02/29/2000FIRE TASK FORCE MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
February 29, 2000
Present: Bill Horne Chair (non-voting)
Joe Calio Task Force Member
Joe Evich Task Force Member
Rowland Herald Task Force Member
George Krause Task Force Member
John Lee Task Force Member
Scott Nall Task Force Member
Bill Schwob Task Force Member
William Sherman Task Force Member
Jean Stuart Task Force Alternate
Duke Tieman Task Force Member
Doug Williams Task Force Member
Absent: Russ Kimball Task Force Member
Also Present: Margie Simmons Finance Director
Tina Wilson Budget Director
John Carassas Assistant City Attorney – arrived 3:20 p.m.
Cyndie Goudeau City Clerk
Sue Diana Assistant City Clerk
Brenda Moses Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. at City Hall.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order.
ITEM 2 – Approval of February 15, 2000, Meeting Minutes
Member Evich requested that sentence 4 on page 4, paragraph 3 of the minutes be changed to read: “Mr. Horne, on behalf of the City Manager, remarked the Task Force…”
Member Tieman moved to approve the minutes of the February 15, 2000, meeting as amended. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
ITEM 3 – Discuss Combining Part I and Part II of Report (City Manager in attendance)
Chair Horne said comments captured from the last meeting were incorporated into the draft of the report to be presented to the Commission. He noted Mr. Roberto has read the draft.
City Manager Michael Roberto thanked the Task Force for their efforts. He said he realizes a decision regarding funding the Fire Department’s five-year plan is a tough issue. Commitments
to certain types of programs sometimes tend to be driven by circumstance and government sometimes postpones necessities until they break down.
He said the City needs to make sure it performs the basic services really well; however, it also needs to look to the future to avoid operating as a reactionary government.
The City Manager said the Downtown is a huge economic asset that has been underutilized and one that can produce significant tax returns to the City. Because of this, he believed the
avenues coming into the Downtown need to be improved.
He said when he first looked at the Fire Department, he noticed there was not a consistent history of keeping up-to-date with the equipment. It was determined there was a capital need
for equipment such as aerial trucks, etc. He noted the City is currently negotiating with Clearwater Mall and discussions include the developer taking out the current fire station and
putting in a new one.
He noted public health and safety are important to the community and if these needs are not dealt with effectively, they are at the mercy of the yearly budget process. Unlike the Police
Department, the Fire Department is not eligible for federal grants. No dedicated revenue source exists to upgrade equipment, build stations, and ensure appropriate staffing levels.
Fifty percent (50%) of the General Fund budget is for public safety; the remainder for recreation centers, libraries, and road maintenance. The South Clearwater recreation center is
inadequate to meet the needs of the community. In North Greenwood, the School Board’s property is being used for recreational purposes. There will come a time when the School Board
requires use of their facility for other purposes and the lack of available recreation facilities to funnel children in a positive, constructive way could become a problem.
As Penny for Pinellas dollars are slated to fund 97% of needed projects with 3% unfunded, a dedicated revenue source is needed to fund the Fire Department’s needs. Tourism drives a
good portion of the economy in the City and the Commission has decided to focus on putting more money into the beach to generate $150 million in economic development projects. Mr. Roberto
felt people move to a particular City because they like the quality of life and expect a specific public health and safety level of service.
Mr. Roberto expressed concern the Task Force’s recommendations included a suggestion that the administration reprioritize Penny for Pinellas projects. Only 30% of the General Fund budget
comes from taxes; 70% is allocated to salaries. Government is attempting to correlate expenses to revenue streams. Staffing affects the level of service the City can provide. Newly
constructed fire stations and other projects require personnel. Absent a new revenue source, one area or group is competing against another for project funds. Tough decisions must
be made as one significant need is being balanced against another in the City.
Although the City has been successful finding other entities to fund some projects such as Jasmine Courts, without a dedicated revenue source such as a fire fee, the Fire Department’s
needs may not be realized. It is the City’s obligation to give the Fire Department the right equipment to do the job. Revenues generated from recent development projects such as IMR
Global, the Sunshine Mall, and other projects will not impact the tax base for 3 – 5 years. To suggest that the Commission figure out what to do without offering specific solutions
suggests that a fee or tax be imposed, or facilities be shut down. If projects are cut 10% - 15%, they may have to be eliminated entirely if they cannot be completed as originally intended.
Mr. Roberto said although the Task
Force has validated the Fire Department’s needs, he felt the Commission needs more specific recommendations from the Task Force.
It was noted at the last meeting, it was recommended as the administration has the details of each program on the Penny for Pinellas list, they should be able to reprioritize those
projects. Many variables such as the status of the partnership with the Coast Guard, the Clearwater Mall development, etc. also make it difficult for the Task Force to recommend how
to reprioritize those funds. It was remarked had taxes been raised over the years to ensure the level of service the City requires, this dilemma with the Fire Department would not be
an issue.
As previously noted, the Task Force is not suggesting that taxes be raised dollar for dollar to fund the Fire Department’s needs. It was remarked it is likely that citizens will have
to pay more taxes and the City must consider the potential for cost cutting or shifting/moving back projects in favor of the Fire Department’s needs, although perhaps over a longer period
of time. The Task Force has validated the Fire Department’s needs and made a recommendation to use Pinellas for Pinellas dollars for capital items and the balance from ad valorem taxes.
It was commented a fire fee cannot totally support the ongoing needs of the Fire Department. Too many uncertainties and variables regarding a fire fee exist to recommend it to the
Commission, including who would be exempted from paying the fee and to what extent.
