Search and Categories

Here’s The Scoop …The Lauderdale-By-The-Sea November 22, 2010 Commission Roundtable Agenda … Progress Coming To Town …. Something To Be Thankful For …




MONDAY, NOV. 22, 2010 – 7PM





a. Ordinance 2010-18: Amending Section 30-313(31) Accessory Buildings and Structures – Approved 1st reading October 12, 2010 and deferred to the November 22, 2010 Roundtable to discuss concerns prior to 2nd reading December 7th (Vice Mayor Stuart Dodd).

BC- this one is being discussed because the Mayor was none-too-pleased with the P & Z’s recommendations for the non-permitted sheds. buildings etc…being allowed with no side /rear setback regulations allowed behind the front facade and the hurricane warning as the time used for dismantling it…The mayor did not think sheds/ structures were allowed in the south end of town…This writer previously posted that most single family/duplex/triplex etc…residences in the south have some sort of Rubbermaid storage due to lack of storage …and as a homeowner find the P & Z’s recommendation correct …It should pass to 2nd reading with perhaps one change the height definition was to be one story even for one-story homes and is currently left at half the height……This was caught and addressed at the P & Z meeting…as I recall…

Scan of pg. 2 & 3  of the backup…full backup on Town website…link below…

b. Use of Pelican Hopper for New Year’s Eve festivities (Commissioner Birute Ann Clottey).

Backup… SUBJECT TITLE: Have the Pelican Hopper in operation during the New Year Eve festivities on the square (10:00
pm 12: 30 am) This would help alleviate traffic and parking problems as well as let those who cannot drive at night
attend this event as well as get others home safely after a night of partying.
EXPLANATION: The Pelican Hopper would be in service on New Year’s Eve and the town would have to pay for
this service.

BC- We really need this service and to pay for it?…How many problems have the BSO contended with in Town limits in prior years?.. If the answer is none or a few…scratch it…I put this right alongside the Reso from the last Comm. Mtg. making this a town conducive to keeping kids from being obese…it’s a waste of Comm./Staff and the taxpayer’s time and money…

c. Expenditures exceeding 10 percent of Town’s budget should be approved by referendum vote (Commissioner Birute Ann Clottey).

Backup- SUBJECT TITLE: Any new expenditure that exceeds ten percent of the town’s operating budget should be approved
by the residents in a referendum vote. Any proposed cost increases by current services providers that exceed $400,000
should also be approved by residents Planned expenditures that will be paid out of specially allocated reserve funds
(fire trucks, sewers etc) will be excluded from this requirement.
EXPLANATION: All proposed bond issues and other major non emergency expenditures with the above stated
exceptions will be proved by referendum vote. In these difficult economic times the taxpayers should have the final
say in these matters.

BC- OMG!..Anyone tell Comm. Clottey Amendment 4 dies at the polls!… This is a hoot and shows Clottey is still being led by the nose by the CIC/Furths. who are still obviously anti-BSO…..10% of the Town operating budget …come on!…How funny that the same group that wanted a referendum to keep the VFD in perpetuity want to make it impossible to negotiate with the BSO without a referendum…One person has already responded asking…how long we will be without police protection going through this process!… Also according to this plan the VFD would have had to to follow suit as well as AMR…and garbage etc…if this was placed into effect prior to 2008!…. This is the same Comm. Clottey who is on record stating quite a few times that she was happy to have the new TM as out negotiator for the BSO …YIKES!… Was this the item “Clueless” Clottey was referring to when she said she held off on placing items on the last roundtable due to the long agenda ?…She should have held back on this indefinitely…Talk about being out of touch…This Comm. is a one-term Commissioner for sure…if she is even considering a 2nd run…

d. Proposed Interlocal Agreement for Resource Recovery System in Broward County (Assistant Town Manager Bud Bentley).

Backup- excerpts…SUBJECT TITLE: Proposed Interlocal Agreement for Resource Recovery System in Broward County
EXPLANATION: The Town is a party to the November 26, 1986 Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for solid waste
disposal with the Broward Solid Waste Disposal District (District) twenty-three (23) Broward County
municipalities Contract Communities and Broward County. There are current twenty-five  (25 ) Contract
Communities. The District is governed by the Resource Recovery Board which in 2007 was changed to the
following nine 9 members
The County was involved in the creation of the Resource Recovery System as the unincorporated areas were a
significant generator of waste at that time but more importantly the County was the overall coordinator and
planner for the system. The Broward County Solid Waste Disposal District was created as a dependent district of
the County.
The ILA communities send waste to one of two Wheelabrator mass burn resource recovery facilities( the
incinerators) in Broward County. Under the current and proposed ILA participating cities are required to send
100% of their waste stream to the Wheelabrator facilities.
The current ILA does not expire until July 2013, but the service agreements with Wheelabrator expire in August
2011 (for the south plant) and March 2012 (for the North plant). Broward County, the District, and Wheelabrator
have been negotiating a replacement ILA and service agreement with Wheelabrator. The term of the new
agreement is ten years beginning on August 4, 2011 with one ten year renewal option Each contract community
has the option not to renew.

