City of Margate Fire Rescue Assessment Program

Transcription

1 City of Margate Fire Rescue Assessment Program April 2013 Presented by: Government Services Group, Inc Mahan Drive, Suite 250 Tallahassee, FL (850) (850) (fax)

2 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION... 1 SERVICE DESCRIPTION... 3 ASSESSABLE COSTS CALCULATIONS... 7 COMPUTATION OF FIRE ASSESSMENTS OUTSTANDING ISSUES List of Appendices Appendix A Situation Found Codes & Descriptions Appendix B Fixed Property Use Codes & Descriptions Appendix C Broward County s Property Use (DOR) Codes and Descriptions Appendix D Broward County Property Appraiser s Building Improvement Codes and Descriptions Government Services Group, Inc. i

3 List of Tables Table 1 City of Margate FY Adopted Fire Assessment Rates... 1 Table 2 Fire Rescue Department s Facilities Physical Location... 3 Table 3 Staffing by Fire Rescue Station... 4 Table 4 Margate Fire Rescue Organizational Chart... 4 Table 5 Fire Rescue Department Apparatus and Capacity... 5 Table 6 Response Protocol... 6 Table 7 Margate Fire Rescue Department Fiscal Year Assessment Budget... 9 Table 8 Fire Rescue Assessable Cost Calculations Proforma Budget (FY through FY 17-18) Table 9 Fire Rescue Incidents and Proportion of Calls by Category Table 10 Cost Apportionment Table 11 Parcel Apportionment within Property Use Categories Table 12 Parcel Apportionment Residential Property Use Categories Table 13 Parcel Apportionment Non-Residential Property Use Category Table 14 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (100% of Assessable Costs) Table 15 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (90% of Assessable Costs) Table 16 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (75.95% of Assessable Costs) Table 17 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (73% of Assessable Costs) Government Services Group, Inc. ii

4 Introduction Government Services Group, Inc. (GSG) specializes in government finance and taxation issues by working with cities, counties, special districts and state agencies to develop unique funding and service delivery solutions for critical infrastructure and service needs. GSG has developed extensive experience in structuring and implementing alternative revenue sources in Florida. The City of Margate (City) has engaged the professional services and specialized assistance of GSG to assist the City with updating the City s fire rescue assessment program for Fiscal Year Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A. (NG&N) was retained to provide legal guidance on this project. This document is the City of Margate s Fire Rescue Assessment Memorandum (Assessment Memorandum), which is one of the project deliverables specified in the Scope of Services. The City currently imposes fire assessments within the incorporated area of the City based on a prior study conducted by GSG in 1997 and updated May 2000 and April Table 1 illustrates the fire assessment rates imposed for Fiscal Year These assessment rates generated approximately $6,878,371 in revenues for Fiscal Year Table 1 City of Margate FY Adopted Fire Assessment Rates Residential Property Rate Per Dwelling Unit Use Categories Residential $225 Non-Residential Property Use Categories Building Classification (in square foot ranges) Commercial Industrial/ Warehouse Institutional Nursing Homes 1,999 $382 $66 $2,219 $382 2,000-3,499 $763 $131 $4,438 $763 3,500-4,999 $1,335 $228 $7,766 $1,335 5,000-9,999 $1,907 $326 $11,094 $1,907 10,000-19,999 $3,813 $652 $22,187 $3,813 20,000-29,999 $7,626 $1,303 $44,373 $7,626 30,000-39,999 $11,439 $1,954 $66,559 $11,439 40,000-49,999 $15,252 $2,605 $88,745 $15,252 50,000 $19,064 $3,256 $110,931 $19,064 The work effort to update the fire rescue special assessment program required the calculation of assessment rates and classifications required to fully fund the identified assessable costs to provide fire rescue services within the City. This work effort required the identification of the full costs of fire rescue services (minus all revenues) and the allocation of these costs to properties that benefit from the provision of such fire rescue services. Government Services Group, Inc. 1

5 OBJECTIVES The City has retained GSG and NG&N to update the City s existing fire rescue special assessment program. The fire rescue special assessments must meet the Florida case law requirements for a valid special assessment, which are: The service provided must confer a special benefit to the property being assessed; and The costs assessed must be fairly and reasonably apportioned among the properties that receive the special benefit. The objectives of the work effort to update the City s fire rescue special assessment program were to: Review the fire rescue services that the City is currently providing; Determine the full costs of providing fire rescue services within the City; Review such final cost determination with the City to confirm that all elements provide the requisite special benefit to the assessed property; Determine the relative benefit anticipated to be derived by categories of property use within the City from the projected delivery of fire rescue services; Recommend the fair and reasonable apportionment of assessable costs among benefited parcels within each category of property use; and Calculate assessment rates and parcel classifications for Fiscal Year APPORTIONMENT METHODOLOGY The calculation of assessment rates for fire rescue services is dependent on three separate, but interconnected pieces of data. The first data element is the identification of the full cost of providing fire rescue services through the development of a pro-forma budget and a determination of the assessable costs of providing such services within such pro-forma budget. The second data element is the analysis of service delivery data, segregated to property use categories (i.e., fire rescue call data). The third and final data component is a comprehensive analysis of all property use categories within the City to determine which parcels receive a special benefit from the provision of fire rescue services and to identify a fair and reasonable method of apportioning the assessable costs among all benefited parcels within each property use category. The recommended fire rescue services apportionment methodology allocates assessable costs on the basis of the anticipated demand for fire rescue services by categories of real property use as identified on the real property assessment roll prepared for the levy of ad valorem taxes. The assessable costs to provide fire rescue services are allocated among real property use categories. This allocation is based upon the historical demand for these services as reflected by the fire rescue incident data that is reported to the State Fire Marshal. Government Services Group, Inc. 2

