Agenda 03-28-11
The City of Boynton Beach
FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 28, 2011 @ 6:00 P.M.
LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33435
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Discussion and voting on recommendations that were tabled at the March 21 meeting (Attached)
FAC E-Billing Recommendation - Don Scantlan
FAC Museum Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
FAC Pensions Recommendation - Mike Madalena
FAC Shopper Hopper Recommendation - Terry Lonergan
FAC Solid Waste Residential Garbage Collection Recommendation - George Feldman
3. Quick review of recommendations voted favorably or unfavorably at the March 21 meeting (Attached)
FAC Cell Phone Recommendation - Bill Shulman
FAC CRA Functions & Development Department Merger Recommendation - Dave Madigan
FAC Forestry & Grounds Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
FAC Golf Recommendation - George Feldman
FAC Hiring Freeze Recommendation - Dave Madigan
FAC HOA Contribution to City Programs Recommendation - Bill Shulman
FAC Library Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
FAC Paperless Billing Recommendation - Don Scantlan
FAC Recreation & Parks Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
FAC Revenue Increase Recommendations - Bill Shulman
FAC Sale of Surplus Physical Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan
FAC Sale of Surplus Real Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan
FAC Solid Waste Franchise Recommendation - George Feldman
FAC Solid Waste Recycling Recommendation - George Feldman
FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan
FAC Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance Recommendation - Bill Shulman
FAC Voluntary Separation (VSP) Recommendation - Dave Madigan
4. Other Business
5. Adjournment
Future meeting dates:
April 11
April 25
May 9
The City of Boynton Beach
.
FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 28, 2011 @6:00 P.M.
LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33435
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Discussion and voting on recommendations that were tabled at the March 21 meeting (Attached)
. FAC E-Billing Recommendation - Don Scantlan
. FAC Museum Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
. FAC Pensions Recommendation - Mike Madalena
. FAC Shopper Hopper Recommendation - Terry Lonergan
. FAC Solid Waste Residential Garbage Collection Recommendation - George Feldman
3. Quick review of recommendations voted favorably or unfavorably at the March 21 meeting (Attached)
. FAC Cell Phone Recommendation - Bill Shulman
. FAC CRA Functions & Development Department Merger Recommendation - Dave Madigan
. FAC Forestry & Grounds Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
. FAC Golf Recommendation - George Feldman
. FAC Hiring Freeze Recommendation - Dave Madigan
. FAC HOA Contribution to City Programs Recommendation - Bill Shulman
. FAC Library Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
. FAC Paperless Billing Recommendation - Don Scantlan
. FAC Recreation & Parks Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
. FAC Revenue Increase Recommendations - Bill Shulman
. FAC Sale of Surplus Physical Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan
. FAC Sale of Surplus Real Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan
. FAC Solid Waste Franchise Recommendation - George Feldman
. FAC Solid Waste Recycling Recommendation - George Feldman
. FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan
. FAC Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance Recommendation - Bill Shulman
. FAC Voluntary Separation (VSP) Recommendation - Dave Madigan
4. Other Business
5. Adjournment
Future meeting dates:
. April 11
. April 25
. May 9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: E-billing System
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Provide citizens with the ability to receive
electronic water bills and be able to pay their bills automatically from a credit card or bank account.
Pros of Recommendation: Citizens will be able to set up automatic bill paying options and get their bills
electronically.
Cons of Recommendation: Provided this is an optional initiative, then there should be no drawbacks.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Worked with staff on getting this option studied.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: The city will save $1 per month for every citizen who elects not to have a
paper water bill sent to them. Currently some citizens are reluctant to select the opt out option,
because they cannot see the details of their water bill. This would eliminate this problem and
encourage more citizens to "opt out" of receiving a water bill.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: : The implementation of an Ebilling system will have some initial and small
recurring license costs. However, these costs will be offset by the reduction in costs of sending paper
water bills.
Impact on Citizens: Provided this is an optional "opt out" initiative, then there should be no impact to
citizens.
Impact on City Staff: As more citizens select this option, processing of paper water bills will be reduced._
Committee Vote Result: For: _ Against: _
TABLED
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC E-Billing Recommendation - Don
Scantlan.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
SubjectITopic: SCHOOL HOUSE CHILDRENS' MUSEUM - 2010-2011 BUDGET $204,519
Reviewed By: MERLINE PAMPLONA
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): IN ODER TO ACHIEVE A 9% BUDGET
REDUCTION OF $18.407, THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS WERE CONSIDERED:
1. REDUCTION OF 6% IN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2. REDUCTION OF 45% IN CUSTODIAL SERVICES
3. REDUCTION OF 7% IN ELECTRIC SERVCES
Pros of Recommendation: NO INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX
NO IMPACT ON CITIZENS AND CITY STAFF
GRANTS FROM HUD AND COUNTY (if unrestricted) CAN BE USED TO MAKE UP 9%
REDUCTION
Cons of Recommendation: MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT - CITY AGREED TO FUND
TOTAL BUDGET.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): REVIEWED BUDGET
MET WITH CRAIG CLARK, NEWSPAPER ARTICLES - BOYNTON FORUM
NEWSPAPER ARTICLES - BOYNTON FORUM - NEW NAME AND MISSION - MUSEUM
WILL SOON ADD EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS TARGETING TO CHILDREN FROM
PRE-K THROUGH MIDDLE SCHOOL AGE
NEWSPAPER ARTICLES - BOYNTON FORUM - RENOVATION COSTS QUESTIONED
RENOVATION TO RESTORE WINDOWS AND FLOORS TO THEIR HISTORIC
APPEARANCE AND REPLACING FLOORING WITH NEW MIAMI-DADE PINE.
$394,000 RENOVATION CONTRACT APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY BY COMMISSIONERS.
MAYOR NOT IN FAVOR
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: SAME AS 2010-2011 AFTER BUDGET CUT
Impact on Out Year Budgets: STAFF SERVICES SALARIES INCREASED FROM 2012-2015
SLIGHT INCREASE IN OPERATING EXPENSES. . I RECOMMEND REVISION OF BUDGET
TO REFLECT 2010-2011 AFTER BUDGET CUT UNLESS MILLAGE RATE IS RAISED
Impact on Citizens: NO DIRECT IMPACT SINCE CUT WILL NOT AFFECT EDUCATIONAL
PROGRAMS
CITIZENS MAY QUESTION RENOVATION COSTS
Impact on City Staff: DECREASE IN SALARY
Committee Vote Result: For: _ Against: _
TABLED FOR STAFF REPORT ON FUNDING
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Funding of their 3 pensions (General, Police and Fire)
Reviewed By: Mike Madalena
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Changes to the existing pension plans are necessary
to maintain the financial health of the overall city. Changes would include an immediate review of past
and present assumptions to determine if the city's past contributions need to be revised to meet current
obligations and if there is a shortfall the city will need to revise their pension calculations for future
retirees. Increase the employee's contribution rate into the plan and level the contribution throughout
all classes. Currently the general employees pay a greater percentage of their pay toward the pension as
it relates to future benefit payout. Eliminate the COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) in the current
pensions and change to a flat rate to be determined by each pension board annually to a factor tied to
real inflation. Immediately end the DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Program) to any new members in
all three pensions as of 7/1/2011. At that time anyone currently in DROP within the city would have
their employment end on that date of 7/1/2011. This would eliminate a double pay scenario and allow
the city to either eliminate the current position or bring in a new hire at a lower pay rate. Increase the
Boynton Beach Fire assessment to fund for the Fire's pension obligations. If changes to state law permit
the use of 175/185 dollars to fund police and fire pensions earmark those dollars to their respective
pensions. If collective bargaining agreements are eligible to be opened the city should then look into
creating a Defined Contribution plan for current future employees.
Pros of Recommendation: Currently the annual pension obligation for the city is one of its largest
expenditures. By adjusting the cost of the pension obligation to the employees or freezing the current
benefit the city could uncover additional funds to move to other projects in the city and balance their
budget.
Cons of Recommendation: Would need the ability to end the collective bargaining agreements with the
Police and Fire Unions to allow changes to their pensions. The unintended consequence is retention of
city staff and public safety employees due to the changes to their pension. Could create low morale for
city staff.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): HB 303, SB 1128, SB 1130, and Governor Rick Scott's 2011
State of Florida Budget
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: none
Impact on Out Year Budgets: depends on the ability to open the collective bargaining contracts and
either freezing the current pension and moving to a DC plan or a reduced DB plan with greater
employee contributions.
Impact on Citizens: None
Impact on City Staff: The unintended consequence is retention of city staff and public safety employees
due to the changes to their pension. Could create low morale for city staff.
Committee Vote Result: For: _ Against: _
TABLED PENDING RESULTS OF STATE LEGISLATION
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Pensions Recommendation - Mike
Madalena.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: SHOPPER HOPPER
Reviewed By: TERRY LONERGAN
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): DISCONTINUE SERVICE. REPLACE WITH A
SUBSIDIZED TAXI SERVICE WITHIN CITY LIMITS. CHARGING A FARE THAT WILL HELP COVER THE
COST OF OPERATION PLUS REQUIRING THOSE HOAS AND BUSINESSES THAT ARE ON THE FIXED
ROUTE OF THE SHOPPER HOPPER TO PAY A FEE TO PARTICIPATE
Pros of Recommendation: FAC SURVEY RESULTS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT
DISCONTINUANCE. THIS HAS NEVER BEEN FISCALLY SUSTANIBLE. RIDERSHIP DOES NOT
WARRANT THE EXPENSE.