At its meeting of November 10, 2009 the Commission approved Resolution 2009-27 which approved a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that set forth the material terms agreed to among Broward County the
Broward Solid Waste Disposal District and Wheelabrator North and South Resolution 2009-27 is only binding
on the Town upon the passage of an additional resolution approving the new ILA Exhibit 2.

Deadlines and Sienin Bonus
The District has requested all municipalities to decide if they are going to enter into the new ILA by December
31, 2010. To encourage an early decision the ILA provides for a signing bonus of 12 million prorated by the
percentage of tonnage of each participating city which is estimated to be $72,858 for the Town (Exhibit 1 page
3). However, that figure is based on 2008 data and the actual amount will be determined based on the year’s
tonnage ending August 4, 2011. We know our tonnage already went down between 2008 and 2009.

Signing  Requirements:
The Service Agreement with Wheelabrator (Exhibit 4 )provides that Contract Communities representing (a) at
least 51 of the population of the District and (b) at least 80 of the 2009 flow from the current ILA
communities must enter into the new ILA prior to December 3,1 2010. If enough communities sign on the new
ILA will become effective for a ten-year term on August 4, 201.1 If not enough cities sign then the ILA will not
become effective and the Town and the other ILA parties will have to find other arrangements for the disposal of
their solid waste or negotiate anew service agreement and ILA.
If the ILA it is signed by the County and Contract Communities representing 80% of the 2009 flow, the ILA will
become effective first as a two-year amendment into the Predecessor Agreement and beginning July 13, 2013 as
a separate agreement for a term of eight (8) years ILA Article 15, Paragraph 2.
As of November 17, 2010 10 municipalities (Exhibit 5) have decided to enter into the new ILA representing
46.5% of the District’s population and 44.4% of the solid waste of the district.

Changes to the ILA:
Three changes from the current system sought by the municipalities have been incorporated into the proposed
l. Conversion of the District from a dependent to an independent district in order to reduce Broward County
2.  Broader municipal representation on the Resource Recovery Board (the Board) which governs the
District and
The right for municipalities to review the terms of the executed version of the Service Agreement
between the District and Wheelabrator before being asked to sign the new ILA.
Right now the Town does not have a representative on the Board All parties including the Town will have a
representative on the Board under the new ILA which will meet twice a year Only 33% of members attending
will constitute a quorum. An eleven-member Executive Board with a quorum set at 5 members will be created
to handle the general matters of the District.
Under the negotiated Service Agreement the Service Fee which is only part of the tipping fee will be
significantly lower than the current fee The 2009 base Service Fee is $47.75 per ton plus a projected 12 per ton.
District fee to cover the District’s administrative costs for a total of 59.75 plus Pass-Through expenses. When
the Service Fee of $47.75 is adjusted for 2010 and 2011 according the formulas in the Agreement the total
tipping fee is projected to be around $66 (includes District Fee and a projected Pass-Through amount) which is a
reduction of about one-third from the current 2009 fee. The reduction in tipping fees is possible because in
part the debt incurred to build the plants have been retired.

The backup continues on with the pros and cons for signing on… we get a small signing bonus of $72,000 while larger cities will get millions…estimated savings in the 1st year $200,000…based on the 2009 waste disposal of  5,700 tons…When the Town’s recycling improves that savings will be reduced…and so will the tipping fee and service fees will increase under the ILA…Another big concern is the Pass-Throughs and adjustments which could substantially increase the service charges… An alternative is to go to another destination…forgo the signing bonus and the tipping fee will be an unknown…Still if the agreement goes through between the County and Wheelbrator those not parties to the new ILA can be charged more than those in ILA…We could go to another vendor as Pompano Beach and others have…This is followed by a public policy portion and the below recommendation…

RECOMMENDATION: Staff should do additional research to document how the cities that do not participate in the current ILA dispose of their waste and how those that have chosen not to participate in the new ILA plan to dispose of their waste stream and the costs they project. We also have many unanswered questions regarding the proposed ILA that require further review anal analysis.We will bring this information back to the Commission in December with a recommendation on how to proceed.

