The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008 03 24 Other Document Provided To During Public Hearing Agenda Item 503.1 Date: March 24, 2008 The following document was provided to the City Commission at the March 24, 2008 City Commission Regular Meeting during the discussion of Public Hearings Agenda Item "503.1". •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••�• ,►•• �� CITY OF WI NTER SPRI NGS FI R E ASiSESSM ENT PROG RAM FINAL PRESENTATION March 24, 2008 Presented by: Government Services Group, Inc. 1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 250 Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (850) 681-3717 •••••••!••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ,►•• ■I S ecial Assessments p .� Definition: Special assessments are charges assessed against the property of some particular loca I ity beca use that property derives some s�ecial benefit from the expenditure of the money. 2 ••••••••s••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• �•• �� Tax vs. Assess m e nt Is a Fire Assessment a tax? No. Similarities - Both generate revenue to pay for services and facilities � - Both are mandatory and can be collected on the tax bi I I '� 3 , � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ri Tax vs. Assessment Differences Taxes Assessments Need not benefit property Must specifically benefit property Authorization by general law Authorization by home rule powers Legislature must prescribe a tax Local Governments may develop base the rate of assessment and method of apportioning costs 4 �•••••••••••••••••••••••••••�••i•••••••• ••• �� Case �aw Re u i rements q �,.. • Special Benefit to Property and • Fa i r a nd Reasona ble Apportion ment � 5 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � r � �I Exam les of S ecial Benefit p p • Fi re Protection • Street Improvements • Parkin Facilities g • Downtown Redevelopment • Sol id Waste • Water and Sewer Improvements � • Stormwater 6 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ` � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ■ I No S ecial Benefit p Case Law: • Public Hospitals • Public Health Units • Emergency Medical Services Not Litigated Yet: • Law Enforcement • Pa rks a nd Recreation 7 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �I Fair and Reasonable A ortion ment pp • Logically and factually driven method must be developed to spread the costs amongthe benefited properties. • Does method of apportionment make sense in terms of what is being provided? • Legislative determ i nation receives j ud icia l deference. 8 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� A ortionment Methodolo pp � Traditional apportionment methodology uses the historical demand for services (fire incidents) and the initial response protocol. • Enhanced apportionment methodology uses the man-hours expended on the fire incidents and the minimum fire flow required to protect each bu i Id i ng based on haza rd class. 9 •••••••••••••••••••••�••••s••••••••••••••�•• �� A ortionment Methodolo pp �Y � Assum tions p Fi re Flow, as expressed i n Ca pacity Units, is a proxy for all the fire fighting resources that would be dispatched to any incident involving property. 10 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� Data Com onents of the p A ortion ment Methodolo pp • Service Del ivery • Fi re Depa rtment Budget • Incident Data and Man Hours • Ad Valorem Tax Roll ,a� ,��;� �; � i;!`� ��±� ,�r � ��,��., �� 11 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ■ � A ortionment Methodolo pp Two Step Process: 1. Cost apportionment uses historical demand for service by property use categories based on the time in service or number of man hours per i ncident 2. Parcel apportionment uses the number of billing (capacity) units based on fire flow requirements for building size and hazard class 12 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� Cost A ortion ment pp • Assigns fire (non-EMS) incident time in service to property use categories. • Time in service is based on the number of man-hours spent on each incident. • Applies the percentages of time in service per p ro pe rty catego ry to a ssessa b l e b u d get. 13 ��••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• �� Cost A ortion ment pp Category Man Hours Percent of Man Hours Single Family Residential 999.2 79.08% Multi-Family Residential 151.1 11.96% Commercial 49.9 3.95% I nd ustria l/Wa rehouse 8.9 0.70% Institutional 54.5 4.31% Total 1,263.6 100% 14 �•••••••••••••••••••ii•••••••••••••••••••••• �� Cost A ortionment: pp Based On Historical Demand For Fire Services ■ Single Family - 999.2 3.95% 0.7096 �_ ❑ Multi Family - 151.1 4.31% 11.9 ■ Commercial - 49.9 ■ Indus/Whse - 8.9 79.08% ■ Institutional - 54.5 15 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ■ I Parcel A ortionment pp • Uses NFPAstandardsfordeterminingminimum water supplies for structural fire fighting purposes. • Assigns haza rd class to each bu i Id i ng use. • Uses actual square footage of build�ngs. • Uses formula to calculate fire flow requirements for each building based on Fire Department's � initial alarm standards, hazard class and building sq ua re footage. • Result is presented as capacity units. 