Res 29-92 RESOLUTION NO. 29-92
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, URGING THE SOLID WASTE
AUTHORITY TO CONTINUE ITS PRESENT DISPOSAL BILLING
SYSTEM, AND TO CONTINUE WORKING CLOSELY WITH
MUNICIPALITIES TO DEVELOP WASTE REDUCTION/MINIMIZATION
PROGRAMS.
WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County is
considering a split assessment system and a volume based system of
charging waste disposal fees; and,
WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Authority created a special sixty (60)
day task force to investigate the assessment and fee issues; and,
WHEREAS, this task force is submitting a recommendation that
would substantially change the method of charging disposal; and,
WHEREAS, the City has developed recycling programs that are
successfully reducing the amount of waste that must be placed in
disposal facilities; and,
WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Authority should continue its present
billing system, and should continue to work closely with municipalities
to develop waste reduction/minimization programs that meet the common
goals of the municipalities and the Solid Waste Authority,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The above recitals are incorporated as though fully
set forth herein.
Section 2. The City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, strongly urges the Solid Waste Authority to continue its
current disposal billing system, and continue working closely with
municipalities to develop waste reduction/minimization programs that
meet the common goals of municipalities and the Solid Waste Authority.
Section 3. The City Commission strongly states that the
societal costs for the City of Delray Beach, in the form of social
inequity and environmental degradation resulting from increased illegal
dumping associated with the recommended disposal billing system, make
the recommended system unacceptable.
Section 4. The City Commission recommends that the Solid Waste
Authority continue to work closely with municipalities to develop solid
waste management programs that meet the need of the municipalities while
still meeting waste reduction goals.
Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to provide the Solid
Waste Authority Board and all other interested parties with copies of
this Resolution immediately subsequent to adoption.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take ef~ct immediately upon
adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the llth day of
March , 1992.
ATTEST:
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #'~--~F - MEETING OF MARCH 11. 1992
RESQLUTION NO. 29-92
DATE: March 6, 1992
This is a resolution urging the Solid Waste Authority to continue its
present disposal billing system, and to continue working closely with
municipalities to develop waste reduction/minimization programs.
The Solid Waste Authority feels that to adequately address the
problem of soaring costs of waste management, a volume based disposal
program is necessary. A Split Assessment/Volume Based Task Force has
been formed to explore problems associated with a split
assessment/volume based "pay-as-you-throw" rate system for waste
disposal. As proposed this program would provide single family
residents with an incentive to reduce their waste bills by reducing
the amount of trash and waste they set out for collection. Based on
the experience of other cities, our staff believes this change would
lead to wide spread illegal dumping. We are also concerned about the
increased cost to lower income families.
The Task Force has recommended that, if the current system must be
changed, the desired results can be achieved through a
combination/goal based disposal billing system without the split
assessment.
Staff therefore, recommends that the Commission adopt this proposed
resolution and further, that the Mayor communicate to the Solid Waste
Authority, via letter, the City's opposition to any change in the
current disposal assessment structure.
Recommend approval of Resolution 29-92 and recommend that the Mayor
communicate to the Solid Waste Authority, via letter, the City's
opposition to any change in the current disposal assessment structure.
100 N.W. 1st AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/243-7000
March 10, 1992
Karen Marcus
Chair, Solid Waste Authority Governing Board
7501 N. Jog Rd.
West Palm Beach, FL 33412
Dear Chair Marcus:
I am writing this letter to express my deep reservations
concerning current proposals for~' change in the method of
collecting solid waste disposal charges. The City of Delray Beach
has developed programs that reduce our solid waste stream and
provide a level of collection service that maintains our goal of
a "Clean Community". By changing the disposal assessment, the
programs that we have so diligently implemented will be
negatively impacted.
I remain unconvinced that a volume based disposal system
would withstand a cost/benefit analysis in the near or long term
future. The opportunity costs, social inequity and environmental
degradation, associated with a volume based disposal system
outweigh any benefit'this system would encourage.