Cons of Recommendation: DISCONTINUANCE WILL PRESENT A HARDSHIP FOR THOSE NEEDIN G
TRANSPORTATION TO THE BOYNTON BEACH SENIOR CENTER AND OTHER STOPS ALONG THE
FIXED ROUTES. SENIOR CENTER MAY LOSE NATIONAL ACCREDIDATION IF THE SERVICE IS
ELIMINATED.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): FAC SURVEY; MEETING WITH WALLY MAJORS;
ATTENDANCE AT SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY BOARD MEETING
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: WILL ADD $200,000 TO CITY BUDGET
Impact on Out Year Budgets: VEHICLE MAINTENANCE WILL NO LONGER BE NECESSARY
Impact on Citizens: LEAVES SENIORS WHO ARE UNABLE TO DRIVE WITHOUT TRANSPORTATION
TO THE SENIOR CENTER. WALMART. TARGET. WALGREENS. CVS AND OTHER STOPS ALONG THE
FIXED ROUTES. WILL ALSO CREATE A HARDSHIP FOR CHILDREN GOING TO AFTER SCHOOL
PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES AND SUMMER CAMP WITHOUT TRANSPORTATION
Impact on City Staff: AT THE PRESENT TIME, 3 F/T AND 1 PIT EMPLOYEES WILL HAVE TO BE
REASSIGNED OR RETIRED
Committee Vote Result: For: _ Against: _
TABLE PENDING PRESENTATION OF "TRANSPORTATION REPORT" TO THE
CITY COMMISSION.
ALSO, THE POSSIBILITY OF THE AVAILABILITY OF PALM TRAN.
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\F AC Shopper Hopper Recommendation - Terry
Lonergan.doc
1 of 2
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Solid Waste - Residential Garbage Collection
Reviewed By: George Feldman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Amend residential garbage collection schedules
such that garbage is collected one time per week (ENTIRE CITY).
Existing service levels provide for residential garbage collection two times per week. This can be
scalable to allow regional neighborhoods to select lesser service frequency. Neighborhoods (HOAs)
would need to respond to a prepared questionnaire, choosing twice a week or once a week pickup.
After reviewing responses, a cost effective determination could be analyzed saving the City operational
expenses and reducing cost to taxpayers or HOAs. This would be a cost neutral approach before
implementation.
Pros of Recommendation: This action would allow for a total cost reduction of approximately
$275,000 annually assuming the entire City is affected. Some customers may prefer twice per week
collection.
Cons of Recommendation: There are a number of cons as follows:
1. Many residents need twice per week collection either because of family size or the amount of
refuse generated.
2. There will likely be an up front cost to implement this program. Carts are available today in two
sizes, 65 gallons and 95 gallons. Many residents also currently use much smaller 35 gallon carts
that are being phased out due to collection difficulties. Therefore, if the City transitions to once
per week collection, many residents will request larger carts in order to accommodate larger
volumes of garbage. Those residents that ask for large carts should be required to pay for the
replacement cost of around $55 per cart.
3. Some residents will place extra garbage bags beside the City cart and expect it to be collected.
This cannot be done with automated trucks. Customer complaints will rise and public health
could be impaired. The City could return to rear load collection vehicles to allow flexibility on
how residents place their garbage at the curb. Rear load vehicles require three employees so
this could require the City to actually add staff which could offset the savings to go with one day
per week collection.
4. Residents can request two carts and pay an extra monthly fee of $6.00 per cart. The City has
some situations like this now. If once per week collection is implemented, some residents may
request an additional cart. They may not have room to store this cart. Internal City tracking of
these extra carts would become difficult.
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Solid Waste Residential Garbage Collection
Recommendation - George Feldman.doc
2 of 2
5. The biggest negative impact would be to those residents who have regular garbage collection on
Thursday, Thanksgiving Day and on the variable days of Christmas and New Years Day. The City
does not collect garbage on these dates. Because the City is on a six day per week collection
schedule (cost reduction measure in 2010), there are no make days available. Therefore, those
with Thanksgiving Day garbage collection would go two weeks without garbage service and
those whose collections days fall on Christmas and New Years will go three weeks without
collection.
6. The public might expect a rate reduction in the monthly water bill. The public may perceive
reduced solid waste services to correlate with reduced solid waste costs. This therefore would
not benefit the General Fund deficit.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Discussion with Larry Quinn, Solid Waste Manager,
Christine Roberts, Asst Director of Public Works, and Jeffrey Livergood, Director of Public Works
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Savings of $275,000 to change entire City to once per week collection.
Savings will vary if larger neighborhoods are allowed to opt in or out.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Regular inflationary growth
Impact on Citizens: Impact on the public will be varied. Those that prefer once per week garbage
collection would be pleased. Those that prefer twice per week collection will not. The most noticeable
impact may be an increase in fly dumping. The City already experiences fly dumping despite the fact that
the City collects garbage twice per week and also collects unlimited amounts of bulk trash and landscape
waste twice per week. By reducing services levels for garbage collection, some may choose to fly dump
causing the appearance of the community to diminish.
Impact on City Staff: Two staff positions (Equipment Operators) will be eliminated.
Committee Vote Result: For: _ Against: _
TABLED - TO BE REVISED
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Solid Waste Residential Garbage Collection
Recommendation - George Feldman.doc
10f3
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject /Topic: Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowances
Reviewed By: William Shulman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Strongly
recommend the elimination of Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowances
where possible
Pros of Recommendation: Would reduce the City's costs of this
perquisite which now totals about $536.527. The private sector does not
usually offer this type of perk except possibly for top management.
Suggest this perk be strictly limited to only necessary and emergeny type
of personnel.
Cons of Recommendation: Must overcome employment agreements.
collective bargaining agreements. and Union resistance .Elimination
should be a long term goal. but should be started now.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Staff analyses. Article In
the Sun- Sentinel dated 12/5/2010
Impact on 2011/2012 Budget: Will help reduce costs of City
Governmen t significantly.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Reduction of costs can continue in future
years.
Impact on Citizens: Beneficial. Will help reduce any planned increase in
the property tax ratable rate. Will not impact on the efficiency of the
operations of the City Government.
Impact on Staff: Very little. Typing assistance.
Committee Vote Results: For: _7_ Against:_O_
C:\Documents and SettingslcarusoelLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslOLK8EIFAC Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance Recommendation-
Bill Shulman.doc
20f3
Memo
To: Kurt Bressner & Barry Atwood
From: William Shulman
Date: 3/28/2011
Re: Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance
DISCUSSION
1. The following statistics reflect the numbers and costs of Car
Allowances and Take Home Vehicles for fiscal 2011:
Average Per
No of cars Annual Costs Employee
Car Allowances 34 $107,940 $3,174.75
Take Home Vehicles 135 428,387 3,174.72
Totals 169 $536,327 $6,349.47
*Assumed average per employee of $3,174.42 similar to Car Allowance
2. The distribution of Take Home vehicles by department is as
follows:
Police
Fire
104
12
Employment Agreements
Collective Bargaining Agreements
133
114
Utilities
Public Works
Total
14
5
135
Past Practices
Assignments
Total
3
19
269
3. The basis for the 169 vehicles receIvmg car allowances and take
home vehicles is as follows:
C:\Documents and SeningslcarusoelLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslOLK8EIFAC Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance RecommendatlOn-
Bill ShuIman.doc
30f3
Although it appears that car allowances are somewhat less for Boynton
Beach than for other surrounding city employees, nevertheless, in this
climate of austerity, such an argument does not make this type of
perquisite easier for Boynton Beach taxpayers to accept.
It is true that even if car allowances were cut completely ($107,940) that
would not significantly reduce the deficit to that great an extent. But
oftentimes, responsible fiscal policies are more about being sensitive to
the public's expectations.
It appears that perks like car allowances and take home vehicles are just
the kind of extra benefits that are annoying and burdensome to tax
payers of Boynton Beach.
With regard to take-home vehicles which total 135 vehicles (of which
Police account for 104), when a patrol car is sitting idle for 16 hours
each and every day, this represents a huge underutilization of the fleet.
(16 hours times104) results in 1664 hours each day of underutilization
of patrol cars. Proper utilization would reduce the number of patrol cars
in the fleet considerably.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is exceedingly difficult to reduce car allowances and take-home vehicle
costs because most of these situations are tied into an employment
agreement or a collective bargaining agreement. However, those
situations which are based on past practices or assignments should be
discontinued. This will reduce costs by approximately $76,000.
Further, future employment agreements as well as collective bargaining
agreements should strive to eliminate car allowances and take-home cars
except to very limited and emergency situations.
Boynton Beach should strive to reduce the annual costs of over one-half
million dollars ($536,527) for car allowances and take-home vehicles to a
more reasonable amount.
The City cannot afford such excessive costs in this time of austerity. It
behooves each involved department of the City of Boynton Beach to
review their absolute need for Take Home vehicles. In addition, Car
Allowances, which in effect represents additional taxable income to the
recipient, should be eliminated as conditions warrant.
C:\Documents and Sel1ings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance Recommendation-
Bill Shulman.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Voluntary Separation Program (VSP)
Reviewed By: David R. Madigan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Continuation of the VSP has been presented to the
Boynton Beach Commission covering FY 2010/2011. Approval to proceed received and program will
have a 60 day open window for Boynton Beach Employees. By the end of 2011, cost savings results are
expected to be completed and presented. Based on FY 2010/2011 cost savings results, consideration
should go forward for FY 2011/2012.
Pros of Recommendation: A) VSP FY 2009/2010 produced actual cost savings of $488K. Projected
estimated cost savings FY 2010/2011 $300K, with a projected cost savings FY 2011/2012 $200K. _
B) Depending on the level of the position vacated, an opportunity of department internal advancement
exists with further consolidation of the remaining positions occurring.
Cons of Recommendation: A) The longer a VSP is offered the possibility exists that critical positions will
become open and require a new hire or a replacement to refill.
B) An additional possibilitv exists that a static level of VSP outs could be offset by replacement in thus
not producing significant cost savings. (See impact on City Staff).
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): City Staff suggested areas of study for FAC in memo dated
8/20/2010.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Projected estimate $200K.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Projected estimate $100K + -
Impact on Citizens: A) The possibility of overall service level being impacted by a reduced workforce.
B) While the VSP is not an employee layoff or furlough. it may be perceived to be so by the public who
were closely split approximatelv 50/50 in the recent FAC Citizens Survev covering employee lavoffs or
furlough to maintain current tax rate.
Impact on City Staff: A) Providing acceptable levels of service to citizens of Boynton Beach.