6 Service Description The City of Margate (City) provides fire rescue services on a citywide basis including providing contractual fire rescue services for the City of Coconut Creek. The services provided by the Margate Fire Rescue Department include fire suppression, fire prevention, building inspections and plans review, fire investigations, public fire safety education, disaster management, rescue, emergency medical services with transport, dive rescue team, and response to other emergencies as needed. The City of Margate s Fire Rescue Department has an ISO rating of one, which signifies the highest level of service provided. The Margate Fire Rescue Department has four stations and operates a rescue unit out of the Rowe Community Center between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Table 2 identifies the Fire Rescue Department s physical location address for each facility within the City s service area. Table 2 Fire Rescue Department s Facilities Physical Location Station Address Station Park Drive Margate, Florida Station Rock Island Road Margate, Florida Station Sol Press Boulevard Coconut Creek, Florida Station NW 24 th Street Margate, Florida Rowe Center 900 NW 43 rd Avenue, Coconut Creek, Florida Source: City of Margate The City contracts with the City of Coconut Creek to provide fire protection and EMS services within the corporate city limits of Coconut Creek, as well as the Seminole Trust Property, and the Hillsboro Pines/Hillsboro Ranches area. The City is compensated for these contractual services; these calls were not included in the study. The City has entered into a statewide mutual aid agreement to provide assistance during emergencies and disasters. The City has entered into a consolidated mutual aid agreement with the surrounding Broward County cities for mutual assistance on emergency scenes. There is no monetary compensation for this agreement. Tables 3 and 4 describe the Fire Rescue Department s staffing of each fire station and the organizational structure. These tables are used to develop the Administrative Factor described in the Development of Factors section of the Assessment Update Memorandum. Government Services Group, Inc. 3

7 Table 3 Staffing by Fire Rescue Station Station Apparatus Staffing Station 18 Engine 18 1 Captain, 1 Driver Engineer Rescue 18 1 Lieutenant, 2 Paramedic/FF Station 58 Quint 58 1 Captain, 1 Driver Engineer, 1 Paramedic/FF Rescue 58 1 Lieutenant, 1 Paramedic/FF Station 94 Quint 94 1 Captain, 1 Driver Engineer, 1 Paramedic/FF Rescue 94 1 Lieutenant, 1 Paramedic/FF Station 98 Rowe Center (9 am 9 pm) 1 Source: City of Margate Engine 98 Rescue 98 Battalion 98 Rescue 50 1 Captain, 1 Driver Engineer, 1 Paramedic/FF 1 Lieutenant, 1 Paramedic/FF 1 Battalion Chief 1 Lieutenant, 2 Paramedic/FF Table 4 Margate Fire Rescue Organizational Chart Acting Fire Chief Rick Donahue Office Specialist II Susan Coyle Medical Director Wayne Lee, MD Office Specialist II Debbie Dvora Logistics Division Chief R Stevens Operations Division Chief Finance/Administration Division Chief Vacant Planning/Prevention Division Chief D. Booker Training Officer Captain Henbest EMS Captain Captain Villar Logistics Tech (PT) Vacant Part-time Inspector Kevin Wilson Battalion Chiefs (3) Captains (15) Part-time Inspector D. Scholl Rescue Lieutenants (18) Driver/Engineers (15) Firefighter/Paramedics (51) 1 Rescue 50 returns to Station 98 after 9 pm. Government Services Group, Inc. 4

8 Table 5 lists the location of all of the fire rescue apparatus and the corresponding fire flow or pumping capacity for each apparatus. This table was used to determine the square footage cap for non-residential properties, which was utilized in calculating non-residential fire rescue updated assessment rates. Table 5 Fire Rescue Department Apparatus and Capacity Station Apparatus Fire Flow (Gallons per Minute) Station 18 Engine 18 1,500 GPM Rescue 18 Station 58 Quint 58 1,500 GPM Rescue 58 Station 94 Quint 94 1,500 GPM Rescue 94 Station 98 Engine 98 1,250 GPM Rescue 98 Battalion 98 Rowe Center Rescue 50 Reserves 1 Reserve Quint 1,250 GPM 4 Reserve Engines 1,250 GPM each Source: City of Margate The current pumping capacity is defined as the combined amount of water that apparatus in the Fire Department can pump to a first alarm, non-residential fire. As outlined by Table 5, the pumping capacity for all primary apparatus of the Fire Department is 5,750 gallons per minute. Accordingly, based on National Fire Protection Association firefighting standards for fire flow, the Fire Department currently has sufficient fire flow capacity to provide service coverage in the event of a structure fire involving 97,700 square feet. 2 Therefore it is reasonable and appropriate to place a cap on the square footage of nonresidential structures of 97,700 square feet. Table 6 illustrates the Fire Rescue Response Protocol. Typical response protocol during major incidents requires one (1) engine and one (1) rescue vehicle to be kept available and centrally located. If additional assistance is required, the City utilizes mutual aid. 2 Source: National Fire Protection Association, NFPA 220 Standards on Types of Building Construction: Fire-Flow Guide. Government Services Group, Inc. 5