The City of Delray Beach remains committed to providing its
residents with effective and efficient solid waste collection
programs that meet our common waste reduction goal and provide an
appropriate level of'collection service. The City will continue
to work closely with the Solid Waste Authority in the development
and implementation of environmental programs that contribute to
waste reduction.
I strongly urge you to maintain the current disposal assessment
system, and work within it to meet the common reduction goals of
Delray Beach and the Solid Waste Authority.
Sincerely,
Mayor
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
Board of County Commissioners County Administrator
Karen T. Marcus, Chair Robert Weisman
Carole Phillips, Vice Chair
Carol A. Roberts
Carol J. Elmquist
Mary McCarty
Ken FOster ~
Maude Ford Lee
March 19, 1992
Ms. Alison MacGregor Harty, City Clerk
City of Delray Beach
100 N.W. 1st Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Ms. Harty:
Thank you for sending me a copy of your Resolution No. 29-92
urging the Solid Waste Authority to continue its present billing
system for another year, and to continue working closely with
municipalities to develop programs for assessment, volume reduction
and disposal fees.
I have forwarded your Resolution to County Administration with
a request that it be placed on the next available Board agenda to
be received and filed into the official records.
If I may be of further assistance in any way, please don't
hesitate to contact me. ~
S4nq.e/rely,
Kgr~n T. Marcus, Chair
ar~ of County Commissioners
KTM/pw
cc(w/enc)= Diane Cahill
County Administration
"An Equal Opportunity - Affirmative Action Employer"
Box 1989 West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-1989 (407) 355-2030 Suncom (407) 273-2030
'CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
100 N.W. 1st AVENUE, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 407/243-7000
FAX NUMBER 407/243-3774
FAX TRANSIVIITTAL
DATE: -~- / ~-
TO: NAME: /~. ~_~
CITY:
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING TRANS1ViITTAL SHEET:
COMMENTS:
COPIES TO:
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF TIlE ABOVE REFERENCED PAGES, PLEASE
CONTACT TI-IE SENDER NOTED ABOVE ASAP.
RESOLUTION NO. 29-92
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, URGING THE SOLID WASTE
AUTHORITY TO CONTINUE ITS PRESENT DISPOSAL BILLING
SYSTEM, AND TO CONTINUE WORKING CLOSELY WITH
MUNICIPALITIES TO DEVELOP WASTE REDUCTION/MINIMIZATION
PROGRAMS.
WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County is
considering a split assessment system and a volume based system of
charging waste disposal fees; and,
WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Authority created a special sixty (60)
day task force to investigate the assessment and fee issues; and,
WHEREAS, this task force is submitting a recommendation that
would substantially change the method of charging disposal; and,
WHEREAS, the City has developed recycling programs that are
successfully reducing the amount of waste that must be placed in
disposal facilities; and,
WHEREAS, the Solid Waste Authority should continue its present
billing system, and should continue to work closely with municipalities
to develop waste reduction/minimization programs that meet the common
goals of the municipalities and the Solid Waste Authority,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The above recitals are incorporated as though fully
set forth herein.
Section 2. The City Commission of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, strongly urges the Solid Waste Authority to continue its
current disposal billing system, and continue working closely with
municipalities to develop waste reduction/minimization programs that
meet the common goals of municipalities and the Solid Waste Authority.
Section 3. The City Commission strongly states that the
societal costs for the City of Delray Beach, in the form of social
inequity and environmental degradation resulting from increased illegal
dumping associated with the recommended disposal billing system, make
the recommended system unacceptable.
Section 4. The City Commission recommends that the Solid Waste
Authority continue to work closely with municipalities to develop solid
waste management programs that meet the need of the municipalities while
still meeting waste reduction goals.
Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to provide the Solid
Waste Authority Board and all other interested parties with copies of
this Resolution immediately subsequent to adoption.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon
adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the llth day of
March , 1992.
ATTEST:
~lty Cler~ !
March 17, 1992
Commissioner Karen Marcus
P.O. Box 1989
West Palm Beach, FL 33402
Dear Commissioner Marcus:
Attached please find Resolution No. 29-92, which was passed and
adopted by the Delray Beach City Commission on March 11, 1992.