B) A "point of no return" in the total overall Boynton Beach employee contingent will present itself in
the not too far future, and to prepare for that. it's recommended that absolute minimum workforce
contingent numbers. iob descriptions/responsibilities. etc. be developed throughout all Boynton Beach
Departments.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Voluntary Separation (VSP) Recommendation - Dave
Madigan.doc
10f3
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Cell Phone Allowances
Reviewed By: William Shulman
Recommendation- (Specific Action Recommended):
Strongly Recommend. Charge all City employees using City paid- for cell
phones either 1) 20% of the monthly cell phone costs so as to reduce
costs by ap-proximately $ 25,000 per year or 2) require each employee to
pay the City $10 per month for use of their cell phones which will reduce
costs by approximately $35,000.
Pros of Recommendation: Charging employees for the use of city paid-
for cell phones (especially since the employees use the phones for
personal use) would reduce the cell phones by between $25,000 and
$35,000 per year. This is not a perk that is normally found in private
industry .
Cons of Recommendation: City employees might not like this
recommendation because it is "give- back". But in times of budget
deficits and austerity programs, everyone must contribute to try to ease
the burdens on our taxpayers.
References - Staff, Documents, and Public): Staff analyses
Impact on 2011/2012 Budget: Will help reduce costs by between
$25,000 to $35,000
Impact on Out Year Budgets: This program can and should continue in
the future.
Impact on Citizens: Beneficial. Will help reduce the pro-posed increase
in the property tax ratable.
Impact on Staff: Very little impact. Typing assistance and a one time
set up to collect refunds from employees by a deduction from their
payroll checks.
Committee Vote Results: For:_ 4_ Against:_3_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Cell Phone Recommendation - Bill
Shulman.doc
20f3
Memo
To: Kurt Bressner & Barry Atwood
From: William Shulman
Date: 3/28/2011
Re: Cell Phone Allowances
DISCUSSION:
The following statistics reflect the number and costs of cell phones for the
fiscal year 2011:
CELL PHONE No. of Cell Annual
ALLOW ANCES Phones Costs Average/Employee
Allowances 154 $65,252 * $423.78
Assigned City Owned Phones 140 59,577 ** 425.55
Totals 294 $124,829 $849.33
*Range from a high of $720 per year to a low of $120 per year.
** Reduced from $80,391 at June 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. All employees who have City paid for cell phones should reimburse
the City for 20% of the cost of each phone used. This would increase
revenues and thereby reduce costs by approximately $25,000. As an
alternative, and probably better administratively, each employee using
a City paid for cell phone should reimburse the City $10 per month
for the use of the City paid cell phone. This would bring in
approximately $35,000 annually.
2. Additional savings may result because if an employee has to pay 20%
or $10 per month of their City paid cell phones such employee may
opt out of the program, thereby saving the City 100%of such costs.
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\F AC Cell Phone Recommendation - Bill
Shulman.doc
30f3
3. In addition, each City department should undertake a survey of City
paid for cell phones , and determine the absolute necessity of City
paid for cell phones ,charged to that department, in an attempt to
reduce the number of cell phones to an absolute necessity
4. Furthermore, such strict controls will aid in avoiding City paid for cell
phones from "mushrooming "out of control in the future.
5. These type of perks for employees which were promulgated during the
financially good times of exceptional high revenues, must be reigned
in during times of budgetary deficits.
Finally, it is recommended that the 20% or the $10 per month
reimbursements, both of which are minimal amounts, (it would cost our
Mayor about $ 189.20 per year) should start with the Mayor and City
Commissioners, in order to set a good example of cutting the City's costs.
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Cell Phone Recommendation - Bill
Shulman.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Merge CRA Functions (CRA/BB Dev. Dept) (BB Dev Dept/CRA)
Reviewed By: David R. Madigan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The CRA based on its past year (s) actual reported
public and private actions perceived public and private actions, is a perceived political "hot dog" and
best left alone for the Boynton Beach Mayor and Commission to direct its immediate future.
Pros of Recommendation: Neither the CRA or Boynton Beach Development Department compliment
each other in their operations/missions statement. Merger considerations should be scrubbed.
Cons of Recommendation:
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): City Staff suggested areas of study for FAC in a memo dated
8/20/10.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: N/ A
Impact on Out Year Budgets: N/ A
Impact on Citizens: N/ A
Impact on City Staff: Allow staff of CRA to stabilize, regroup and rededicate toward a successful
operation led by a 7 person Boynton Beach Citizen CRA Board. The sooner the current 5 Commission
Board Members step aside from the CRA Board and appoint 5 Boynton Beach Citizens to replace them
to join the current 2 Boynton Beach Citizens on the CRA Board, the perceived political posture will end
and measurable positive results can be achieved.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC CRA Functions Development Department Merger
Recommendation - Dave Madigan.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
SubjectITopic: FORESTRY AND GROUNDS - 2010-2011 BUDGET $1,553,099
Reviewed By: MERLINE PAMPLONA
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A 15%
BUDGET REDUCTION OF $232,965, REDUCTION OF MEDIAN MAINTENANCE WAS
CONSIDERED
Pros of Recommendation: NO INCREASE IN PROPERY TAX
ONLY ONE DEPARTMENT AFFECTED BY BUDGET CUT
Cons of Recommendation: REDUCTION OF MEDIAN MAINTENANCE WILL RESULT IN
THE FOLLOWING:
· Reduce median maintenance on all of Congress Ave. and Federal Highway
· Remove turf and plants exclusive of trees and palms
· Replace turf and plants with mulch
· Weed control (Spraying) 4 times per year
· Minor modification in irrigation
· Trash and litter will only be cleaned up four times per year because litter cleanup is part of our
landscape maintenance contract
· Many of these medians are remote and in residential areas. Unable to calculate cost reductions
for these smaller medians at this time
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): REVIEWED DEPARTMENT BUDGET
MET WITH GLENDA HALL, CHRISTINE ROBERTS, AND JEFFREY LIVERGOOD
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: SAME AS 2010-2011 AFTER BUDGET CUT
Impact on Out Year Budgets: CURRENTLY, BUDGET HAS INCREASE IN OVERALL
EXPENSES FROM 2012-2015. I RECOMMEND REVISION OF BUDGET TO REFLECT 2010-
2011 AFTER BUDGET CUT UNLESS MILLAGE RATE IS RAISED
Impact on Citizens: CITIZENS MAY NOT BE PLEASED WITH LEVEL OF MEDIAN
MAINTENANCE
Impact on City Staff: REDUCTION OF HOURS IN THE MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT
NO DIRECT IMPACT ON PERSONNEL
Committee Vote Result: For: -1- Against: 0
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Golf Course Department
Reviewed By: George Feldman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): To support the Golf Course, (which is an enterprise
fund solely supported by user fees and not part of the general fund), by endorsing management's
current practices and policies.
Pros of Recommendation: The wisdom of allowing the golf course to operate status quo is in the
recognition of the success of the operation. The golf course has been cutting expenses at every corner,
delaying capital purchases, and maximizing revenue at every opportunity. The fact that the golf course
has no debt, customer surveys give rave reviews and the Links currently holds the distinction of being
rated by Golf Digest as Florida's # 1 municipal golf course is a reflection of its current and past
management practices. The golf course is in the process of weathering an economic storm that all
businesses, including golf courses are going through. The Links' position of stability should enable it to
stand firm. The current trend in the golf industry finally has more courses closing than opening. This is
the first time this has happened and as it continues it will contribute to the health of the courses that
remain.
Cons of Recommendation: Allowing the golf course to continue to delay capital purchases such as
maintenance equipment and extending the life of the golf car fleet two to three years is a voyage into
uncharted waters. Management is confident that it's past preventative maintenance practices and
dedicated in-house mechanics will pay a dividend over the next couple of years.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public):
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Delaying capital expenses will reduce the expense side of our budget._
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Stretching the life expectancy on capital purchases does not necessarily
mean that everything will come due at the same time. The hope is that as the economy picks up, weak
courses perish and that revenue will increase.
Impact on Citizens: The service that our customers have come to expect in this highly competitive
market will remain the same.
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Golf Recommendation - George
Feldman.doc
Impact on City Staff: The only impact on city staff at this point is to continue the practice of converting
full-time positions to part-time to reduce personnel cost. This has been done as the situation presents
itself but if the economy does not improve or nearby courses do not fail, this practice could become
mandatory. This situation will be looked at on an annual basis.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Golf Recommendation - George
Feldman.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Hiring Freeze
Reviewed By: David R. Madigan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Continue with hiring freeze. Exemptions Police and
Fire, yet as needed, post, interview and hire to fill vacant position (s).
Pros of Recommendation: A) Produces an existing lean, mean Boynton Beach employee contingent
dedicated to producing an exceptional level of service.
B) Maintain. per recent Vacancv Savings Report. covering FY 2009/2010. $1.4 million in full and part time
cost savings. The full and part time cost savings will not accrue each FY. rather this is a carrv forward
cost savings and as such. should be considered as a benchmark to maintain.
Cons of Recommendation: It's too far fetched that a con could be perceived. A hiring freeze makes fiscal
sense. Although, while a hiring freeze is not an employee layoff or furlough, it may be perceived by the
public to parallel the operating results based on the approximate 50/50 split per FAC Survey covering
employee layoffs or furlough to maintain current tax rate.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): FAC identified this area as a study issue.
Impact on 2011112 Budget: $1.4 million benchmark carry forward (See Pro's B)
Impact on Out Year Budgets: $1.4 million benchmark carry forward (See Pro's B)
Impact on Citizens: The possibility of overall service level being impacted by a reduced work force.
Impact on City Staff: A) Providing acceptable levels of service to citizens of Boynton Beach.
B) A "point of no return" in the total overall Boynton Beach employee contingent will present itself in
the not too far future and to prepare for that. it's recommended that absolute minimum work force
contingent numbers. iob description/responsibilities. etc. be developed throughout all Boynton Beach
Departments.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Hiring Freeze Recommendation - Dave Madigan.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject / Topic: Homeowner Association Contributions to City Programs
Reviewed By: William Shulman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Strongly recommend that the City
institute this program .Contributions received will assist certain departments in obtaining
urgently needed equipment which they cannot obtain during this budgetary crisis.
