Tuesday, November 26, 2001 at 7: 00 P. M.

The meeting was called to order at 7: 00 p. m. by Mayor Capellini on the above date in
the City Commission Chambers, City Hall.

Mayor Capellini stated that the purpose of this meeting is to satisfy the Broward
Delegation as requested on Tuesday, November 6, 2001, that the City of Deerfield
Beach establish an annexation policy, specifically Representative John P. "Jack" Seiler
and Senator Steve Geller

Roll Call:
Present: Commissioner Gwyndolen Clarke-Reed
Commissioner Steve Gonot
Commissioner Amadeo Trinchitella -Absent
Vice Mayor Peggy Noland
Mayor Albert Capellini, P. E.

Also Present: Larry Deetjen, City Manager
Charles Seaman, Assistant City Attorney
Ada Graham-Johnson, City Clerk


COMMENTS: Commission to consider establishing an annexation policy.
Mayor Capellini stated that as directed, Andrew Maurodis, City Attorney, has reviewed
the Broward Delegation Annexation Policy August 2001, and has responded by
cover of Memorandum dated November 26, 2001, which he read.
In addition, Mayor Capellini requested that Ada Graham-Johnson, City Clerk, read
correspondence that was received from the elected officials who were unable to attend
tonight's meeting due to having to attend a special legislative session in Tallahassee.

Mrs. Graham-Johnson read correspondence that was received from 1) Senator Debby
P. Sanderson, dated November 26, 2001 to Mayor Capellini and Commissioners,
Subject: Annexation. 2) Mark Weissman, Representative, District 90, dated November
26, 2001, to Mayor and Commissioners. 3) Kristin D. Jacobs, Vice Chair, Board of
County Commissioners to Representative Stacy Ritter, dated November 19, 2001.

Continuing, Mayor Capellini stated that it was requested that he attend the annexation
meeting that was held in Coral Springs on Tuesday, November 6, 2001 and issue a
statement as to the City's position, however, the Commission in its entirety has not
formulated their exact position. Although, they have studied the annexation policy, and
hired consultants in 1997; if annexation becomes mandatory it would be the City's
desire to do so in a phased, organized and financially secured manner, so as to not
impede the services or burden the current residents of Deerfield Beach with
unnecessary cost..

Additionally, Mayor Capellini stated that a report was prepaired on November 17, 2001
by the City's consultant, Teicher and Associates regarding annexation and financial
implications of annexation. The report outlined the areas that the City should and
should not annex. Also included was a letter from the City Attorney, dated January 25,
1978, recommending that the City annex the same parcels of land that the Alvarez Bill
has proposed. At which time, the parcels were known as areas 1, 2 and 3.

MOTION was made by Commissioner Gonot to support the Bill, recommended by
Senator Steve Geller, to annex the areas of Bonnie Loch, Tedder, Tallman Pines, with
the exclusion of Pompano Highlands.

Commissioner Gonot stated that approximately three weeks ago Commissioner
Trinchitella was appointed the City's representative for the County's Annexation Board.
And he agreed to support the agreement recommended by Senator Steve Geller
because the two cities Pompano Beach and Deerfield Beach could not reach an
agreement, therefore, Senator Geller was called as the mediator and the
aforementioned bill was agreed upon.

In response to Commissioner Gonot's comments, Mayor Capellini stated that the City of
Deerfield Beach did not request Senator Geller to act as a mediator because doing so
would violate the Sunshine Law.

Commissioner Clarke-Reed stated that she as well as the other Commissioners, are not
aware of what transpired at the annexation meeting in which Commissioner Trinchitella
attended as liaison for the City of Deerfield Beach.

Mayor Capellini stated that Senator Geller did not propose a bill but an amendment to a
bill that was proposed by lobbyist Russ Klenet, Consultant for the City Pompano Beach,
and has been unsuccessful on two occasions with his plan. Further, Mayor Capellini
stated that Senator Geller does not represent the City of Deerfield Beach. However, the
City's representatives, Representative Weissman and Senator Sanderson are in
opposition to the amendment proposed by Senator Geller. The reasons they oppose
the amendment is because; 1) it does not allow the people to vote their choice of city.
2) In 1978, Sample Road was the delineation because it would be almost impossible to
serve the people south of Sample Road, especially if it is jagged through various
communities. 3) It does not allow for phased annexation and an interlocal agreement to
be completed signed and approved by all parties.

Furthermore, Mayor Capellini stated that the Broward County League of Cities have
adopted a policy to support annexation only with the vote of the people; therefore, there
would be no forced annexation.

Commissioner Gonot stated that the Alvarez Bill only gave the unincorporated residents
north of Sample Road a choice to vote what City they wish to be annexed into. And that
there is a problem with the principle of the Broward League of Cities in regards to being
inflexible. The unincorporated residents south of Sample Road would be
disenfranchised because the amendment to add them to the Alvarez Bill was dropped
by Representative Weissman, which was brought to his attention.