9 Table 6 Response Protocol Type of Call Residential Structure Fire Commercial Structure Fire Fire Alarm Medical Vehicle Fire Vehicle Accident Brush or Dumpster Fire Source: City of Margate Minimum Response Apparatus Two Engines, One Ladder, Two Rescue Vehicles, One Command Vehicle, Safety Officer Three Engines, One Ladder, Two Rescue Vehicles, One Command Vehicle, One Safety Officer, One CERT One Engine One Rescue Vehicle One Engine, One Rescue Vehicle One Engine, One Rescue Vehicle, One Command Vehicle One Engine Government Services Group, Inc. 6

10 Assessable Costs Calculations FEES AND REVENUES In October 2010, the City of Margate and the City of Coconut Creek entered into an interlocal agreement for providing the delivery of emergency medical and fire protection services by the Department within Coconut Creek. The contract became effective on October 1, 2010 and provides for the City of Margate to provide automatic aid to the City of Coconut Creek until September 30, The total contract amount is $25,437,099 for four years. The City of Margate has agreed to provide ALS/BLS transport services to the citizens of Coconut Creek on the same basis that such services are provided to the citizens of the City of Margate. Pursuant to the contract, the City of Coconut Creek is reimbursed for the first $500,000 of the fees collected from Coconut Creek residents for ALS/BLS transport services. Thereafter, the City of Margate will reimburse the City of Coconut Creek at a rate of fifty percent of such fees. DEVELOPMENT OF FACTORS FIRE RESCUE V. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES In June 2000, litigation over the City of North Lauderdale fire rescue assessment program resulted in a decision by the Fourth District Court of Appeals in the case of SMM Properties, Inc. v. City of North Lauderdale, (the North Lauderdale case). The Fourth District Court of Appeals concluded that Emergency Medical Services (EMS) did not provide a special benefit to property. The Court, however, reaffirmed that fire suppression, fire prevention, fire/building inspections and first response medical services do provide a special benefit to property. To address these concerns, GSG developed a methodology that removed the costs associated with emergency medical services. This method of splitting the fire and EMS portions of a consolidated public safety department s budget was recently upheld by the Fourth District Court of Appeals in July 2010 in Desiderio Corporation, et al. vs. The City of Boynton Beach, Florida, et al., 39 So.3d 487 (Fla. 4 th DCA 2010). The proposed Fiscal Year fire rescue line item assessable cost calculations were allocated between fire rescue and emergency medical services as a result of the Florida Supreme Court s opinion in City of North Lauderdale v. SMM Properties that emergency medical services (above the level of first response) do not provide a special benefit to property. Accordingly, the City s fire rescue costs were split from emergency medical service costs based on the following general guidelines. Government Services Group, Inc. 7

11 DIRECT ALLOCATIONS To the extent that certain line items could be allocated directly between fire and EMS, direct allocations were made. For example, all costs associated with Firefighters Supplemental Compensation and fire hose replacement were entirely allocated to fire, while EMS Licensure Expense and Medical Director costs were entirely allocated to EMS. ADMINISTRATIVE FACTOR Certain line items were allocated between fire and EMS based on an Administrative Factor. The Administrative Factor is derived by creating a ratio between non-ems or fire personnel and total combat personnel. This methodology resulted in a factor for the City of 65.4% for fire service costs. The percentage was then applied to administrative line items to allocate the costs between fire costs or EMS costs. As an example, the administrative factor of 65.4% for fire service costs was used to calculate line items such as salaries and benefits to determine the fire costs associated with the provided service. Similarly, the Administrative Factor was applied to operating expenditures such as Maintenance - Structures and Office Supplies to determine the fire service costs for these line items. OPERATIONAL FACTOR Other assessable cost line items may also be allocated between fire and EMS based on an Operational Factor. The Operational Factor is derived by creating a ratio between EMS calls and non-ems (i.e., fire) calls. The ratio is then applied to operational line items to allocate the costs. To develop the Operational Factor for the City, GSG obtained fire rescue incident data identifying the number of fire rescue calls made to property categories within the City over a one year period. City fire rescue incident data, as reported to the State Fire Marshal for the calendar year 2012, was used to determine the demand for fire rescue services. For calendar year 2012, the City had 1,973 non-ems calls out of a total 7,688 fire rescue calls or a 25.66% operational fire factor. This ratio was applied to certain budget line items such as Gas, Oil & Vehicle Maintenance. ASSESSABLE COST CALCULATIONS The assessable cost calculations for Fiscal Year are based on the full cost of the fire assessment program for Fiscal Years through (5-year average). The following assumptions for the purpose of this Assessment Memorandum were applied. The five-year fire assessable budget was developed by using the proposed Fiscal Year Fire Rescue Department budget and applying the appropriate factors to each line item to develop Fiscal Year assessable budget. Unless more accurate information was available, for each fiscal year a 3% annual increase was applied across all Personnel Expenditures; a 2% annual increase was applied to Operational Expenditures, Revenues remained constant and Debt Services and Capital Expenditures were the actual expenditures. Government Services Group, Inc. 8