Pros of Recommendation: Costs to City is minimal: consisting of typing and mailing
costs (and possibly updating the "Homeowner data file ". This program will assist certain
departments to obtain much needed equipment they cannot now afford to purchase. It
may also act to make Homeowner Associations feel part of aiding the City during this
time of need.
Cons of Recommendation: None. except perhaps some Associations may not respond
because of their own financial problems.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): None
Impact on 2011/2012 Budget: Will have very little impact on the 2011 /2012 budget
because these items were not budgeted for.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Probably none unless program is reinstituted which is not
recommended.
Impact on Citizens: Excellent results for citizens of Boynton Beach .No adverse effect
because this will be a ioint effort by about 200 homeowner associations
Impact on Staff: Minimal costs of typing and mailing and some administrative costs.
Committee Vote Results: For: _7_ Against:_O_
C:IDocuments and SeningslcarusoelLocal SeningslTemporary Internet FileslOLK8EIFAC HOA Contribution to City Programs Recommendation _ Bill
Shulman.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
SubjectITopic: LIBRARY - 2010-2011 BUDGET - $2,243,271
Reviewed By: MERLINE PAMPLONA
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): IN ODER TO ACHIEVE A 15 %
BUDGET REDUCTION OF $336,491, THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS WERE
CONSIDERED:
1. ELIMINATION OF POSITIONS:
Vacant librarian position (1)
Current full-time positions (4)
Part-time positions (2)
2. $14,524 REDUCTION IN OPERATING EXPENSES - SEFLlN - (SOUTHEAST FLORIDA
LIBRARY INFORMATION NETWORK)
We would not lose any type of accreditation.
We would lose our State-wide delivery service, which saves us approximately $2,000 in
postage per year.
We would also lose "library-specific" staff training, our online calendar of events, which is
hosted by SEFLlN and library networking.
We would not be eligible for special technology projects, which often come our way through
federal grants that SEFLlN is awarded in the past has included a redesign of our website, or
database cleansing of our bibliographic records.
3. $1,639 REDUCTION IN CAPITAL EXPENSES - BOOKS
4. OTHER RECOMMENDATION - POSSIBLE INCREASE IN FINES (late fees) COULD
RESULT IN INCREASE OF $10,000.
Pros of Recommendation: NO INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX
LIBRARY WILL REMAIN OPEN FOR A MINIMUM 10 HOURS MONDAY THROUGH
THURSDAY
Cons of Recommendation: LESS STAFF RESULTING IN REDUCTION IN OPERATING
HOURS FROM 54 HRS TO 48 HRS (a 6 hrs/week cut - hours of least demand)
LIBRARY IS CURRENTLY CLOSED FRIDAY AND SUNDAY
NEW OPERATING HOURS:
Monday through Thursday 9:30am-7:30pm
Saturday 9:00am-5:00pm
BASED ON GATE READINGS, ON AVERAGE 1,500 VIST THE LIBRARY
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): REVIEWED DEPARTMENT BUDGET
MET WITH LIBRARY DIRECTOR CRAIG CLARK, BOARD MINUTES
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: SAME AS 2010-2011
Impact on Out Year Budgets: CURRENTLY, BUDGET HAS INCREASE IN OVERALL
EXPENSES FROM 2012-2015. I RECOMMEND REVISION OF BUDGET TO REFLECT 2010-
2011 AFTER BUDGET CUT UNLESS MILLAGE RATE IS RAISED
Impact on Citizens: LESS OPERATING HOURS RESULTING IN RESTRICTION ON USE OF
THE LBRARY MAINLY BY STUDENTS.THE LIBRARY IS THE ONLY SOURCE FOR MOST
OF THOSE WHO USE IT AND IT WILL AFFECT THE COMMUNITY
Impact on City Staff: LOSS OF POSITIONS, EMPLOYEE MORALE, AND SOME
EMPLOYEES MAY HAVE TO TAKE ON MORE DUTIES
Committee Vote Result: For: _5_ Against: _2_
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Paperless Billing
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Provide citizens with the option to decline paper
water bill. This recommendation has been implemented.
Pros of Recommendation: Eliminate sending paper water bills to citizens who do not want them. Save
on processing and postage.
Cons of Recommendation: Provided this is an optional "opt out" initiative, then there should be no
drawbacks.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Worked with staff on getting this option implemented
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: The city will save $1 per month for every citizen who elects not to have a
paper water bill sent to them.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: : The city will save $1 per month for every citizen who elects not to have a
paper water bill sent to them.
Impact on Citizens: Provided this is an optional "opt out" initiative, then there should be no impact to
citizens.
Impact on City Staff: As more citizens select this option, processing of paper water bills will be reduced._
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Paperless Billing Recommendation _ Don Scantlan.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
SubjectITopic: RECREATION AND PARKS-
2010-2011 BUDGET $4,609,482 (does not include transportation)
Reviewed By: MERLINE PAMPLONA
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A 15%
BUDGET REDUCTION OF $691,422, THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS WERE
CONSIDERED:
1. ELIMINATION OF 12 POSITIONS - DIRECTOR CANNOT IDENTIFY DUE TO THE
EFFECT IT MAY HAVE ON EMPLOYEES.
2. DECREASE IN LEVEL OF MAINTENANCE IN THE PARKS
Pros of Recommendation: NO INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX
BASED ON CITY BUDGET SURVEY, 84.8% PREFER CITY AMENITIES
BASED ON THESE RESULTS, CITIZENS MAY BE WILLING TO PAY
AWARENESS IN ADOPT-A-PARK PROGRAM
FUNDING OF $20,000 TO BOYNTON BEACH LITTLE LEAGUE SHOULD DECREASE OR
CUT
CHARGE FEES FOR CURRENT NON-FEE PROGRAMS
APPLY FOR MORE GRANTS
INCREASE IN PROGRAM FEES
Send letters to citizens about possible increase in program fees or reduction of
programs/activities) to please choose one:
1. Increase all program fees by amount consisting with revenue increase
recommendation
2. Reduction in programs
INCREASE IN RENTAL FEES FOR BIG EVENTS
ELIMINATE NON-REVENUE GENERATED PROGRAMS ((Self Improvement Programs, some
social activities, Life Skills and Mentoring)
Cons of Recommendation: ELIMINATION OF POSITIONS WILL RESULT IN REDUCTION
OF SERVICES INCLUDING DECREASE OF HOURS FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE
PUBLIC
DECREASE IN LEVEL OF MAINTENANCE IN THE PARKS WILL HAVE NEGATIVE EFFECT
ON CITY.
INCREASE IN PROGRAM FEES
INCREASE IN RENTAL FEES FOR BIG EVENTS
CITIZENS WILL NOT BE PLEASED WITH ELIMINATION OF CERTAIN PROGRAMS
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): REVIEWED BUDGET
MET WITH DIRECTOR, WALLY MAJORS.
CITY BUDGET SURVEY REVEALS 84.8% OF RESIDENTS RATE AMENITIES EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT TO MODERATELY IMPORTANT
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: SAME AS 2010-2011 AFTER BUDGET CUT
Impact on Out Year Budgets: CURRENTLY, BUDGET HAS INCREASE IN OVERALL
EXPENSES FROM 2012-2015. I RECOMMEND REVISION OF BUDGET TO REFLECT 2010-
2011 AFTER THE 15% CUT UNLESS MILLAGE RATE IS RAISED
Impact on Citizens:_ELlMINATION OF POSITIONS WILL RESULT IN REDUCTION OF
SERVICES INCLUDING DECREASE OF HOURS FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE
PUBLIC.
LACK OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC.
DECREASE IN LEVEL OF MAINTENANCE IN THE PARKS
POSSIBLE INCREASE IN USER AND PROGRAM FEES
Impact on City Staff: LOSS OF POSITIONS, EMPLOYEE MORALE, AND SOME
EMPLOYEES MAY HAVE TO TAKE ON MORE DUTIES.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7 _ Against: _0_
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject / Topic: Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources-2011/2012 Budget Year
Reviewed By: William Shulman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Strongly suggest these recommendations
be implemented especially in view of projected budget deficits for the 2011/2012 budget year.
Pros of Recommendation: Will increase revenues as follows:
Revenue increases for fees
Fire assessment increases
Total
$ 456,772
759,467
$ 1,196,739 *
* Excludes other possible revenue increases not determinable at this time.
Cons of Recommendation: There may be some negative feedback from certain citizens and
businesses, since some people do not want to pay additional fees. But the increased revenues
derived from this program will assist in keeping the property tax ratable increase to a lower level
so that these people who complain (and who also reside in Boynton Beach and are subject to
property taxes) will benefit from lower property taxes.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): See page 1 of cover letter "Reviewed the
Following Documents)
Impact on 2011/2012 Budget: Could possibly reduce the projected budget deficit by
approximately $1,200,000
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Could also assist in reducing future budgets by approximately
$1,200,000
Impact on Citizens: Affirmative impact. Will reduce any Increases In property taxes for
taxpayers.
Impact on Staff: Will require City staff to implement fee increases for all selected departments
subject to fee increases.
Committee Vote Results: For: _7_Against_0_
Proposed Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources for
Boynton Beach for Budget Year 2011-2012
Attn:
Kurt Bressner, City Manager
Date:
February 15,2011
Subject:
Proposed Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources for Boynton Beach for
Budget Year 2011-2012
From:
William Shulman, Financial Advisory Committee
Methodology and Discussion:
A. Reviewed the following documents:
1. City of Boynton Beach, Financial Services Department, Financial
Advisory Committee Review of Revenue Projections for all Funds (
through F /Y 2010/2011
2. City of Boynton Beach 2010/2011 Revenue Projections.
3. Ordinance of the City Commission of City of Boynton Beach Amending
Chapter 13 of the Code of Ordinances Section 13-4 by Providing for a 5%
increase in the Business Tax Fee Schedule( Proposed 6/19/2009)
4. Various Other Fee Schedules and Documents from Other Boynton Beach
Departments.