Commissioner Clarke-Reed disagreed with Commissioner Gonot, and said that the City
has always indicated its desire to annex north of Sample Road and not south of
Sample. Therefore, any decisions that were to be made north of Sample Road should
have been presented to the Commission and the final decision decided along with the
representatives. And is uncertain as to why Senator Geller was able to make such a
decision without informing the entire City Commission.

Mayor Capellini stated that the issue is "cherry picking" and the ad valorem tax value of
the various areas are identified as D: Meadows, Woodsetter, Bonnie Loch; E: Pompano
Estates, Tedder and B: Pompano Highlands. And said that the property that Russ
Klenet, City of Pompano Beach Lobbyist, has recommended not be annexed into the
City of Deerfield Beach is B, Pompano Highlands. This area is worth approximately
$170,000 million in ad valorem tax value and is more than the remainder of the land that
would be annexed into the City. So, financially and responsibly if the City of Deerfield
Beach considers annexing an area it would be this area.

Additionally, Mayor Capellini stated that he and Mr. Deetjen met with Roger Deejarlais,
County Administrator, who indicated that $143,000 million has been allocated for the
annexed area to improve the infrastructure. This is in addition, to the improvements on
the north end west of Dixie Highway that is scheduled to begin. Therefore, he agrees
with the Alvarez Bill because it allows for phased annexation, and that an interlocal
agreement be completed, signed and approved by all parties prior to annexation, Mr.
Klenet's amendment to the bill does not allow the aforementioned. Mayor Capellini
further stated that we live in a democracy and believe that the people should be allowed
to vote for their government.

Commissioner Gonot stated that Item 9 on the Broward Legislation Delegation Public
Hearing Agenda was a competing bill of the Alvarez Bill and was also approved for the
voluntary annexation of Pompano Highlands into the City of Pompano Beach. He
further stated that the Pompano Beach Highlands Homeowners Association along with
the Crime Watch Group is representing Pompano Highlands and have submitted a bill
to the Broward Delegation for voluntary annexation into the City of Pompano Beach,
which must also be respected. Therefore, he asked that the Commission not be
supportive of the Alvarez Bill because it includes the area of Pompano Highlands, and it
would not be consistent with the policy of allowing the people the right to choose.
Therefore, Pompano Highlands must be separated from the Alvarez Bill.

Commissioner Clarke-Reed disagreed and said that the City Commission must include
the Pompano Highlands area in the Alvarez Bill. She further stated that if the Broward
Delegation has approved another bill, they must decide prior to forwarding to the State
Legislature, which bill they support. If not, it is likely that the State Legislature may not
approve both bills due to them being displeased with Broward County's decision
regarding annexation.

Mayor Capellini said that the State is allowing the local government to make the
decision of annexing the subject areas by 2005, if they do not decide, the State would
do so.

Vice Mayor Noland stated that the children in the subject area currently attend the
schools in the Deerfield Beach area, Deerfield Middle and Deerfield Beach Elementary.
And spoke in favor of allowing the people to make the choice to vote for the city they
wish to be annexed into.

Commissioner Gonot stated that he previously brought this subject matter up in June,
nevertheless, there were no public hearings held regarding annexation. They
telephoned many of the homeowners association presidents in his District which have
expressed opposition to annexing the subject area. They said that the City had recently
completed a tough budget and prior to annexing the Crystal Lake area the City had a $4
million surplus that has now been depleted to zero. Although, Crystal Lake was revenue
positive, there remains out-of-pocket cost for the City which annexation occurred in

Continuing, Commissioner Gonot asked what would be the City's financial impact if it
provided services to the unincorporated areas that are contained in the Alvarez Bill?

Larry Deetjen, City Manager, replied that the City Commission commissioned the
Tischler Report in 1996. Tischler and Associates performed fiscal impact analysis and
recommended phased annexation. They are one of the leading firms in the Country
and performs a lot of work in Florida and Arizona. They recommended that Crystal
Lake be annexed first along with Park Ridge, which was a successful strategy. They
indicated that the Pompano Highlands was a revenue neutrality and recommended it be
next, as opposed to the middle section, Woodsetter, Tedder, Tallman Pines, Meadows,

Further, Mr. Deetjen read the Analysis of Results and Implications of Annexation of the
Tischler Report indicating that "a slow pattern of annexation from west to east after the
annexation of Zone 1 is preferable. 1) Although no outcome is positive primarily
because of the negative (fiscally) impacts of Zones 2, 3 .. 2) Although, a slow
pattern of annexation may be seen as delaying the inevitable negative fiscal
consequences, it will allow the City some time to possibly reconfigure its revenue
structure to better accommodate the future."
He said that the City has taken the first
step by adopting the Fire Protection fee as well as negotiating with the County the
construction and financing of capital improvements. "3) Overall, the deficits generated
are not that significant when compared to the City's current budget of approximately
$27.2 million. For example, under the Slow Trends scenario, a deficit of $537, 000 is
only 2 percent of the City's budget. With proper planing, as alluded to in point 2, this
can be absorbed. 4) Given the current political climate in Broward County, with
annexation of County land a growing concern and soon to be under mandate, the fiscal
results present a clear argument for the annexation of Zone 1 by Deerfield Beach rather
than by another City. "
Mr. Deetjen said that this was done, however, when Zone 1 was
done, the City requested the landfill and incinerator as well as Waste Management
Corporate Headquarter, FP& L Substation because of the high tax base, however they
were all gerrymander out with the exception of the Crossroad Shopping Center. There
still remains a tax base in the area northwest of Sample Road that requires continued
negotiations on the part of the Commission for corporate headquarters such as Waste
Management and FP& L.