12 Revenues are shown as a reduction of the total projected expenditures for each fiscal year, thereby reducing the total assessable costs for that year. Revenues are comprised of revenues received from fire inspection and permit fees and firefighter supplemental were allocated directly to fire and an operational factor was applied to the City of Coconut Creek revenues. Ambulance Transportation fees were allocated directly to EMS. The line item Statutory Discount under Miscellaneous Assessment Expenditures reflects a 95% collection of the Fire Assessment to cover the 4% statutory discount allowed by the Uniform Method and 1% reserve for under collection. Accordingly, the statutory discount is budgeted at 5% of the total assessable costs. The line item Study and Annual Maintenance Costs under Miscellaneous Assessment Expenditures is the reimbursement to the City for the cost of conducting the assessment study and annual maintenance of the assessment program. These costs are reimbursable through the assessment program. Pursuant to section , Florida Statutes, the tax collector may enter into an agreement with the local government for reimbursement of necessary administrative costs incurred from the collection of the non-ad valorem assessment. Accordingly, if any such fee(s) is charged, the fee may be recouped as an add-on to the total assessable costs for the year. The line item Collection Costs (TC) under Miscellaneous Assessment Expenditures reflects reimbursement for the collection costs associated with the non-ad valorem assessment incurred by the Tax Collector. Pursuant to section , Florida Statutes, a municipal or county government shall only compensate the tax collector for the actual costs of collecting the non-ad valorem assessment. The applied collection charge is estimated to be adequate to cover the Tax Collector s actual collection costs. Table 7 shows the projection of the full cost of the fire assessment program for Fiscal Year Table 7 Margate Fire Rescue Department Fiscal Year Assessment Budget Proposed Budget Assessable Costs FY FY Personnel Expenditures Senior Management-Certified Firefighters 107,000 69,978 Regular 104,000 68,016 Regular - Certified Firefighters 8,500,000 5,559,000 Upgrade 50,000 32,700 Assignment 5,000 3,270 Longevity 140,000 91,560 Overtime 425, ,950 Holiday Pay 449, ,740 Vacation Pay Out 156, ,121 Firefighters Supplemental Compensation 78,000 78,000 Vehicle Benefit 2,350 1,537 Phone Allowance Social Security 621, ,194 Medicare Tax 145,255 94,997 Retirement 1,492, ,175 Health Insurance and W/comp 1,917,083 1,253,772 Employee Benefit Trust Fund 100,176 65,515 Total Fire Personnel $14,293,829 $9,375,152 Communications Personnel : 12 specialists + 2 supvr (salary w/fringe) 1,695, ,045 Government Services Group, Inc. 9

13 Proposed Budget Assessable Costs FY FY Total Personnel Expenditures $15,989,251 $9,810,198 Operating Expenditures Clothing and Apparel 131,000 85,674 Operating Expenses 17,400 11,380 EMS Licensure Expense 8,000 0 CERT & Emergency Management 2,500 2,500 Professional Services - Medical Director 30,000 0 Contract Services - Non-Emrgncy Transport 4,500 0 Contract Services - ADP for EMS Billing & Collection 98,000 0 Travel and Per Diem 7,500 4,905 Communication Services 70,000 45,780 Postage and Printing 3,750 2,453 Rentals & Leases 8,000 5,232 Maintenance - Equipment 115,500 75,537 Maintenance - Office Equipment 4,000 2,616 Maintenance - Vehicles 12,000 3,079 Maintenance - Structures 9,000 5,886 Office Supplies 5,000 3,270 Operating Supplies 110,000 71,940 EMS Operating Supplies 120,000 0 Subscriptions, Memberships & Training 13,200 8,633 Education & Training 53,500 34,989 Radio Maintenance (PD Budgt) 46,000 30,084 Gas, Oil & Vehicle Maint; Supplies (PW Budget) 244,000 62,610 Total Operating Expenses $1,112,850 $456,568 Capital Expenditures Quint - 2st lease paymt of 7 108, ,000 Rescue Vehicle - 2st lease payment of 7 30,000 0 Rescue Vehicle - 2st lease payment of 7 190,000 0 Other Equipment (including hose replacement) 25,400 25,400 Total Capital Expenditures $353,400 $133,400 Other Expenditures Administrative: (Cty Mngr, Fin & Purch, HR IT, Cty Atty Cty Clrk) - 5% of salaries 147,274 96,317 Reserve for Employee Payouts 576, ,227 Total Other Expenditures $724,073 $473,544 Capital Improvement Plan - Enhancements Quint 2 replacement 0 0 Engine 1 replacement 450, ,000 Rescues 3 & 4 replacement 0 0 Staff Vehicles replacement 0 22,890 Station 50 personnel 924, ,296 Extrication Equipment Replacement 53,500 53,500 Thermal Imagers 3,000 3,000 Turnout Gear 50,000 32,700 SCBA 144,000 94,176 Station 50 furnishings 11,200 7,325 Station 58/Admin 250, ,500 Station 50 Radio System 50,000 32,700 Government Services Group, Inc. 10

14 Proposed Budget Assessable Costs FY FY Mobile Radios 35,000 22,890 Mobile Data Terminals 23,000 15,042 Total Replacement/Enhancements $1,993,700 $1,502,019 Total Expenditures $20,173,274 $12,375,728 Revenues Fire Inspections and Permits 180, ,000 Firefighters Supplemental (State $) 36,000 36,000 Ambulance Transport Fees 1,525,000 0 Contractual Services to Coconut Creek 7,174,395 1,840,950 Total Revenues $8,915,395 $2,056,950 Total Expenditures $20,173,274 $12,375,728 Total Revenues $8,915,395 $2,056,950 Total Net Expenditures $11,257,879 $10,318,778 Miscellaneous Assessment Costs Study and Legal Costs 24,500 Notice Costs (22,000 notices) 28,600 Collection Costs (TC - 2%) 228,350 Statutory Discount (4% early payment/1% non-payment) 588,902 Total Miscellaneous Assessment Expenditures $870,351 Total Assessable Costs $11,189,129 Government Services Group, Inc. 11