5. Articles from Newspapers and Internet Sources
6. 2010 Local Government Financial Information Handbook, October, 2010,
Published by the Florida Legislature, Office of Economic and
Demographic Research.
B. Prepared a Summary Schedule by:
1. Type of revenue source
2. Proposed 2010/2011 annual revenue sources( only those applicable to
this assignment)
Proposed Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources for
Boynton Beach for Budget Year 2011-2012
3. Comments and methods of increasing revenues
4. Anticipated additional revenues
C. Discussion
1. In most cases it was determined that all departments, for all uses,
should increase fees by a minimum of 10%. This is based on lack
of increases over the past several years and the cost of living
increases that did prevail during this period, thereby increasing
the costs to deliver these services even with the City "pay freeze"
which is effect.
2. It should be pointed out that there are several exceptions. It was
determined that the licenses for alcoholic beverages , and all fines
i.e. code enforcement, false alarms, library parking, etc. should be
increased by 20% to act as a deterrent for future citizen violations
3. Further, the Fire Assessment increase should be approximately
30% because the present fee is so low ($68) and the increase to
$88 for residential should be acceptable. See Survey Monkey
results regarding this item.
D. Other I terns
There are other items which should be considered for additional
sources of revenue that will need further and more extensive
research and investigation:
1. Selling Waste Management Services to Ocean Ridge.
2. Selling Building Services to Briny Breezes and Ocean Ridge.
3. Assessing internet usage fees.
4. More intense marketing of Intercoastal Boat Club.
5. Developing a program for naming rights at various public
sites.
6. Possibility of getting revenue from inserting ad flyers in
mailings of our water bills to residents. See examples of FP&L
ad flyers.
7. Soliciting voluntary contributions from not- for - profit
organizations such as religious organizations, hospitals, schools,
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\LocaJ Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\F AC Revenue Increase Recommendations _ Bill
Shulman.doc
Proposed Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources for
Boynton Beach for Budget Year 2011-2012
who avail themselves to City services. In so doing, we must be
certain that such voluntary solicitations are not construed as a
"tax". See article in the Wall Street Journal dated January 28,2011.
With regard to items number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, each of the appropriate
City departments should immediately begin instituting a planned
program to implement these programs, if said program will increase
revenues.
As to item 7, if this is agreeable and acceptable by the City
Manager, the Financial Audit Committee can begin this program;
similar to what was presented in the Solicitation of Homeowner
contributions.
E. Resultant Possible Increases in Revenues
Based on a preliminary analysis and subject to further scrutiny
and review, it is deemed that the following additional revenues
could be achieved for the City of Boynton Beach. This excludes the
items listed in Paragraph D. Other Items
C:\Documents and Sellings\carusoe\Local Sellings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\F AC Revenue Increase Recommendations _ Bill
Shulman.doc
Proposed Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources for
Boynton Beach for Budget Year 2011-2012
Type of
Revenue Source
Proposed Suggested Increasing Revenue Sources for Boynton Beach
Excludes Sho er Hopper. Pensions. and Medical Premium Reimbursements)
Estimated Proposed
Annual Revenue
2010-2011
Comments and Methods
for Increasing Revenues
occupatlona' Licenses:
Current Business License
,.:"." ",-,,":'.;:' -."
Penalties of Lk:ense
"-'-.' 4'V~" ';:'.'
O!~~~~:,!~~~~~ Pee
Building Pennlts
Electric Pennlts
Plumbing Permits
Ot~er ~d,~~~!,!r~ee~
PenaJtfes on Pennit
Parldng Decals
Carage Sale Pennlt
S~~~ty~~~ p'~it .
Mobile Home License
'.'.....,:..,-...,.:-,...;-..,.-.,.....-....
~1c~h~I.B~era~e License
SlIe PI~~ ~PJlro~al F~.. .
BnY/ronmental Review Pees
Tax Se,arches
Police Special Delall
~~~'-;~ ~!~!.,~,~~,"~,~O~f.~ .
"b~~dope~.~!~~~, .
Tennis Center Permits
Tennis Center Dally Pees
Pool Dally Pees
Beach Dally Parking Fees
Recreallon Special DetaU
Library Fines
Code Enforcement Fines
Police Parldng Fln.s
False Alarm Fines
Fals. ~~rm FI~!!Fire
Re.tal o!CI'r!'~cJ.litl.s
Beach CIlair UmbreUas
There has not been an locrease since 06/20/06. A fee
Increase of 5% was submitted 06/16/09. An Increase of
8% for all cale~orteslsr~comlll~n_ded.
'~~}~.~!-;r~.~.'~~.i~~.f~~_~'~~~'~t~!~~' ..
An increase of 10% Is recommended
.' ....."....,;;w"'O"'; ~~~.O.'-.:,-'-,.>J.;.... ,""-j~"''''''','~~~....,,'t<>'' ~_: ':.'''':.'",,-~'''-'';-';'''';l''''~;;'''''' ,"''-~',,",-',-,.o
Last Increase was 12/1/09. Recommend an across the board
increase of 10% In aU caresortes.
, - -':'.-::.~.:'.. ,r..,\...., ,."~~, '..~.._,-.,...... ,-,:.""" ...'.,t'.'M.""".J.,."'......::, "':.',;,. :,<" "..
2,000 Ques"on why these revenues are so low.
A 10'16 Increase Is recommended.
.~..,'-...~'~'\l:....."'"~~tiC~r,'.'''.~,.......'..,
7,000 Question Why these numbers are so low.
An Increase of 10% Is recommended
'_v.._~,-.,.:..: .-,~u.....,;.".~....~_...~l;-,..,.',....-..'~ .,,'C,' --.'",.1:',',,"
3,000 An Increase of10% Is recommended
.;;,.-..'?,:..J......;~...:.~~';..,,:..;,;u,,~....~''''''''~~r:T',-r............,V..,-.~'..... ,~,..,..
41,000 An Increase of 10% Is recomlllended
,'. ",':1 '('~f."._....__.~,,-=..... ",~f-~,.~^,~~..:;~;.......'.c.~~'ltl'~~,...l"o<' "'." ~'<....,..,-:'..~...~"""'~.'.~....'..f,.
185.000 Increase parldng decals by 10% rounded up to nearest
doUar.
1,000 Q~';;.~;;hY'th;~;;;;;~~~-;;";;I~.;:~ .'"'
Gal'il.e sales are not beln. P<>Ilced.
15~OOll"-' A;i~~;~;';'i096a;'r;;;;;;;;;;.~d'
.". .-.."',.-,-.~...'.~r_->,~-~"',~,_.""..-..~'4.~.' ',..:>.~'... ';f~7'<""i'-~"''';'''1''',''''','
40.000 An Increase of 10% III recommended
i~:=; " ~~:i~~;:~i~.:{~i~~~~f
30.000 An Increase 0' 10% Is recommended
30.000' A;;.I;;;;~~~r;o%-;;;;.~;;;~~~ .
525.000" O;';;.ti~~p~llc.'r~~< ;j,;~;d~~n;.;;;ciuidbe
costly to dllzens requesting such service.
An incre... of 1S'l61s recommended.
"_. ~O_...IJ._..go. " -..A~'.i~~~;";~f-l09&b;;.;;.;;;;;;;rr.'''~-y ~'-
.' ..' .....~..'.......)'i~"-"'""".i..:'..;;""'''~-:.<:'~!r'<''l~~'o1'''',...'..,
65,000 An Increase of 20% Is recommended.
T'~,..........,..f""~",...,-~~~...~"'->:c+<>~"..~....~",.:-....."",'.._"..._.'r.~
48.000 Permits avera.e about $300 each from $265 for
indlvfdual resident to $397 for family resldenL
Increase by 10'16 or $30. 193 Permits at $30 each.
15.000 R~u:sa;e.io.;;;rth~;D~I.:.;y. P~~'P?i/B"
9130/10.th~re~ere 2.562 Y/olts. Increase by $2.00
7 ,aDO Fe.~;;S2~OO~d~i~:. $1:oodilld~;'~1'7~;;r;;:A 3ii'd';;
." ,. ,"!~!~[,I'~~I!$~~;~2:}~c!~~~~,2'},?~.~~~II!e~~:,_ ......c...
200.000 Fees $S.OO from 11/15; $10. from 11/16 - 4/30, decals $40 per
year for non residents $90 per year. Increase all rates
by 10%.
7.000 Pavilion Fe.. range from $2 to $25. Raise all fees
. by'~,O'l(,e~cert !~'yc~~ ~ t-
Ali fines should be Increased across the board by
10% and enforcement of Improper behavtor should
result In fines to deter reCllrrence oflnfractton. This
may assist In reducln. such Infractions.
.$I~~~O.O~~,
! I{~OO
'. ,~!:~ee~,
440,000
Anticipated
Additional
Revenues
$.1~~,0~0
_.!:l00
,~!}O.o
44.000
200
. ,.",2.0_0,
300
:- '''-,..........',~.'''~,..".
.:,.>-~~~
18.500
1.500
'.o;..>r"-i"-':""..
4.-~??
7,000
_'u~.";';"
3.500
3.000
3.000
78.750
~-. ..
1.000
,1},;,~~~
5.790
40.000
80.000
25.000
40,000
10.000
, "-"";.v.,,""..
~cO,~o.o.
24.000
An Increne ollO%.I~.~~-~;~.;~nd;d'~
.- .. -'-;.' :.;-~ .-,'," " ",.... ~.. ::~ :r.:' ......:.~!\.~;c,,'".:. ~... '-'~'~~':'~ ;'~.':;'. .'_
An Increase of 10% Is recommended.
5.124
700
20.000
700
4,000
8.000
2.500
4.000
1.000
_ "",_,,-,,.!~~O
2.400
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Revenue Increase Recommendations _ Bill
Shulman.doc
Page I
Proposed Suggested Increases in Revenue Sources for
Boynton Beach for Budget Year 2011-2012
Type of
Revenue Source
Fire Assessment
Estimated Proposed
Annual Revenue
2010-2011
~
3,1'/"7,~3't
Comments and Methods
,... . ...._ _f~r,!~~e~sln1..R;~~~e~_...... _.".