A comment was made the Task Force’s recommendation that the Commission reprioritize the Penny for Pinellas list is in essence placing the task back on the Commission and lacks feasible
solutions. Other members disagreed. It was noted that a previous suggestion had been made to allocate $4 million of Penny for Pinellas dollars for the Fire Department.
It was suggested revenues generated from development on Sand Key should have been used for construction and operation of a Sand Key fire station. It was felt the Fire Department should
get their fair share of Penny for Pinellas dollars. It was questioned if the administration has approached the churches, nursing homes, etc. that are currently exempted from paying
taxes regarding their willingness to pay for a fire fee. In response to a question, Member Herald felt that substantial revenues can be realized from those nonpayers over the five-year
timeframe. He said the maintenance costs associated with a fire fee in the first year are estimated at under $20,000.
Mr. Roberto said although some entities will complain about a fire fee, it can legally be imposed. The Florida Supreme Court has upheld its legality as it clearly provides a relative
value of service to enhance real property. In response to a question, Mr. Roberto said the Commission would decide the fire fee exemptions. The 25% buydown costs would come from the
General Fund. It was suggested if Option 7C (75% from ad valorem; 25% from a fire fee) is adopted by the Task Force using $4 million from Penny with a 25% buydown, precedence set in
other cities could be used to identify properties to be exempted. It was noted the public needs to be educated about a fire fee.
It was remarked that staff had been asked a number of times if they had any specifics regarding funding sources. One member said last week was the first time staff indicated the Task
Force should provide the administration with more specific funding alternatives. It was commented the Task Force was charged with validating the Fire
Department’s needs and finding alternative funding sources, not rubber stamping a fire fee. He said a fire fee and fees that provide minimal revenue were the only alternative funding
sources brought forward by staff. He said if it was staff’s position that a fire fee was the only alternative funding source that could be brought forward, then the Task Force should
have received additional information. The Task Force has reviewed information and after months of discussion made a determination.
One member said he was originally a proponent of a fire fee, but now feels the disproportionate rate to residential homeowners is unfair, regressive, and too many unknowns exist.
Chair Horne said at a number of meetings staff offered realistic, available options and the Task Force reviewed them. Staff felt they supplied appropriate information relating to alternative
funding sources. Mr. Horne said the Task Force was informed as soon as information was available regarding negotiations for development of stations, etc. Mr. Horne said the Commission
appointed the Task Force to provide “fresh eyes” on the issue of a fire fee. He said it was not his intent to supply the Task Force with an agenda or influence them regarding their
decision. It was commented the Task Force did not consider potential policy decisions as part of their task during the process but now recognizes the Commission expected the Task Force
to recommend specific funding alternatives.
The City Manager encouraged the Task Force to submit other major alternative funding sources. He said the City must abide by the legal parameters regarding imposition of fees, etc.
He said capital issues can be dealt with over a longer period of time. The concern is the operational side. Construction of a fire station requires 14 people with related benefits
and ongoing annual costs that will increase. If the answer is just to raise taxes, it becomes a tough decision, and requires giving consideration to not doing some projects. He felt
a tax increase over a 4-5 year period is not the solution. A fire fee appears to be the best dedicated revenue source to resolve the issue. A tax increase often tends to get lost
in the overall General Fund instead of being dedicated to fund a particular issue.
Staff and Chair Horne were complimented for their efforts. It was remarked the Chair did not impose his opinions on the Task Force, but merely solicited opinions and summarized them.
It was questioned if the Task Force wishes to revisit any previous recommendations. It was remarked the Task Force unanimously validated the needs of the Fire Department and is comfortable
with their analysis.
The City Manager said although the Commission was expecting a final report in January, the Task Force should feel comfortable in providing their final report to the Commission. He noted
staff will begin the budgeting process soon and would appreciate as much lead-time as possible in dealing with Fire Department funding issues. It was remarked estimated increases in
assessment values of property and new construction that has taken place were not included in the information provided. The Fire Department did include inflationary and salary increases.
Member Herald felt staff addressed many fire fee concerns by proposing a budget that includes $4 million of Penny for Pinellas funds, three-quarters of the balance from the General
Fund, and one-quarter from a fire fee with a 25% buydown. That option resulted in $85 a year for a $100,000 homeowner and seemed to be the most
cost efficient and the least expensive in the form of a tax or fee increase. Fire prevention fees were anticipated to generate $300,000 - $350,000 a year until compliance increases.
It was remarked that other funding options such as bonding capital items were not fully explored. Finance Director Margie Simmons said the five-year plan assumes that facilities would
be bonded for 3 years and those costs were taken into consideration. Vehicle costs would be borrowed over five years. It was remarked that one of the reasons some members are leaning
toward Penny for Pinellas dollars to fund the five-year plan is that one-third of it is paid by tourists. It was commented that the County pays the City 15% of the Fire Department’s
total expenditures submitted regardless of how the City pays for those expenditures. It was felt that taxpayers are willing to pay more taxes for necessary items than for “nice to have”
items.
Staff will provide the Task Force a list of the timelines for each Penny for Pinellas project. Mr. Roberto requested if the Task Force believes a tax increase is one method of generating
the operating costs required by the Fire Department’s five-year plan, that their report strongly highlight that decision. It was suggested that further discussion regarding Option 7c
can be included on the agenda at the next meeting.
ITEM 4 – Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 5:09 p.m.