15 Table 8 shows the calculation of the full cost of the Fire Rescue Assessment Program for Fiscal Year through Fiscal Year (Five-year average). Table 8 Fire Rescue Assessable Cost Calculations Proforma Budget (FY through FY 17-18) Assessable Costs FY FY FY FY FY Year Average Personnel Expenditures Senior Management-Certified Firefighters 69,978 72,077 74,240 76,467 78,761 74,305 Regular 68,016 70,056 72,158 74,323 76,553 72,221 Regular - Certified Firefighters 5,559,000 5,725,770 5,897,543 6,074,469 6,256,703 5,902,697 Upgrade 32,700 33,681 34,691 35,732 36,804 34,722 Assignment 3,270 3,368 3,469 3,573 3,680 3,472 Longevity 91,560 94,307 97, , ,052 97,221 Overtime 277, , , , , ,135 Holiday Pay 293, , , , , ,901 Vacation Pay Out 102, , , , , ,435 Firefighters Supplemental Compensation 78,000 80,340 82,750 85,233 87,790 82,823 Vehicle Benefit 1,537 1,583 1,630 1,679 1,730 1,632 Phone Allowance Social Security 406, , , , , ,307 Medicare Tax 94,997 97, , , , ,870 Retirement 976,175 1,005,460 1,035,624 1,066,693 1,098,694 1,036,529 Health Insurance and W/comp 1,253,772 1,291,385 1,330,127 1,370,031 1,411,132 1,331,289 Employee Benefit Trust Fund 65,515 67,481 69,505 71,590 73,738 69,566 Total Fire Personnel $9,375,152 $9,656,407 $9,946,099 $10,244,482 $10,551,816 $9,954,791 Communications Personnel : 12 specialists + 2 supvr (salary w/fringe) 435, , , , , ,943 Total Personnel Expenditures $9,810,198 $10,104,503 $10,407,639 $10,719,868 $11,041,464 $10,416,734 Operating Expenditures Clothing and Apparel 85,674 87,387 89,135 90,918 92,736 89,170 Operating Expenses 11,380 11,607 11,839 12,076 12,318 11,844 EMS Licensure Expense CERT & Emergency Management 2,500 2,550 2,601 2,653 2,706 2,602 Professional Services - Medical Director Contract Services - Non-Emrgncy Transport Contract Services - ADP for EMS Billing & Collection Travel and Per Diem 4,905 5,003 5,103 5,205 5,309 5,105 Communication Services 45,780 46,696 47,630 48,582 49,554 47,648 Postage and Printing 2,453 2,502 2,552 2,603 2,655 2,553 Rentals & Leases 5,232 5,337 5,443 5,552 5,663 5,446 Maintenance - Equipment 75,537 77,048 78,589 80,160 81,764 78,620 Maintenance - Office Equipment 2,616 2,668 2,722 2,776 2,832 2,723 Maintenance - Vehicles 3,079 3,141 3,204 3,268 3,333 3,205 Maintenance - Structures 5,886 6,004 6,124 6,246 6,371 6,126 Office Supplies 3,270 3,335 3,402 3,470 3,540 3,403 Operating Supplies 71,940 73,379 74,846 76,343 77,870 74,876 EMS Operating Supplies Subscriptions, Memberships & Training 8,633 8,805 8,982 9,161 9,344 8,985 Education & Training 34,989 35,689 36,403 37,131 37,873 36,417 Radio Maintenance (PD Budgt) 30,084 30,686 31,299 31,925 32,564 31,312 Government Services Group, Inc. 12

16 Gas, Oil & Vehicle Maint; Supplies (PW Budget) Assessable Costs FY FY FY FY FY Year Average 62,610 63,863 65,140 66,443 67,772 65,165 Total Operating Expenses $456,568 $465,699 $475,013 $484,513 $494,203 $475,199 Capital Expenditures Quint - 2st lease paymt of 7 108, , , , , ,000 Rescue Vehicle - 2st lease payment of Rescue Vehicle - 2st lease payment of Other Equipment (including hose replacement) 25,400 25,908 26,426 26,955 27,494 26,437 Total Capital Expenditures $133,400 $133,908 $134,426 $134,955 $135,494 $134,437 Other Expenditures Administrative: (Cty Mngr, Fin & Purch, HR IT, Cty Atty Cty Clrk) - 5% of salaries 96,317 99, , , , ,272 Reserve for Employee Payouts 377, , , , , ,227 Total Other Expenditures $473,544 $476,433 $479,409 $482,475 $485,632 $479,499 Capital Improvement Plan - Enhancements Quint 2 replacement 0 676, ,200 Engine 1 replacement 450, ,000 Rescues 3 & 4 replacement Staff Vehicles replacement 22,890 22,890 22,890 22,890 22,890 22,890 Station 50 personnel 604, ,859 Extrication Equipment Replacement 53,500 53,500 53,500 53,500 53,500 53,500 Thermal Imagers 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Turnout Gear 32,700 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 10,464 SCBA 94,176 94,176 94, ,506 Station 50 furnishings 7, ,465 Station 58/Admin 163, , , , , ,500 Station 50 Radio System 32, ,540 Mobile Radios 22,890 22,890 22,890 22, ,312 Mobile Data Terminals 15,042 15,042 15, ,025 Total Replacement/Enhancements $1,502,019 $1,055,903 $379,903 $270,685 $247,795 $691,261 Total Expenditures $12,375,728 $12,236,447 $11,876,390 $12,092,495 $12,404,588 $12,197,130 Revenues Fire Inspections and Permits 180, , , , , ,000 Firefighters Supplemental (State $) 36,000 36,000 36,000 36,000 36,000 36,000 Ambulance Transport Fees Contractual Services to Coconut Creek 1,840,950 1,840,950 1,840,950 1,840,950 1,840,950 1,840,950 Total Revenues $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 Total Expenditures $12,375,728 $12,236,447 $11,876,390 $12,092,495 $12,404,588 $12,197,130 Total Revenues $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 $2,056,950 Total Net Expenditures $10,318,778 $10,179,497 $9,819,440 $10,035,546 $10,347,638 $10,140,180 Government Services Group, Inc. 13