Full 103 page backup link below…

BC- Readers will remember this was a topic questioned by Candidate Sasser…and it will be interesting to see his take on it as Commissioner Sasser…

e. Sewer Rates (Town Manager).

Backup scanned …pages 1-8…

BC- This writer made a PRR for a letter that was sent out to south- end customers ..(see below)…There was to be one sent to Sea Ranch Club and SRLakes North Condos but we are told it was put on hold …for now…This writer still sees those 4 buildings being in “no-man’s land”…For years they paid the Town thinking the Town followed through on the direction given at the special meeting dealing with the annexation in 1998…(prev. posts)…This year they found out they were victims of a “ruse” of which few inside Town Hall were privy…Now the Town needs to decide if SRC/SRLN pay Pompano Beach directly once again…Essentially the 4 buildings are in the same position they were before the annexation with one big exception…They currently, as far as we can tell, are the only portion of LBTS without a sewer agreement in place… The sewers in front of the buildings we are informed are Pompano Beach sewers and Pompano Beach would be responsible for any repairs to the infrastructure …Any inkling to charge SRC/SRLN in arrears for any payments or for them to pay for the south-end infrastructure due to the benefit provided without their knowledge will in this writer’s opinion be political suicide for any candidate advocating it … (full disclosure…this writer lives in SRC)…These buildings decided the last two elections in LBTS and what really needs to happen…again in this writer’s opinion is to make it loud and clear no more such acts will be tolerated in town putting the blame clearly where it belongs…on the last two administrations and a certain member of the Commission who many think had full knowledge from the get-go that the direction was not enacted …

“Condos Merged Letter”…

BC- the archived backup on the sewer is on the Town website…link below…

f. Town Manager FY 2011 Performance Goals (Town Manager).

BC- The TM, who will not be at the roundtable said she would present revised performance goals after last week’s meeting to discuss priorities…the scan below is the revised goals … This writer still believes Government Efficiency needs to be at the top…as well as parking requirements being exempted downtown for restaurants …after last week’s P & Z meeting …


g. Parking Sponsorship Program (Assistant Town Manager Bud Bentley).

Backup- SUBJECT TITLE: Parking Sponsorship Program
EXPLANATION: The Commission has approved parking sponsorship by businesses in the past on a case-by
case basis. Under this arrangement the business pays for a number of parking spaces and posts signage
indicating customers can park there free of charge courtesy of the business.
We have a request from BankUnited to sponsor parking in front of their location at 227 East Commercial and we
would like to structure a trial period not only for BankUnited but also for other locations during which time we
would test different procedures and measure their effectiveness. Sponsored parking spaces would be open to
anyone and would not be restricted to customers of the sponsor.
After the trial period we would present a report with our recommendations for an ongoing program for
Commission approval. Once adopt we could market the program to the business community.
The Commission would need to approve the trial periods the Town Manager could set parking time limits and the
fee to be charged the sponsoring business. For example the time limit in front of BankUnited is four hours and
the Bank is interested in sponsoring parking for customers in the shop area. In a sponsorship program for the
Bank we would establish several 30-minute parking spaces in front of the Bank. The cost to the Bank to
participate would be the payment of loss of meter revenues which we would calculate based on current
utilization and the start-up expense for the meter signage.
RECOMMENDATION: We recommend the Commission approve a parking sponsorship program and
authorize the Town Manager to set parking time limits and establish the fee for sponsored parking spaces.

BC- I like the idea…and hope the Asst. TM will consider being on board with other innovative parking ideas such as the exemption for restaurants …to be proactive in jumpstarting business coming to LBTS…

h. Informal approval of FY 2011-2012 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application (Finance Director Doug Haag).

Backup- SUBJECT TITLE: Informal Approval of FY 2011/2012 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
EXPLANATION: Requesting informal approval of this grant application in the amount of $29,209 because it is due no later than
December 1, 2010. We will bring this back for formal approval at the December 7th meeting. The grant funds are
used to offset part of the costs of operating the senior center programs at Jarvis Hall. The Town has applied for
and received funding for this program for several years While we are requesting $29,209, the actual amount may
be different.
We will include matching funds for this grant in the FY2011/2012 budget process.



The meeting is open to the public…no public comments..Televised on Comcast Ch. 78/ Live-streamed on Town website and  both the backup and the meeting will be archived on the website as well…link…

Of Note the 2010/2011 Adopted LBTS Budget is also now on the Town website as well…

more to come…

Tags: , , , ,

Post Division