Increase fire ass.ssm.nt from $68 to $88 or 29.41% for
residential and approximately 30% for commercial use or
an average of 29.1%Incr.as.. See,~u!,:ey_monkey.
Anllclpated
Additional
Revenues
",,__c,. ...
15'f,'l-b1
~
Golf Course
Cart & Green Fees
\.691.389 Incr.ase all tee ofT fees by $1.00 limes 11.297 tee olTs 71.297
!"'~>:~~~~ '.
. _ 2.4!97.? .~?,~,~nBe
24,911 . No Change
.~." "82;000 -C;;;I;$i.OOfo7io<ba";~Tok;';"~~~d.8:z0o;;-;;;balls. 8,200
Incr.ase to SUO for \0 balls.
..':.>">ol,:.1.',',...",..c-....:;~.,',.;l.V,,--,-.;.'.:: ..+'~"....-_''''~....,'-'',.<:..1".li.......,
. ,_.8.S:0Cl~_~~~:.~}~~h~~-"~.,:to~~~~.!,.: "
136,219 Incr..se by 5% . 6.811
'_V.l,_<::<;'~1ool:~,~~~:.>o:ii~......."="',~~.."",;~~.~,,,>llo:"I'"...~.",;o\~'"'~i','...'...;"_:,.,.".".......~.:.;I',~,-,.,:.",-f*'4:~;.-.
50.000 Incr.ase to SSS.OO from $50.00. \0% Increase. 5.000
APH Du.: B.~ynton
AP~ D."~:~o.unty
Range Balls
Merchandise
.~.~_';..h.~~::,~~~2~~~~~~ "
Resident J.D. Cards
Total
/,1%,731
f],"J.98J
Other
Internet Usage Fees
Inter Coastal Boat Club
f.e. at Ocean Ridge Beach
We would need to cb.ck lhe revenue book to determln.
~!!~"~~~~~~~~~~~~..~.~.!<.r.~~:,:,.
.-~~~.~~~r:~!~_~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~,~.,-"_~_.,r'.
Thl. may bea duplication S.. page 2.
.~~_~!Jr,.~~~!!'.8.~~..'.;,.,. "'" '.' '.'~" ."~~,,,, '., .
The Waste Manlgement Departm.nt should Investigate
tl.l!.~~'1'.b~II~.~!~.!!\~~~s,<;':"J~.!.~~'O~a,~TR1~~;..
The 8ulldlng Departm.nt should make a conc.rt.d
effort to sell these servlc.s to Brtny Breez.s & Ocean
~~~~,." "
See articles In Wall Street Journal dat.d 1/26/10
.nUlIed: "Strapped Clttes. Hit non.profits with Fees,"
These matters should not be framed as a tax but TClther
as I contribullon to the C.ne",1 fund of the Boynton
Belch City Gov.mm.nt so that city services conlinue al
a hl~ lev.1as Inthe pasL .
S..id Insert In' the FPL invoice ;.nt to Ulel~c';'lom.rs.
Thl.SC~~ld ~e in,~~rte~ !n.~~yn~~~~~.~.~~e~~U1s.
R.lmbursements to the City of Boynton Beach that
;Er,~~~~~.~,~~/~I,~.r~~~~,~ ~y~~~,~~~~~..~~~~~'J~~~:.
S.U1ng Wa.t. Management
to Ocea~~I~~e
5.lIlng Building S.rvices to
Briny Br.eze. & Ocean Ridge
Consider Sollcttlng Voluntary
Contributions from Non-Profit
Or&anitations, i.e. Schools,
Hospitals, Religious
Orgilnlzatlons
Ins.rt Ad Mailings In Wat.r
Bills for fee.
Special Events Cost
R.lmburs.ments
. ..,.' .~....::"',.,.---"',.... " -
R.lmbursements from Non-
pront Organization. should
be In~r~~
Page 2
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Revenue Increase Recommendations - Bill
Shulman. doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Sell Surplus City Property (Physical property)
Reviewed By: David R. Madigan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Continue with existing internal Boynton Beach
procedures designating property surplus and continue forwarding to Palm Beach County for ultimate
sale.
Pros of Recommendation: Surplus property has value. Boynton Beach CFO estimates $150K + in
annual surplus sales.
Cons of Recommendation: None
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): City Staff suggested areas of study for FAC in a memo dated
8/20/10.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Projected estimate $150K +
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Projected estimate $150K +
Impact on Citizens: Opportunity to purchase surplus physical property at a much reduced cash outlay.
Impact on City Staff: Thru the surplus process, the ability exists to keep more current with
technology/automation.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Sale of Surplus Physical Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Sell Surplus City Property (Real Property)
Reviewed By: David R. Madigan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): A number of parcels have been identified (from 17
acres to 1.5 acres) from City owned property print out (attached). Action on an ongoing basis is
suggested to proceed as follows:
1. Form a high level decision making City staff work grouP.
2. City staff work group reviews identified parcels from attached print out selecting those identified
parcels where a potential sale could take place. Also. identify and add any additional parcels where a
potential sale could take place.
3. Have selected parcels appraised.
4. Price parcels for sale.
5. Advertise or list with a Commercial Real Estate Agent/Broker.
Pros of Recommendation: Generate cash from sale as well as turning parcel into a real estate tax
generator. (See impact on citizens for more info).
Cons of Recommendation: None
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): City staff suggested areas of study for FAC in a memo dated
8/20/10.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: N/ A
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Projected minimum estimate $50K annual
Impact on Citizens:_City will add cash, on a one time basis, as a result of a sale, and then turn a non-tax
generator into an out year real estate tax generator. The more non-tax generators that convert to a real
estate tax generator will assist in adding to Boynton Beach's overall income and assist in keeping real
estate tax millage constant.
Impact on City Staff: Only the time that the high level decision making work group put in making this
successful.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Sale of Surplus Real Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan.doc
1 of 2
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Solid Waste - Franchise All Solid Waste Services
Reviewed By: George Feldman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Eliminate all in-house Solid Waste services and
replace with a private waste hauler through a franchise agreement obtained through competitive bid.
Because all recommendations are made with fiscal concerns in mind, it is imperative that the move to
contract Solid Waste services be done for the purpose of saving money. That savings must be so
significant that it is worth losing local control of these functions.
Pros of Recommendation: This action would alleviate the City of Boynton Beach of direct local
responsibility to the public for solid waste collection services. The positive aspect of this is that this
should allow for reduced overhead in other City departments and assumes that the financial impact on
the City's General Fund is equal to and no worse than that contemplated in the FY 2010-11 Budget.
Cons of Recommendation: Assumption and cons as follows:
1. The net cost to the City's General Fund must, at minimum, be $3,430,000 as shown in the City's
budget. This means that net revenue from any franchise fee, less any City expenses to manage
the franchise, must be equal to or greater than this amount.
2. All control of daily collection operations, both residential and commercial, is given up to a
private contractor. The contractor will have to respond to complaints and concerns in a manner
prescribed in the contract. Contract service levels to the public should be equal to or better
than services now provided by City staff.
3. It is important to note that the City's Solid Waste staff and equipment were the first clean up
operations to begin service after the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005. Solid Waste managers and
supervisors oversaw both in house and contractual clean up operations in conformance with
FEMA requirements. Without in house City Solid Waste staff, clean up operations immediately
following a storm event will be slowed considerably and overall oversight of contractual services
will likely fall to the private waste hauler.
4. Over the past two years, the City has made great strides in cleaning up the City using its one
Solid Waste Code officer to identify trash piles that are not placed in compliance with local
codes. That officer is able to call existing Solid Waste staff and equipment such that an illegally
dumped pile is cleaned up that same day. Although this service level could be incorporated into
a franchise contract, it would seem unlikely that a private hauler would responds as quickly.
5. At least three employees (one supervisor, one clerical, one Code) must remain on City payroll to
administer the franchised contract and field resident phone calls.
6. The City would no longer incorporate Solid Waste services design into private development as
part of the City's plan review process. Assuming the private hauler wishes to be part of this
design review, additional time could be added to the review process.
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Solid Waste Franchise Recommendation - George
Feldman.doc
2 of 2
7. The City often coordinates and provides garbage removal services for special events, often at
the last minute and usually at no cost to the event holder. Because special events can be
variable in scope, a private waste hauler will likely only provide these additional services for a
fee.
8. Once a decision is made to franchise solid waste services, the City would sell its solid waste
equipment. It would be exceedingly difficult to change back to City service provision since the
estimated new cost of solid waste fleet is around $5.4M.
9. The decision to franchise solid waste services is one that must be made with a full
understanding of timing. Once a final decision is made to franchise these services, it will take
around six months to prepare bid specifications, receive bids, and then award a contract. Once a
contract is awarded many more months can follow to allow the time for the contractor to hire
staff (City staff hopefully), acquire equipment, and plan private operations and routes.
Satisfactory time would then be required to notify the publiC of the changed processes. It could
easily be early summer of 2012 until a franchise agreement could be implemented.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Discussion with Larry Quinn, Solid Waste Manager,
Christine Roberts, Asst Director of Public Works, and Jeffrey Livergood, Director of Public Works.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: No impact assuming that the franchise fee charged to the private waste
hauler accounts for the current internal fund transfer of $3,430,000 and for added contract
administration expenses.. As an enterprise fund, Solid Waste operations only impact the General Fund
budget by transferring funds to the General Fund. What is unknown is the rate that the private
contractor would charge to residents and businesses in order to cover his/her operating costs and to pay
the City the specified franchise fee. Those may be lower or higher than those currently charged by the
City. The City would receive a one time revenue from the sale of surplus equipment in the amount of
around $1.5M.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Regular inflationary growth
Impact on Citizens: Residents and businesses would no longer receive Solid Waste services by the City
of Boynton Beach. Although the City would still oversee the contract and field some phone calls, the
responsibility to address and follow up on resident and business concerns would fall solely upon the
private contractor. The City would no longer have staff and equipment to rapidly address needs of the
public.
Impact on City Staff: 37.5 staff positions will be eliminated.
