rate to the appraised value of property, Mr. Bird stated that last year they raised in tax revenue $5,467,420; this year their proposed tax revenue from the same source is $6,306,260. The net difference is the tax in- crease received by the City, $838,840, a portion of which is coming to them from new construction. If everybody's taxes went up as high as his, Mayor Weekes' and Mr. Murphy's did, they would have an ad valorem increase in taxes of four or five million dollars. There are people whose tax bills went down; it's a false assumption to draw that every- one's taxes went up the same amount. The issue of whether one person's taxes should have gone up 120% or not is an issue to be discussed with the property appraiser. Mrs. Rosetta Rolle, 301 N.W. 3rd Avenue, noted that police personnel was mentioned by Mr. Huddleston as one reason for the increase over the rollback rate and she asked why they are including police personnel if that comes out of Revenue Sharing. She also asked for an explanation of the 5.1 figure. Mayor Weekes replied that .t.he 5.1 is percentage, not mills, and noted that Mr. Huddlestan §aid .that the 5.1% was made necessary by employees in various departments, not just the Police Department. Mayor Weekes added that Revenue Sharing does not cover the full cost of fund- ing police.personnel. Mr. Henry Morris, 3133 Lakeview Drive, President of the Lakeview Civic Association, stated that he feels they are paying far more than their share. They want to know what they are getting for budgeting and that they look at the necessity for the employees they - 2 - 09,!29/81 165 have already before adding anymore. He asked what the process is for Lakeview to secede from the City. They understand that the City just took in Del Aire but they didn't see any reflection on their taxes from taking in such a high rent district as Del Aire. Mayor Weekes replied that Del-Aire will not be taken in until next year. Mr. Bird added that the constitution of the State of Florida forbids deficit spending for operating expenses. Mr. Willie Sharpe, S.W. 14th Avenue, asked what the people in the black community in the southwest portion of the City are getting for their money. The police take 45 minutes to come out there. They don't have any decent sidewalks. He has asked the City for a street light and no action has been taken. Mr. Ozzie F. Youngblood echoed Mr. Sharpe's concerns and added that he wishes that the people of Delray Beach could, at some time in the future, vote for the Police Chief. Last night at about 4:00 A.M. a white man was beat up next door to his home; the man asked him to call the police and he did. He spoke to a young lady on the telephone and told her it was an emergency and the police should come at once. The police took much longer than he felt they should have to respond to something of that nature. He finally said that the young man was white and that seemed to throw a different light on the conversation. In another incident, there was a lady living in one of his apartments who was selling dope and he wanted her out. A white policeman was sent out and this policeman asked him (Mr. Youngblood) to go to the apartment with him so he did. When they went inside, the policeman was afraid; it seemed like he was trembling. He stated further that last week some boys were playing football in his yard and they were breaking down his palm trees. A white policeman was sent out and he was afraid to talk to the boys; the policeman asked him to get their names. He feels that this is foolishness. If the new budget is going to relate to employing more police personnel, he requests that the City give them some better service than what they have now. The public hearing was closed. The City Attorney reported if Council is in agreement with the millage rate ordinance, as amended as he read it, then the next item of business would be to adopt Ordinance No. 67-81 as amended. Mr. Bird moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 67-81 as amended on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Blair. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Blair - Yes; Mr. Bird - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Mrs. Durante moved to authorize the Administration to make the adjustment referred to in Section 3 of Ordinance No. 67-81 if such adjustment is necessary, seconded by Mr. Bird. Said motion passed unanimously. Mr. Bird moved for the adoption of Ordinance No. 66-81 on Second and FINAL Reading, seconded by Mr. Blair. Upon roll call Council voted as follows: Mr. Scheifley - Yes; Mrs. Durante - Yes; Mr. Blair - Yes; Mr. Bird - Yes; Mayor Weekes - Yes. Said motion passed with a 5 to 0 vote. Mr. Scheifley stated that there is a lot of misunderstanding in the budget making process. He thinks that some grave errors have been made in the last few years which account for it. The State Supreme Court ruled some years ago that every property would be assessed at 100% market value, which actually means 83%. The Property Appraiser refused to do that; people thought they were getting a break and voted for him. If the Appraiser had started to gradually bring up the rolls 10 or 12 years ago, they wouldn't have this problem no~. If the County Appraiser had appraised all property in the County uniformly and fairly, the way it should be, their millage rate would be way down. - 3 - 09/29/81 166 Mrs. Elizabeth Matthews, 1024 White Drive, stated that the subject of dual taxation has not been addressed approprzately by this Council. For a number of years the cities have been paying for police and engineering services which are given to people in the unincorporated areas. After much opposition to this, the County Commission was pushed into appointing a Fair Tax Council. The Fair Tax Council studied the matter and came up with a recommendation to the County Commission which stated that the County Commission must charge those people in the unin- corporated areas for the services they use. The Fair Tax Council, a little over a year ago, recommended that the balance be restored to the municipalities; the County Commission rejected it by a 4 to 1 vote. Four cities brought a lawsuit against the County Commission about a year ago in order for the imbalance to be rectified. At that time Delray Beach decided not to participate in the lawsuit. The lawsuit by the four cities, Boca Raton, West Palm Beach, Palm Beach and North Palm Beach, was won in the courts and the County Commission has just been ordered by the judge to set aside 4.1 million dollars to compensate those four cities for the excess in taxes they paid to the County for the fiscal year which is just ending and the coming fiscal year. The City of Delray Beach, for an estimated cost of $25,000, could have been in a position of being paid for those two years also. Delray not only has to pay for police and other services in the County, but also has to pay the money to compensate the four cities for the two years. She suggested that they immediately file suit against the County Commission on behalf of the City of Delray Beach. Mayor Weekes stated that Mrs. Matthews' comments are well taken. Mr. Scheifley added that there are 37 municipalities in the County and 4 of them have sued; he cannot imagine the other 33 munici- palities standing by and not doing anything. He felt the procedure should be a collective suit by all 33 cities. Mrs. Matthews disagreed. She felt that they should file their own suit and let the other 32 cities do what they like; it's not their money we are talking about, it's our money. Mayor Weekes declared the meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M. City Clerk ATTEST: ~ MAYOR The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach and that the information provided herein is the minutes of the meeting of said City Council of September 29, 1981, which minutes were formally approved and adopted by the City Council on ~ud~ . ~3.~./~'J/. City Clerk -- NOTE TO READER: If the minutes that you have received are not completed as indicated above, then this means that these are not the official'minutes of City Council. They will become the official minutes only after they have been reviewed and approved which may involve some amendments, additions, or deletions to the minutes as set forth above. - 4 - 09/29/81