17 Miscellaneous Assessment Costs Assessable Costs FY FY FY FY FY Year Average Study and Legal Costs 24,500 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,900 Notice Costs (22,000 notices) 28, ,840 Collection Costs (TC - 2%) 228, , , , , ,837 Statutory Discount (4% early payment/1% non-payment) 588, , , , , ,264 Total Miscellaneous Assessment Expenditures $870,351 $823,830 $795,460 $812,488 $837,079 $827,841 Total Assessable Costs $11,189,129 $11,003,327 $10,614,900 $10,848,033 $11,184,717 $10,968,021 INCIDENT DATA GSG obtained information from the City in an electronic format, identifying the number and type of fire incident responses by City fire vehicles for calendar year 2012 within the incorporated area of the City. The fire rescue department incidents are tracked using the State Fire Marshal office s Florida Fire Incident Reporting System (FFIRS). FFIRS is a tool for fire rescue departments to report and maintain computerized records of fire rescue incidents and other department activities in a uniform manner. Under this system, a series of basic phrases with code numbers are used to describe fire rescue incidents. Appendix A provides a codes list for the type of situation found as recorded on the fire rescue incident reports used to identify EMS and non-ems (fire) calls. Another data field in the FFIRS, fixed property use, identifies the type of property that fire departments respond to for each fire incident. The fixed property uses correlate to property uses determined by the Broward County Property Appraiser on the ad valorem tax roll. Appendix B provides a codes list for the fixed property use as recorded on the fire incident reports. GSG analyzed one year of fire incident data (calendar year 2012) to evaluate trends and determine if aberrations were present. The fire incident data for calendar year 2012 represents 7,688 fire rescue incidents. Of the 7,688 fire rescue incidents, there were 5,715 incidents classified as EMS type incidents based on the type of situation found indicated on the incident report. The 5,715 EMS type incidents were not included in the analysis. There are certain fire rescue incidents that could not be assigned to a specific property or parcel. These calls represent non-specific type incidents, which are incidents that either could not be correlated to a specific parcel or calls that involved auto accidents and other types of incidents along roads and highways. Of the 1,973 remaining fire type incidents, 1,542 were calls to specific property uses. The remaining 431 incidents were considered non-specific type incidents. The City s budget is sized based upon its ability to provide service to improved property within its boundaries. Therefore, the level of services required to meet anticipated demand for fire rescue services and the corresponding annual fire rescue budget required to fund fire rescue services provided to non-specific property uses would be required notwithstanding the occurrence of any incidents from such non-specific property use. Government Services Group, Inc. 14

18 Because of the urbanized character of the City, the suppression of fires on vacant land and agricultural property primarily benefits adjacent property by containing the spread of fire rather than preserving the integrity of the vacant parcel. Thus, incidents to vacant and agricultural property were not included in the final analysis of the fire call database. The 21 calls to these two property use categories were removed. Using the fixed property use codes, the remaining 1,521 fire type incidents corresponding to specific properties were initially assigned to the following property use categories: residential, commercial, industrial/warehouse, institutional and nursing homes. Incidents to government properties, religious buildings, institutional parcels, and educational properties were aggregated into an institutional category. Table 9 illustrates the final assignment of fire rescue incidents and proportion of calls by property use category. Table 9 Fire Rescue Incidents and Proportion of Calls by Category Property Category Number of Percent of Fire Rescue Incidents Total Incidents Residential 1, % Commercial % Industrial/Warehouse % Institutional % Nursing Homes % Total 1, % Source: City of Margate Fire call data PROPERTY DATA GSG obtained information from the ad valorem tax roll maintained by the Broward County Property Appraiser s office to develop the assessment roll. Each property use within the assessable area on the ad valorem tax roll was assigned to one or more of the property use categories based on their assignment of use by the Broward County Property Appraiser or verification of use obtained through field research. The Property Appraiser assigns a two-digit code based on the Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) property use codes reflected in Rule 12D-8.008, Florida Administrative Code. A listing of DOR codes and associated property use categories is provided as Appendix C. Further analysis regarding building improvement types was conducted relative to each building s use on a parcel of property based on their assignment of use by the Broward County Property Appraiser or verification of use obtained through field research. A list of building improvement codes used by the Broward County Property Appraiser and associated assessment category is provided as Appendix D. For parcels assigned to the residential property use category, the total number of dwelling units was determined. For buildings within the non-residential property use categories of commercial, industrial/warehouse, institutional and nursing home, the amount of square footage of these non-residential structures was determined from the building files on the ad valorem tax roll, where available. Government Services Group, Inc. 15