Very truly yours,
Alison MacGregor Harty
City Clerk
AMH/ag Eric.
cc: Commissioner McCarty Solid Waste Authority
Jack Horniman (PBC Municipal League)
, Agenda Item No.:
· AGENDA REQUEST
Date: 3/5/92
Request to be placed on:,
X Regular Agenda Special Agenda Workshop Agenda
3/10/92
When:
Description of agenda item (who, what, where, how much):
Adoption of a resolution m,,th~ri~ino the Solid Waste Authority tn
continue present disposal billing s~stem
Recommendation: Approval
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive Plan:
City Attorney Review/ Recommendation (if applicable):
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure
of funds):
Funding available: YES/ NO
Funding alternatives: (if applicable)
Account No. & Description:
Account Balance:
City Manager Review:
ApprovedHold Until:f°r agenda: / NO ;w~j~ ~,
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Action: Approved/Disapproved
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAVID HARDEN - CITY MANAGER
FROM: LULA BUTLER - DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT,~
SUBJECT: VOLUME BASED DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE
DATE: MARCH 4, 1992
ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION:
A resolution of the City Commission urging the Solid Waste
Authority (SWA) to continue its present billing system for
disposal of garbage and trash, and to work closely with
municipalities to develop programs for waste
reduction/minimization.
BACKGROUND:
The SWA feels that to adequately address the problem of the
soaring costs of solid waste management, a volume based disposal
program is necessary. This would provide single family residents
with an incentive, through the ability to decrease their waste
bills, to reduce their garbage and trash. By doing so, the county
would be able to reduce solid waste generated within its borders
decreasing the need for additional infrastructure and extending
the useful life of the existing facilities.
In accordance with SWA Governing Board direction a Split
Assessment/Volume Based Task Force was formed to explore problems
associated with a split assessment/volume based "pay-as-you-
throw" rate system for waste disposal. Attendance at these
meetings exceeded 40 persons representing municipalities,
haulers, and the public, all of whom were treated and
participated as Task Force members.
The Task Force is recommending that; if the current system must
be changed, the desired results of equity and waste reduction can
be achieved through a combination/goal based disposal billing
system without the split assessment. This system can be
implemented with the least impact. The final report of this Task
Force, providing recommendations, is attached.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department of Community Improvement recommends the adoption
of the resolution urging the Solid Waste Authority to continue
working within the existing system to reduce waste. It is further
recommended that the Commission authorize the Mayor to
communicate, via letter, the City's opposition to any change in
the current disposal assessment structure.
SPLIT ASSESSMENT/VOLUME-BASED SYSTEM TASK FORCE
FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
BACKGROUND
In accordance with Goveming Board direction on December 18, 1991, the Split Assessment/Volume-Based
System Task Force was formed and met weekly to explore the problems associated with both the split
assessment and volume-based "pay-as-you-throw" rate system for garbage disposal. Since the first
meeting on January 10, 1992, interest in the activities of the Task Force was significant. Attendance
frequently exceeded 40 persons representing municipalities, haulers and the public, all of whom who were
treated and participated as Task Force members.
PROCESS
The Task Force utilized an informal, creative problem-solving and consensus building approach that
encouraged the active participation of all attendees, not just the Task Force members. This approach
involved identifying the problems created by each system, attempting to identify solutions and evaluating
how well each system might work in our community.
Initially, the Task Force set out to address the problems associated with three "pay-as-you-throw" systems
implemented in other parts of the country: Subscription, Bag/Tag, and Combination. During the course
of our meetings, other systems emerged as worthy of consideration: Weight-Based, Goal-Based and the
Combination System without the Split Assessment. As a framework for planning, goal-setting and
monitoring results, the Goal-Based approach received such support that it ultimately became part of the
final Task Force recommendation.
RECOMMENDATIONS
First and foremost, public information and education must be emphasized and generously funded to
encourage reduction, reuse and recycling; discourage illegal dumping; and inform the public on solid waste
management plans. Secondly, if the current system must be changed, the desired results of equity and
waste reduction may be achieved through the Combination/Goal-Based system without the split
assessment (See Table 1). Compared to the other systems, this system can be implemented with the least
impact.