Commissioner Gonot asked if the City continued to annexed additioned areas with
negative revenue impact how would it fund said cost?

Mr. Deetjen replied that the Alvarez Bill requires the approval of an interlocal agreement
with the County prior to the Bill being adopted. This allows the County a timeframe to
negotiate with the City regarding police, fire, public works etc. He said that the City
would not be responsible for utilities, sewer and water, but will continue to be a County
function due to the bonds not being advertised as well as covenants in the bonds. Also,
garbage would continue to be a service by the County due to the preexisting contract,
the language allows Waste Management or BFI to continue to serve five (5) years after
annexation. Mr. Deetjen further stated that he and the City's management team have
met on this issue and will continue to meet on this issue. He said that he is concern
about the finances and provided the Commission with the positives if the City annexed
the subject areas as recommended in the Alvarez Bill. 1) Extending the borders with
Lighthouse Point to Sample Road the City would increase its interaction with the City of
Lighthouse Point. 2) The North Broward Park is a large park with multiple football fields,
baseball and community room. 3) Substation for District 9, is a recently new building.
4) The commercial tax base on Federal Highway. 5) There are active neighborhood
associations. 6) Phase approached.

Overall, 60% of the City's budget is Police and Fire, which would be the same for the
proposed annexed area. He said that currently the unincorporated area pays $250 for
fire rescue fee, which would assist with cost for fire services. In addition, the City would
be entitled to additional CDBG funds that would assist with capital investment that
would not be obtained from the County.
In conclusion, Mr. Deetjen stated that by annexing the subject area it would not be
revenue neutrality, nor was it in 1997, but is positive that it will become an asset to the
City, the impact or percentage must be placed in perspective.

Commissioner Clarke-Reed stated that there are few unincorporated areas annexed
that are revenue neutrality because the County's lack of infrastructure needs.
Therefore, by entering into an interlocal agreement with the County with the essential
points to assure that the monies needed to improve the areas would be bound for the

Commissioner Gonot stated that there is a history with the County not providing
revenue that is needed for infrastructure. Although, the City Manager has indicated his
long-term hope is that the property in the Alvarez Bill would be an asset to the City,
taxes would increase for the residents of Deerfield Beach to cover the revenue shortfall.
Additionally, due to the September 11, 2001 devastation, the Country economy as well
as the City revenue has been placed in jeopardy, in that the Property Appraiser have
notified the City that some of the property value may decrease, which may mean a
possible increase in millage. In addition, the telecommunication bill has been adopted,
which no longer allow the money to come directly to the local cities, but to the State
indicating a possible estimate of an 8% short fall.

Mayor Capellini stated that Commissioner Gonot is in favor of Mr. Klenet's amendment
to the Bill, property D and E, which results in approximately $84,000 million and $64,000
million in tax value. If the City agreed to Mr. Klenet's recommendation, it would annex a
lower area with an additional shortfall in the City's budget. As compared to annexing
area B, $170,000 million, would increase the City's revenue by 100% and the population
by 50%, thereby reducing the shortfall. Therefore, he is in favor of the Alvarez Bill that
allows for phasing.

Commissioner Gonot suggested that the Commission not take any action and to table
the item.

Mayor Capellini stated that the Bill the Commission is supporting states no area would
be annexed into the City unless the interlocal agreement between the County and City
is approved.

Mr. Deetjen read the language on Page 4, Section 5. of the Bill, "An interlocal
agreement shall be developed between the governing bodies of Broward County and
the annexing municipality and executed prior to the effective date of the annexation as
provided for in Section 4. " Additionally, when the Crystal Lake area was annexed, the
proposed infrastructure was to be constructed and financed on a shared basis, with the
City sharing 1/ 3 of the cost. However, Mr. Desjarlais, County Administrator, has
indicated that the County has allocated $143,000 million and that there would be no
sharing cost requested. Further, there would be spirited negotiations regarding Crystal
Lake and fire rescue facilities, sidewalks, lights etc.

Commissioner Gonot withdrew his motion.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Clarke-Reed and Seconded by Vice Mayor
Noland to support the North County Bill 11A, d/ b/ a Alvarez Bill (Resolution No.
2001/ 174). Roll Call: YEAS: Commissioner Clarke-Reed, Vice Mayor Noland and
Mayor Capellini. NAYS: Commissioner Gonot.

City Manager
No Report.
City Attorney
-No Report.
City Clerk
-No Report.
Commissioner Clarke-Reed
-No Report
Commissioner Gonot
-No Report
Commissioner Trinchitella -Absent.
Vice Mayor Noland
-No Report.
Mayor Capellini -No Report.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8: 00 p. m.