19 Computation of Fire Assessments This section of the memorandum includes the recommended parcel classifications and preliminary assessment rates as calculated within this Assessment Memorandum. The fire assessment cost calculations provided herein are primarily based on information supplied by the City. The assessable cost projections developed by GSG are designed to forecast preliminary assessment rates within each property use category for Fiscal Year SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions support a finding that the fire services, facilities, and programs provided by the City provide a special benefit to the assessed parcels. Fire services, facilities, and programs possess a logical relationship to the use and enjoyment of property by: (i) protecting the value and integrity of improvements and structures through the availability and provision of comprehensive fire services; (ii) protecting the life and safety of intended occupants in the use and enjoyment of property; (iii) lowering the cost of fire insurance by the presence of a professional and comprehensive fire program; and (iv) containing fire incidents occurring on land with the potential to spread and endanger other property and property features. The availability and provision of comprehensive fire services enhance and strengthen the relationship of such services to the use and enjoyment of the parcels of property, the market perception of the area and, ultimately, the property values within the assessable area. APPORTIONMENT METHODOLOGY The following section describes the recommended assessment apportionment methodology for fire services based on: (i) the fire assessable cost calculations; (ii) the ad valorem tax roll maintained by the property appraiser for properties within the City and the availability of data residing on the tax roll database; and (iii) the fire rescue incident data. Government Services Group, Inc. 16

20 COST APPORTIONMENT The Fiscal Year assessable costs calculation was apportioned among property use categories based upon the historical demand for fire services reflected by the fire incident data for calendar year This apportionment is illustrated in Table 10. Table 10 Cost Apportionment Property Category Number of Fire Rescue Incidents Percent of Total Incidents Portion of Budget Residential 1, % $8,004,276 Commercial % $1,218,669 Industrial/Warehouse % $14,422 Institutional % $872,538 Nursing Homes % $858,116 Total 1, % $10,968,021 Source: City fire call data and budget PARCEL APPORTIONMENT The share of the assessable costs apportioned to each property use category was further apportioned among the individual buildings of property within each property use category in the manner described in Table 11. Table 11 Parcel Apportionment within Property Use Categories Category Parcel Apportionment Residential Dwelling Unit Non-Residential -Commercial -Industrial/Warehouse -Institutional Nursing Home Square Footage (capped at 97,700) Applying the foregoing parcel apportionment methodology, fire assessment rates were computed for each property use category. The specific methodology, underlying special benefit and fair apportionment assumptions are included below and generally described. RESIDENTIAL PARCEL APPORTIONMENT ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions support findings that the parcel apportionment applied in the Residential Property Use Category is fair and reasonable. The Residential Property Use Category includes such properties as single-family dwelling units, multi-family dwelling units and mobile homes. Government Services Group, Inc. 17

21 The size or the value of the residential parcel does not determine the scope of the required fire services. The potential demand for fire services is driven by the existence of a dwelling unit and the anticipated average occupant population. Apportioning the assessed costs for fire services attributable to the residential property use category on a per dwelling unit basis is required to avoid cost inefficiency and unnecessary administration, and is a fair and reasonable method of parcel apportionment based upon historical fire call data. RESIDENTIAL PARCEL APPORTIONMENT CALCULATION Based upon the historical demand for fire services, the percentages of assessable costs attributable to residential properties were calculated. The amount of the assessable costs allocable to the residential property use category was divided by the number of dwelling units in the City to compute the fire assessment to be imposed against each dwelling unit. For each residential parcel, the actual number of dwelling units located on the parcel will be multiplied by the residential dwelling unit rate to compute the residential fire assessment amount for the parcel. Table 12 illustrates the assignment of dwelling units under this apportionment methodology to the Residential Property Use Category. Table 12 Parcel Apportionment Residential Property Use Category Residential Property Use Category Number of Dwelling Units Residential 23,842 Source: Broward County Tax Collector (2012) NON-RESIDENTIAL PARCEL APPORTIONMENT ASSUMPTIONS The Non-Residential Property Use Category includes commercial, industrial/warehouse, institutional and nursing home property uses. The capacity to handle fires in Non-Residential Property Use Category is governed by the following: The current pumping capacity is defined as the combined amount of water that apparatus in the Fire Department can pump to a first alarm, non-residential fire. As outlined by Table 5, the pumping capacity for all primary apparatus of the Fire Department is 5,750 gallons per minute. Accordingly, based on National Fire Protection Association firefighting standards for fire flow, the Fire Department currently has sufficient fire flow capacity to provide service coverage in the event of a structure fire involving 97,700 square feet. 3 Therefore, based upon the findings outlined herein, it is fair and reasonable to place a cap on the square footage of non-residential structures of 97,700 square feet. The following assumption supports findings that the parcel apportionment applied in the Non-Residential Property Use Category is fair and reasonable. The separation of the non-residential buildings by actual square footage is fair and reasonable for the purpose of parcel apportionment because the demand for fire services is determined and measured by the actual square footage of structures and improvements within benefited parcels. In accordance with section , Florida Statutes, which mandates that the City treat recreational vehicle park property as commercial property for non-ad valorem special assessments levied by the City, 3 Source: National Fire Protection Association, NFPA 220 Standards on Types of Building Construction: Fire-Flow Guide. Government Services Group, Inc. 18