COMBINATION/GOAL-BASED SYSTEM (WITHOUT SPLIT ASSESSMENT)
This system provides the customer with a base level of service (BLOS) with additional waste requiring
special bags or tags. Unlimited recycling is also part of the system, apparently free but actually imbedded
in the fixed costs. Base level of service disposal costs are billed annually as a special non-ad valorem line
item on the tax bill; disposal costs for additional bags are included in the cost of the bag. Implementation
would involve a gradual decrease in the level of service over a five year period with intensive public
education ar~l~nformation.
The Combination system is very similar to the existing system because it provides a base level of service
and most existing cans and containers can be used. It has the advantage of gradual implementation which
can serve to overcome public resistance.
¢
GENERAL FINDINGS
RECYCLING AND RECYCLABLES: The Task Force agreed that any change in the disposal rate system
should provide a direct relationship between use and cost and should encourage the "3 R's:" Waste
Reduction, Reuse and Recycling. It was also agreed that in addition to encouraging the public to "do its
part," government should help to expand markets for recyclable materials by purchasing recycled products
whenever poss~le and reasonable. Furthermore, the Task Force agreed that the commercial sector, a
substantial contributor to the waste stream, should be encouraged by SWA programs to increase recycling
efforts.
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INFORMATION: Regardless of the system chosen for implementation, public
information and education is essential. The SWA Governing Board must adequately fund a public
information program, and the SWA must implement it as quickly as possible if any system is to succeed.
ILLEGAL DUMPING: While illegal dumping exists to some extent now, the Task Force concluded that the
disposal rate system will cause an Increase In this activity. To the extent possible, illegal dumping
should be carefully monitored and if a problem becomes apparent, a Task Force should be appointed to
address it.
PILOT PROGRAMS: If any system other than that recommended by the Task Force is adopted, one or
more carefully designed, controlled and monitored pilot programs are suggested. Because the
recommended system involves gradual transition over a period of five years, pilot programs are not
necessary.
EXISTING CONTRACTS AND FRANCHISES: Depending upon the speed with which implementation of
changes is pursued, existing contracts and franchises may require re-negotiation.
SYSTEMS - SPECIFIC FINDINGS
SPLIT ASSESSMENT: The Task Force concluded that the Split Assessment should not be adopted
because it will require time and money to design, staff and implement billing systems. Given current
economic conditions there is little likelihood of political support for, or public acceptance of, increasing taxes
to fund additional staff for the purpose of implementing a Split Assessment.
Additionally, it was felt that the Split Assessment creates an education, information and public relations
problem at all levels. The Task Force recommendation is a system wherein the assessment need not be
split, however if the Governing Board should choose not to follow this recommendation and instead adopts
the split, the Solid Waste Authority should either assume total administrative and financial responsibility for
billing, or reimburse the cities for the cost of billing. In either case, planning and public information should
precede any change in the current method of billing.
SUBSCRIPTION SYSTEM (WITH SPLIT ASSESSMENT)
Under this system, the customer would subscribe to a level of service involving two (2) variables: container
size and frequency of collection. Yard waste collection would be additional and bulk collection would be
handled on a sticker basis. Unlimited recycling is provided, apparently free, but actually embedded in the
fixed costs. Fixed costs are billed annually as a special non-ad valorem line item on the tax bill.
Concerns and' Findings: Although this system affords the customer the greatest degree of choice and
control, it is also potentially the most confusing to the public and the most complex in terms of
administration and billing. It also requires significant hauler monitoring to determine whethe.? the garbage
set out for collection matches the subscription level. Finally, certain cities mcy not be able to participate
due to existing automated equipment with fixed container sizes. The Task Force does not recommend this
system for implementation.
BAG/TAG SYSTEM (WITH SPLIT ASSESSMENT)
This syStem requires the resident to pumhase one type of bag for garbage, one for recyclables, another
type of bag for yard waste, and tags for bulk trash. Unlimited recycling is also provided at a reduced cost,
but actually embedded in the fixed costs. Fixed costs are billed annually as a special non-ad valorem line
item on the tax bill.