Committee Vote Result: For: _0_ Against: _7_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Solid Waste Franchise Recommendation - George
Feldman.doc
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: Solid Waste - Residential Recycling Collection
Reviewed By: George Feldman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Eliminate Curb Side Recycling
Pros of Recommendation: This action would allow for a total cost reduction of approximately
$475,000 annually. This could lead other to a reduction in the monthly garbage fee paid by the customer
or a corresponding increase in the fund transfer from Solid Waste to the General Fund. No other pros.
Cons of Recommendation: There are a number of cons as follows:
1. Chapter 403 of the State Statutes created a goal of recycling of 75% of the waste stream by
2020. Without a local recycling program, the City would be unable to help meet this goal.
2. There has been expanded effort over the last two decades to encourage individual recycling
efforts. The possible cut to local recycling shows that the recycling process has a cost to society.
3. Elimination of curb side recycling would force an addition to the solid waste stream. These
additional materials would have to be disposed of in the landfills rather than recycled. These
recyclable materials would be placed into the regular residential garbage cart for disposal
thereby taking up additional volume in the cart. Elimination of recycling services is therefore not
compatible with other service reduction initiatives such as reductions in frequency of collection.
One cart would probably not be able to handle the added regular garbage and the addition of
the recyclable materials.
4. The public might expect a rate reduction in the monthly water bill. The public may perceive
reduced solid waste services to correlate with reduced solid waste costs, hence a rate reduction.
This therefore would not benefit the General Fund deficit.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Discussion with Larry Quinn, Solid Waste Manager,
Christine Roberts, Asst Direction of Public Works, and Jeffrey Livergood, Direction of Public Works
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Savings of $475,000.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Regular inflationary growth
Impact on Citizens: Those residents that would still choose to recycle would need to locate other
venues, both private and public (County).
Impact on City Staff: Three staff positions will be eliminated. Bulk of savings is equipment and fuel.
Committee Vote Result: For: _0_ Against: _7_
C:\Documents and settings\carusoe\Local settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Solid Waste Recycling
Recommendation - George Feldman.doc
10f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, general
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Review the results of the City Services Survey and
use them as a data point during budget discussions this year
Pros of Recommendation: The results of this survey reflect the opinions of 513 citizens of Boynton
Beach (using self-attestation as the source of residency). The survey did prevent two submissions from
the same IP address to prevent overstuffing the survey. Although it is not obvious, the number of
persons responding is a statistically significant number to represent the adults in Boynton Beach using a
95% confidence level and a +/- 5.7 error rate
Cons of Recommendation: As stated above, the number of respondents represents a statistically
significant sample size. What would make this an invalid assumption is that if the sample were not truly
random. Since a very few respondents chose to enter their names, the assumption of randomness
cannot be verified. The obvious question is, was there an abnormal number of a specific group
represented in the survey (such as did more city employees answer the survey compared to the
population of Boynton Beach). I believe (intuitively, not supported by data) that the results of questions
20 and 23 indicate that there was not an excess of city employees that answered the survey.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Citizens: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are both
increases in fees and/or taxes as well as reduced or increased services available from the opinions
expressed in this survey.
Impact on City Staff: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
possibilities for lay-offs, furloughs as well as some staff increases expressed by the opinions in this
survey.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations _ Don Scantlan.doc
20f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question #8. What is yaur annual family income?
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of this question call into consideration
the true randomness of the sample.
Pros of Recommendation: Of the 297 respondents who provided their annual family income, 36% said
their annual family income exceeded $100K. Since intuitively (new census data forthcoming would
answer this specifically), I do not think that 36% of Boynton Beach residents have annual family income
that exceeds $100K, then the answers in this survey may not be a true representation of Boynton Beach
residents.
Cons of Recommendation: Since there is the possibility of an excess of wealthier residents who
responded to the survey, the opinions to allow increases in taxes and fees may not represent the actual
opinions of the most of Boynton residents.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Citizens: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are both cost
savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on City Staff: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
possibilities for lay-offs, furloughs as well as some staff increases expressed by the opinions in this
survey.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations _ Don Scantlan.doc
30f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question #s 11, 13, 18 & 26. How important were the following
factors in influencing you to move to Boynton Beach? Question 13. Thinking back to the previous
question about how important the following factors were in influencing you to move to Boynton Beach,
how important are these same factors in influencing you to remain in Boynton Beach? Question #18. To
maintain the property tax rate at 6.7626 mills, are you in favor of cutting services for Public Safety (i.e.,
Police, Fire, and Communications)? Question 26. Relating to Police coverage/response time, would you
rather: Increase property taxes, or Reduce coverage and see a possible decrease in response time
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of the responses to these questions
indicate the importance of public safety in the decision to move to and stay in Boynton Beach. It (public
safety) received the highest number of extremely important responses. Items in the budget relating to
public safety should be weighted higher relative to other issues. If this survey is conducted next year, a
response option of "low taxes" should be added to questions 11 & 13.
Pros of Recommendation: The factor of Public Safety as an attraction to get people to want to move to
and remain in Boynton Beach is foremost, according to the responses. Citizens are willing to pay more
taxes to keep good response times.
Cons of Recommendation: Taking public safety issues "off of the table" means that other issues face
deeper cuts or that taxes must be raised.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Citizens: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are both cost
savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on City Staff: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
possibilities for lay-offs, furloughs as well as some staff increases expressed by the opinions in this
survey.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations _ Don Scantlan.doc
40f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question #s 11, 13 & 19. How important were the following factors
in influencing you to remain in Boynton Beach? Question 13. Thinking back to the previous question
about how important the following factors were in influencing you to move to Boynton Beach, how
important are these same factors in influencing you to remain in Boynton Beach? Question 19. To
maintain the property tax rate at 6.7626, are you in favor of cutting Cultural and/or Recreation services
(i.e., Library, Recreation programs)?
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of the responses to this question
indicate the willingness of the community to forgo Cultural and/or Recreation services during these
challenging times. City amenities and cultural factors received the lowest ratings in questions 11 & 13
(schools was second lowest for question 13, followed by city amenities).
Pros of Recommendation: The factors of city amenities and cultural factors as an attraction to get
people to want to move to and remain in Boynton Beach is insignificant, according to the responses.
Citizens accept cuts in costs/services in these areas.
Cons of Recommendation: Especially during challenging times, the use of city amenities is more critical
to many citizens. As families look for ways to stretch their budgets, use of public facilities (library, parks
and recreational facilities goes up).
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Citizens: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are both cost
savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on City Staff: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
possibilities for lay-offs, furloughs as well as some staff increases expressed by the opinions in this
survey.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations _ Don Scantlan.doc
50f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question #21. 21. Since it was implemented in June 2009, the
Compressed Work Week for employees (Monday-Thursday, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m., except for essential
services) has enabled the City to budget an annual savings of $140,000. Are you in favor of continuing
the Compressed Work Week for employees?
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Continue the compressed work week.
Pros of Recommendation: Continued savings. City Hall hours more available before and after
traditional workday hours.
Cons of Recommendation: At least one city department has been negatively impacted by the
compressed work week. The City Clerk's office previously had Fridays to transcribe meeting minutes (no
committees/boards met on Fridays). Now there are no workdays when no meetings are scheduled,
impacting the turnaround time for transcribing meeting minutes. Citizens who expect to conduct
business at City Hall on Fridays are disappointed when City Hall is not open on Fridays.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond. Comments relative to the impact to the City Clerk's office were gained from conversations
with staff members.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: $140K in cost avoidance each year.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: $140K in cost avoidance each year.
Impact on Citizens: Lower taxes and City Hall hours available more during the week, but, not on Fridays.
Impact on City Staff: Some city staff do not like the extended days as it impacts child care and other
family obligations. Others do like it.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan.doc
60f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question # 22. The City's Fire Rescue Assessment is a nan-ad
valorem fee (i.e., not based on property value). Are you in favor of an increase in the residential Fire
Assessment, which is now set at $68 a year, to $88 a year and a corresponding increase in the current
rotes for non-residential buildings (e.g., commercial, institutional and industrial/warehouse buildings) to
enable Fire Rescue to maintain its current quality levels of emergency response times and level of
service? For residential buildings, this represents a monthly increase of approximately $1.67 a month; for
non-residential buildings the fee is calculated on a square footage basis. For a 10,000 square foot
building, this represents a monthly increase of $39.22 for commercial buildings and $9.80 for
industrial/warehouse buildings.
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of the responses to this question
indicate the willingness of the community to pay more for the fire rescue assessment. This could offset
fire department operational costs and reduce general fund expenditures for fire operations. Note cons
below and comments to question 8. Since this assessment is levied on all properties (including those
that pay no ad valorem taxes) the assessment is viewed by some as being more fair.
Pros of Recommendation: The assessment increase would offset some costs currently borne by the
general fund.
Cons of Recommendation: This is a tax increase borne by all property owners.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Costs of fire operations currently being funded by the general fund, could
be shifted to the revenue generated by increasing the assessment.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Costs of fire operations currently being funded by the general fund, could
be shifted to the revenue generated by increasing the assessment.
Impact on Citizens: This would be a tax increase on all residential property owners of $20/year and
depending on the size of the commercial property an increase of roughly 30%.
Impact on City Staff: It is expected that a dollar for dollar reduction in the amount of fire operations
that would be shifted from the General Fund to be funded by the increased revenue from the fire
assessment, thus, this in and of itself should have no impact on City Staff. However, the funds made
available to the general fund because of this shift could make more funds from the General Fund
available for other City operations.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan.doc
70f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question # 24. How much do you agree or disagree that the
following taxes and/or user fees should be raised to the extent to which the City is able in order to
maintain the City's high level of services? (Franchise fees are fees that the City charges utility companies
for the use of City streets and right-of-ways. The utility company - electric, telephone, cable, water - is
allowed to pass the cost on to the customer.)
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of the responses to this question
indicate a desire to raise fees. When combining both the agree responses, all but one of the responses
have over 50% of the citizens desiring increased fees (Franchise fees have 49%). If you remove the
neutral responses an overwhelming number of citizens are in favor of increasing fees. Fees should
reflect the actual cost for the city to deliver the service requested or a fair market value price when
comparable prices are available.