22 like the fire rescue assessment, it is fair and reasonable to treat each RV space within recreational vehicle park property as a building of commercial property and assign the square footage of 191 square feet, the average size of a recreational vehicle, according to the Florida Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds. This square footage was then aggregated by parcel. NON-RESIDENTIAL PARCEL APPORTIONMENT CALCULATION Based upon the historical demand for fire services, property in the Non-Residential Property Use Category will be responsible for funding a percentage of assessable costs. The amount of the assessable costs allocable to each non-residential parcel will be based upon the aggregate of all non-residential building square footage situated on the parcel. The non-residential assessment rate was determined by multiplying the percent of total fire calls attributable to non-residential property by the total assessable costs. This calculated amount of assessable costs was then divided by the number of non-residential square feet to obtain an assessment amount per square foot. For buildings containing non-residential improvements over 97,700 square feet, an assignment of improved area of 97,700 square feet was made. Table 13 illustrates the assignment of square footage for parcels under this apportionment methodology in the Non-Residential Property Use Category. Table 13 Parcel Apportionment Non-Residential Property Use Category Non-Residential Number of Property Use Categories Square Feet Total Commercial 4,205,718 Total Industrial/Warehouse 1,576,904 Total Institutional 945,594 Total Nursing Home 376,463 Source: Broward County Property Appraiser (2012) MIXED USE PROPERTY CALCULATION AND CLASSIFICATION For residential parcels that contain non-residential buildings, the non-residential improvements located on the parcel were treated according to their non-residential property use category and size to compute the parcel's non-residential fire rescue assessment. This assessment was then added to the parcel's residential fire rescue assessment. For non-residential parcels that contain a residence, the actual number of dwelling units located on the parcel was multiplied by per dwelling unit charge to compute the parcel's residential fire rescue assessment. This assessment was then added to the parcel's non-residential fire rescue assessment. Government Services Group, Inc. 19

23 COMPUTATION OF FIRE ASSESSMENT RATES Applying the parcel apportionment methodology, fire assessment rates were computed for each specified property use category. Based on the assessable costs of providing fire services, the number of fire calls apportioned to specific property categories and the number of billing units within the specified property categories. Table 14 illustrates the preliminary assessment rates after application of the assessment methodology based on 100 percent funding of the total assessable costs for Fiscal Year Table 14 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (100% of Assessable Costs) Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Dwelling Unit Residential $ Non-Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Square Foot Commercial $0.29 Industrial/Warehouse $0.01 Institutional $0.93 Nursing Home $2.28 *Estimated Gross Revenue: $10,968,021; Estimated Exempt Buy-down: $1,660,909; Estimated Net Revenue: $9,307,112 Table 15 illustrates the preliminary assessment rates after application of the assessment methodology based on 90 percent funding of the total assessable costs for Fiscal Year Table 15 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (90% of Assessable Costs) Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Dwelling Unit Residential $ Non-Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Square Foot Commercial $0.27 Industrial/Warehouse $0.01 Institutional $0.84 Nursing Home $2.06 *Estimated Gross Revenue: $9,871,219; Estimated Exempt Buy-down: $1,497,616; Estimated Net Revenue: $8,373,603 Table 16 illustrates the preliminary assessment rates after application of the assessment methodology based on percent funding of the total assessable costs for Fiscal Year Table 16 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (75.95% of Assessable Costs) Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Dwelling Unit Residential $ Non-Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Square Foot Commercial $0.23 Industrial/Warehouse $0.01 Institutional $0.71 Nursing Home $1.74 *Estimated Gross Revenue: $8,330,212; Estimated Exempt Buy-down: $1,264,795; Estimated Net Revenue: $7,065,417 Government Services Group, Inc. 20

24 Table 17 illustrates the preliminary assessment rates after application of the assessment methodology based on 73 percent funding of the total assessable costs for Fiscal Year Table 17 FY Preliminary Fire Assessment Rates (73% of Assessable Costs) Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Dwelling Unit Residential $ Non-Residential Property Use Categories Rate Per Square Foot Commercial $0.22 Industrial/Warehouse $0.01 Institutional $0.68 Nursing Home $1.67 *Estimated Gross Revenue: $8,006,655; Estimated Exempt Buy-down: $1,212,807; Estimated Net Revenue: $6,793,849 EXEMPTIONS AND IMPACT OF EXEMPTIONS In the current methodology, the City identified the aggregate cost for the fire services that are available to institutional tax-exempt and governmental parcels within the City. The City made a policy decision to exempt institutional tax-exempt and governmental properties, and have funded the proportional assessed costs allocated to such exemptions from the other legally available sources because the financial burden of such exemptions cannot be apportioned to non-exempt parcels. The estimated revenue from all institutional taxexempt and governmental properties, based on 100 percent of the assessable costs of $10,968,021, is approximately $911,747 using the updated assessment methodology. Based on fire incident data, Nursing Home rates have been developed which reflect the moderately high call frequency for this property use category. Applying these rates to the relatively small number of nursing homes results in a higher assessment burden being placed upon these properties than other properties in the non-residential categories. The effect of these facilities providing a public service and assessing them at a rate which might constitute an undue hardship, require that the rates for this property use category be further analyzed. In the past the City determined that it was appropriate to cap the assessment charges to these facilities at the rate calculated for other commercial property uses of the same size and to pay the unfunded portion of the fire rescue assessment for such property use category from other available City revenues. The estimated buy-down, based on 100 percent of the assessable costs of $10,968,021, is approximately $749,162 using the updated assessment methodology. Government Services Group, Inc. 21

25 Outstanding Issues ADMINISTRATIVE FACTOR CALCULATION The administrative factor calculation was based on information provided by the City for normal staffing levels. Any changes to the staffing levels could result in a revised administrative factor which could increase or lower the amount of assessable costs to be collected. NON-SPECIFIC CALLS In the fire call analysis, certain fire related calls were classified as non-property specific, because of the location of occurrence in the incident report. These calls represent non-specific incidents that either could not be correlated to a specific parcel or involved auto accidents or other types of incidents along roads and highways. These calls are excluded from the analysis that determines the percentage of calls for service to respective property types and therefore, are not considered in the determination of the extent of budget required to fund the department. Because the budget is established based on the ability of the department to adequately protect structures, no adjustment has been made to the budget due to non-property specific calls. Further, even if such calls did affect the cost of the department's operations, there are sufficient nonassessment revenues available to offset any impact upon the budget. Government Services Group, Inc. 22