Concerns and Findings: While this system is probably less confusing than the subscription system, bagging
certain types of waste and tagging others can also generate confusion. This system is also somewhat less
convenient than other systems in that special bags and tags are needed. Additionally, distribution points
for bags and tags must be carefully chosen to maximize convenience and minimize administrative costs.
Although no change in hauling equipment is needed in order to implement this system, monitoring by the
hauler is required and haulers collecting with automated equipment may not be able to monitor to the
desired extent. Finally, residential credits become complicated and perhaps inequitable in that they can
only be tracked by bag sale district.
COMBINATION SYSTEM (WITH SPLIT ASSESSMENT)
This system provides the customer with a base level of garbage service with additional waste requiring
special bags or tags. Unlimited recycling is also part of the system, apparently free but actually embedded
in the fixed costs. Fixed costs are billed annually as a special non-ad valorem line item on the tax bill and
variable costs of disposal are covered by the cost of additional bags.
Concems and Findings: The combination system is very similar to the existing system because it provides
a Base Level of Service (BLOS) and existing cans and containers can be used. It will require monitoring
on the part of the hauler.
WEIGHT-BASED
This system requires the hauler to weigh the garbage, and bulk waste set out for collection by each
customer. Customers "pay-by-the-pound" with the cost of "free" recycling embedded in the cost-per-pound
of garbage.
Concerns and Findings: While the weight-based system is the most equitable, it is also potentially the most
expensive to implement. Current estimates of the cost of retro-fitting existing trucks are in the range of +/-
$17,000 per vehicle exclusive of on-board computer technology and personnel training. The Task Force
acknowledges that the required technology may become more affordable in the future, but does not under
the current economic conditions find the system feasible ~or implementation.
GOAL-BASED APPROACH TO PLANNING
This approach is not itself a system but rather a planning tool that allows each city to work with the SWA
to establish a five year plan with specific goals for waste reduction and recycling. The city and SWA would
develop a plan to meet those goals and monitor the results. If at the end of the five year period, the goals
are not met, the SWA, working with the cities, will develop an alternative system.
Concerns and Findings: While planning is an important aspect of any program, the Task Force was
concerned that this approach could lead to 38 different programs and an administrative burden on the
SWA.
MULTI-FAMILY CONTAINERIZED SERVICE
While multi-family containerized service is similar to commercial service in that collection fees are based
on the volume 'of waste which could be placed in a dumpster or other large container, there is no direct
relationship between the amount of waste generated by each household and the fee paid for disposal of
that waste. The Task Force agreed that if a volume-based system were to be implemented for the
residential waste stream, and multi-family containerized customers create 20-25% of the waste stream,
some effort should be made to extend the system to these users. The Task Force concluded that another
committee or entity with a process for public participation should thoroughly explore issues such as
container sizes and recycling for multi-family service.
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY
OF PALM BEACH COL~TY
7501 North Jog Road
West Palm Beach, Florida 33412
Telcphone (407) 640-4000
January 28, 1992
Honorable Mayor:
The following information is being provided to you, at this time,
so that you will be aware of a potential change in the
Authority's billing system that, if implemented, would have a
budgetary impact on the cities for fiscal year 1992-93:
The Authority Board has created a task force, comprised of
individuals representing a cross section of interests to study
the feasibility of a volume based system of rates (VBS) for
residential rate payers. Such a system, if implemented, would
provide residential rate payers the same opportunities as are
presently enjoyed by commercial rate payers who now pay
approximately a 58% base rate disposal assessment with the
balance of their individual disposal needs paid for in the form
of tipping fees.
In order to provide the opportunity 'for a volume based disposal
system to be implemented it is first necessary to split the
disposal assessment for residential rate payer in the same manner
as is presently done for commercial rate payers. However, it
must be understood that splitting the disposal assessment for
residential ratepayers does not, by itself, cause a VBS to be
implemented, it merely creates the opportunity for a VBS to be
established, if desired, by the community.
If the Authority elects to implement a split disposal assessment
for all rate payers the net effect upon municipalities would be
the need to collect the tipping portion of the total rate from
residential customers as is currently done for commercial
customers.