Pros of Recommendation: Raising fees should increase revenue to the city.
Cons of Recommendation: Raising fees could reduce revenue. If the fee increase causes fewer people
to opt to use the service tied to the fees, the revenue to the city could actually decrease. Also,
increasing fees could cause a negative effect on the lower income families who rely on the city's
services.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Citizens: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are both cost
savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on City Staff: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
possibilities for lay-offs, furloughs as well as some staff increases expressed by the opinions in this
survey.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan.doc
80f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question # 25. Relating to garbage pick up, would you rather:
Decrease service (fewer pickupdays), or Increase fees
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of the responses to this question
indicate a reduction in service is preferred to increasing fees. I also talked to many citizens about this
issue and the common response was that with the bigger garbage cans, pickup was only required once a
week.
Pros of Recommendation: While not expected to be a 50% cost reduction, significant savings should be
available by reducing pick up to once a week.
Cons of Recommendation: Larger households that generate a lot of garbage could have difficulties with
once weekly pick up.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond. In addition to the responses to the survey, I personally asked a lot of citizens this question.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there could
be significant savings to the city by reducing solid waste staff and reducing fuel and maintenance costs
of sanitation vehicles.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there could
be significant savings to the city by reducing solid waste staff and reducing fuel and maintenance costs
of sanitation vehicles.
Impact on Citizens: Citizens who generate a lot of garbage may have to request another garbage can.
Impact on City Staff: By changing to once weekly pick up, it is expected that fewer sanitation/solid
waste workers will be required.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\ Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan.doc
90f9
Recommendation From
Boynton Beach Financial Advisory Committee
Subject/Topic: City Services Survey, Question # 27. The Utilities Fund is an enterprise fund for the City;
operational expenses for the Utilities Department come from customer fees. They are not part of the
City's General Fund budget. Water supply infrastructure consists of what is built to pump, divert,
transport, store, treat and deliver safe drinking water. In order to maintain and expand the City's utility
infrastructure to meet increasing water supply and demand, it may be necessary to increase fees. Should
the City increase fees: Annually or Semi-annually (two years).
Reviewed By: Donald Scantlan
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): The results of the responses to this question
indicate a desire to raise rates every other year instead of yearly.
Pros of Recommendation: Rates would not go up every year..
Cons of Recommendation: Raising every other year would make the raises bigger.
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): The questions were developed thru a combined effort of
city staff and the Finance Advisory Committee. The answers were from the general public who chose to
respond.
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
both cost savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on Citizens: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are both cost
savings and revenue increases available from the opinions expressed in this survey.
Impact on City Staff: Depending upon the decisions made by the City Commission, there are
possibilities for lay-offs, furloughs as well as some staff increases expressed by the opinions in this
survey.
Committee Vote Result: For: _7_ Against: _0_
C:\Documents and Settings\carusoe\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK8E\FAC Survey Recommendations - Don Scantlan.doc
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM
COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 5, 2011
0 OPENINGS 0 PUBLIC HEARING
0 OTHER 0 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
0 ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 0 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NATURE OF 0 ADMINISTRATIVE ~ NEW BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM
0 CONSENT AGENDA 0 LEGAL
0 BIDS AND PURCHASES OVER $100,000 0 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
CODE COMPLIANCE AND LEGAL
0 SEITLEMENTS
REQUESTED ACTION BY CITY COMMISSION: Presentation of Financial Advisory Committee
Recommendations.
EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The Financial Advisory Committee was created by
ordinance in 2010 and has been meeting to review City finances. From an original list
of 53 issues, this year the Financial Advisory Committee has completed a review and
recommendation on 22 issues. These issues cover a wide-variety of programs and
activities of the City and are designed to assist the City Commission and City staff in
evaluation of City budget and program issues. The topics addressed in 2011 were as
follows:
· FAC Cell Phone Recommendation - Bill Shulman
· FAC CRA Functions & Development Department Merger
Recommendation - Dave Madigan
· FAC Forestry & Grounds Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
· FAC Golf Recommendation - George Feldman
· FAC Hiring Freeze Recommendation - Dave Madigan
· FAC HOA Contribution to City Programs Recommendation - Bill
Shulman
· FAC Library Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
· FAC Paperless Billing Recommendation - Don Scantlan
· FAC Recreation & Parks Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
· FAC Revenue Increase Recommendations - Bill Shulman
· FAC Sale of Surplus Physical Property Recommendation - Dave
Madigan
· FAC Sale of Surplus Real Property Recommendation - Dave Madigan
. FAC Solid Waste Franchise Recommendation - George Feldman
. FAC Solid Waste Recycling Recommendation - George Feldman
. FAC Take Home Vehicles and Car Allowance Recommendation - Bill
Shulman
. FAC Voluntary Separation (VSP) Recommendation - Dave Madigan
. FAC E-Billing Recommendation - Don Scantlan
. FAC Museum Recommendation - Merline Pamplona
. FAC Pensions Recommendation - Mike Madalena
. F AC Shopper Hopper Recommendation - Terry Lonergan
. FAC Solid Waste Residential Garbage Collection Recommendation -
George Feldman
Prior to completing these studies, the Financial Advisory Committee met with operating
departments that provided the committee with an overview of operations. As a follow-
up, as part of their reports individual members of the committee met with staff to review
specifics of their assigned task. The work of the committee was adversely affected by
the fact that two members of the committee resigned during the first year of operation.
They have not been replaced yet.
In addition to these studies, the Financial Advisory Committee completed a citizen
survey. A copy of the survey results and an assessment of the survey also is attached.
How WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? The Financial Advisory Committee
has requested an opportunity to meet with the City Commission in a workshop to
discuss their findings in detail.
FISCAL IMPACT: Pending
ALTERNATIVES: Information
-' (~
Ij AJ)t}Y
\1 ~}J- /
\V .
\
1 of 2
Recommendation from
Boynton Beach financial Advisory Committ e
Subject/Topic: Solid Waste - Residential Garbage Collection
Reviewed By: George Feldman
Recommendation (Specific Action Recommended): Amend residential gar
such that garbage is collected one time per week (ENTIRE CITY).
Existing service levels provide for residential garbage collection two times per eek. This can be
scalable to allow regional neighborhoods to select lesser service frequen Ne ghborhoods (HOAs)
would need to respond to a prepared questionnaire, choosing twice a wee or nce a week pickup.
After reviewing responses, a cost effective determination could be analyzed s ving the City operational
expenses and reducing cost to taxpayers or HOAs. This would be a cost eut I approach before
implementation.
Pros of Recommendation: This action would allow for a total cost re
$275,000 annually assuming the entire City is affected. Some customers m
collection.
cti n of approximately
pr fer twice per week
Survey Says: Once a week garbage collection preferred.
Cons of Recommendation: There are a number of cons as follows:
1. Many residents need twice per week collection either because of fa
refuse generated.
Iy si e or the amount of
2. There will likely be an up front cost to implement this program. Ca
two sizes, 65 gallons and 95 gallons. Many residents also currently us
carts that are being phased out due to collection difficulties. Therefor
once per week collection, many residents will request larger carts i
larger volumes of garbage. Those residents that ask for large carts s
for the replacement cost of around $55 per cart.
s a e available today in
m h smaller 35 gallon
if t e City transitions to
ord r to accommodate
IlIld be required to pay
3. Some residents will place extra garbage bags beside the City cart and
This cannot be done with automated trucks. Customer complaints " ri
could be impaired. The City could return to rear load collection vehic
how residents place their garbage at the curb. Rear load vehicles req
this could require the City to actually add staff which could offset the s
per week collection.
it to be collected.
and public health
allow flexibility on
ire hree employees so
ing to go with one day
4. Residents can request two carts and pay an extra monthly fee of $6. r cart. The City has
some situations like this now. If once per week collection is implemen d, ome residents may
request an additional cart. They may not have room to store this cart. Inte nal City tracking of
these extra carts would become difficult.
C:\userS\GEORGE\APPData\local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\low\Content.IE5\RY6A25AR AC id Waste Residential
Garbage Collection Recommendation - George Feldman[l].doc
2 of 2
5. The biggest negative impact would be to those residents who have reg .Iar rbage collection on
Thursday, Thanksgiving Day and on the variable days of Christmas and Ne Years Day. The City
does not collect garbage on these dates. Because the City is on a si day per week collection
schedule (cost reduction measure in 2010), there are no make days a aila Ie. Therefore, those
with Thanksgiving Day garbage collection would go two weeks with ut arbage service and
those whose collections days fall on Christmas and New Years will 0 tree weeks without
collection.
6. The public might expect a rate reduction in the monthly water bill.
reduced solid waste services to correlate with reduced solid waste co
not benefit the General Fund deficit.
he ublic may perceive
his therefore would
References (Staff, Documents, and Public): Discussion with Larry Quinn Sol d Waste Manager,
Christine Roberts, Asst Director of Public Works, and Jeffrey livergood, Director of P blic Works
Impact on 2011/12 Budget: Savings of $275,000 to change entire City to 0 ce er week collection.
Savings will vary if larger neighborhoods are allowed to opt in or out.
Impact on Out Year Budgets: Regular inflationary growth
Impact on Citizens: Impact on the public will be varied. Those that prefer onc per week garbage
collection would be pleased. Those that prefer twice per week collection will t. he most noticeable
impact may be an increase in fly dumping. The City already experiences fly dum ing espite the fact that
the City collects garbage twice per week and also collects unlimited amounts of ulk rash and landscape
waste twice per week. By reducing services levels for garbage collection, some ma choose to fly dump
causing the appearance of the community to diminish.
Impact on City Staff: Two staff positions (Equipment Operators) will be elimina ed.
Committee Vote Result: For: _ Against: _
EVISED 3/27fl
C:\users\GEORGE\AppOata\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet FlIes\low\Content.IE5\RY6A25AR\ AC S id Waste Residential
Garbage Collection Recommendation - George Feldman[l].doc