Tipping fees would be set based upon the balance of required
revenues after deducting the special assessment revenues from the
total. A split assessment must cover certain fixed non-variable
costs but at least the debt service requirements which would
approximate 50% of present total costs.
Recycled Paper
Page 2
As a point of reference, if a split system had been implemented
for the current fiscal year with the assessment set at the
minimum the cities would have needed sufficient revenues to cover
approximately 80% of the tipping fees paid for residential waste
during the fiscal year ended 9/30/90.
The task force charged with the investigative effort to determine
the feasibility of this endeavor has been directed topresent a
final report of their findings to the SWA Board at the March 18,
1992 meeting. A status report will be included on the
February 19, 1992 agenda.
We encourage the municipalities to stay abreast of this activity
considering the potential for budgetary impact. A list of the
task force members has been attached hereto for your information.
The task force meets every Monday at 9:00 a.m. in the conference
room of the Clayton Hutchinson Agricultural Center, 559 N.
Military Trail, West Palm Beach, Florida.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Maccarrone, Director
Financial Management Services
CEM:TBM
Attachment
cc: SWA Board
CAC Members
Timothy F. Hunt, Jr.
Donald L. Lockhart
Kathy Kelley
Kathy Duzan
Municipal Officials:
City Manager
Town Clerk
Finance Director
Jack Horniman, Municipal League
James Adams, Esq.
Bernard Conko, Esq.
SPLIT ASSESSMENT/VOLUME BASE TASK FORCE
TENTATIVE MEMBERSHIP/ATTENDEE LIST
Committee Members:
(Phone No.) (Fax No.)
Carole Phillips, Solid Waste Authority Board (407) 355-2205 (407) 355-3990 .
Harold Ostrow, CAC (407) 495-2230 No Fax No.
Catherine Dwore, Sierra Club, Chairperson (407) 624-9032 (407) 624-9032
Judy Passett, City of Boca Raton (407) 393-7884 (407) 393-7843
A1 Dusey, Town of Palm Beach (407) 838-5400 (407) 835-4688
Bill Underwood, City of Belle Glade (407) 996-0100 (407)992-9619
Jeannie Gerard, Audubon Society (407) 965-1390 No Fax No.
Linda Erbacher, City of Palm Beach Gardens (407) 775-8255 (407) 775-8244
Michael Kalland, Business Community (407) 687-2400 (407) 687-8750
Bob Bergen, Palm Beach Community College (407) 625-2350 (407) 626-6723
Charlie Roads, Palm Beach County Public Health Department (407) 355-3023 (407) 355-2442
Deborah Manzo, Town Clerk, Juno Beach (407) 626-1122 (407) 775-0812
Jeff Koons, City of West Palm Beach (407) 848-1004 (407) 863-6451
SWA Support Staff:
(407) 640-4000 (407)683-4067
Charles Maccarrone, Director of Financial Management Services
Kathleen E. Kelley, Director of Recycling, Contract Management and Public Affairs
Kathy Duzan, Assistant Director of Operations Contract Management
Pat Franklin, Intergovernmental/Franchise Manager
Andra Pierro, Assistant Director of Customer Service
Dan Pellowitz, Cost Accountant
Linda Hodgkins, Public Aft'airs Administrator
Resource:
Dr. Grace Johns, Principal Economist, Hazen and Sawyer (305) 987-0066 (305) 987-2949
Other Interested Attendees:
David Farber, City of Greenacres (407) 642-2071 (407) 642-2004
Dick Holliday, City of West Palm Beach (407) 659-8047 (407) 659-8039
Steve Hiney, City of Delray Beach (407) 243-7127 (407)243-3774
Jody Rutherford, Village of Royal Palm Beach (407) 790-5122 (407)790-5174
Jeff Lis, Catalfumo (407) 471-0338 (407)471-1201
Dale Smith, Economic Council (407) 684-1551 (407) 689-7346
Hugo Unruh, Business Community (407) 835-8505 (407) 659-6711
Jack Horniman, Municipal League (407) 655-8751