16 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �I Hazard Class • NFPA 1142, Chapter 5, classifies property uses i nto haza rd classes ra ngi ng from 7 (lowest risk—examples: residential, schools, office buildings) to 3(highest risk—examples: flour mill, sawmill) • The fire flow necessary for a structure depending on the hazard class (higher risk = greater fi re flow). 17 �� Hazard Class Exam les p Class 7- Residentia l, hotel, n u rsi ng home, school, off i ce Class 6- Bakery, barber shop, church, gas station, city building Class5-Restaurant, laundry, nursery Class 4- Warehouse, department store, exhibition hall, paper mill Class 3- Sawm i I I, flou r m i I I, plastic processi ng 18 •••••!•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••i•• �� Ca acit U n its a y • Fi re Depa rtment's i n itia l response assign ment is the establishment of 300 gallons per minute (gpm) of effective fire flow. • Each Capacity Unit equates to the Fire Department's capability to effectively deliver 300 gpm for a particular structure. The number of capacity units assigned to a structure are calculated based on the hazard class and size � of the structu re. 19 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••i••••••i•• �� Sample Capacity Unit Calculations - Residential ��, Single Family Residence (Class 7) • 100 - 1,199 square feet = 1.0 Capacity Unit • 1,200 - 1,999 square feet = 1.5 Capacity Units • 2,000 - 3,099 sq ua re feet = 2.0 Ca pacity U n its ; • 3,100 - 4,499 sq ua re feet = 2.5 Ca pacity U n its • 4,500 - 6,099 square feet = 3.0 Capacity Units • 5,000 - 9,999 sq ua re feet = 4.0 Ca pacity U n its 20 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � + � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� Sample Capacity Unit Calculations • Single Family Residence (Class 7) - 5,000 square feet = 3.0 Capacity Units • Church (Class 6) - 5,000 square feet = 3.5 Capacity Units • Restaurant (Class 5) - 5,000 square feet = 4.0 Capacity Units • Department Store (Class 4) - 5,000 sq ua re feet = 4.5 Ca pacity U n its • Heavy Industrial (Class 3) - 5,000 square feet = 5.0 Capacity Units 21 � ■i �� 7�t tl�r C�p�cit� Unit Comparison By H a� a rd C lass Exampls bsrssd on 2.000 �q_ Tt_ I�uilding Ha�ard �C la�� 7 Haaard � lass G Sin� � Fam ily R� sid �rrtfal Ct�arc h � � - � � H a� a rd C las� 15 H a� a rd � lass � Restaa.rarrt D�epartmer�t i'i[oro � � � � Ha�ard C lass 3 Hesavy Indust rial � � - 22 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �I Calculation of Rates 1. Capacity units aggregated by Property Use Category. 2. Portion of budget by Property Use Category (based on man-hours)/Total Capacity Units per Property Use Category =Rate Per Capacity Unit Per Property Use Category. 22 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� Sam le Rate Calcu lations p • Mobile Home (Class 7) - 900 sq u a re feet =(1 u n it) o r$115 • Single Family Home (Class 7) - 2,500 square feet =(2 units) or $230 - 3,500 square feet =(2.5 units) or $288 - 6,500 square feet =(3.5 units) or $403 • Restaurant (Class 5) � - 5,000 sq ua re feet =(4 u n its) or $964 • Department Store (Class 4) - 25,000 square feet =(10.5 units) or $2,531 • Warehouse (Class 4) - 40,000 square feet =(13.5 units) or $783 • Church (Class 6) - 10,000 square feet =(5 units) or $2,695 23 r � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� Calculation of Assessment Amounts Per Buildin g Residential Building =# Capacity Units/Parcel x Residential Rate Per Capacity Unit Commercial Building =# Capacity Units/Parcel x Commercial Rate Per Capacity Unit Industrial/Warehouse Building = # Capacity Units/Parcel x Industrial/Warehouse Rate Per Capacity Unit Institutional Building =# Capacity Units/Parcel x I nstitutiona I Rate Per Ca pacity U n it 24 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••�••••••••••• ■) Cred its M itigation cred its of not less tha n 20% or greater than 40% of the Capacity Units calculated for a building may be granted to parcels with a building equipped with a functioning and properly designed, fully automated fire suppression system or a building that is otherwise designed to be more fire resistant due to unique building construction. 25 I' � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � + � � � � ■ I I m lementation Sched u le p City Adopts Ordinance (2nd Reading) at Public Hearing March 10, 2008 City Adopts Initial Assessment Resolution March 24, 2008 GSG Prints and Stuffs Notices March 25—April 4, 2008 GSG Mails First Class Notices to Affected Property Owners April 7, 2008 City Publishes Public Hearing to Adopt Final Assessment Resolution April 7, 2008 City Adopts Final Assessment Resolution April 28, 2008 Separate Bills Mailed to Property Owners May 2, 2008 Deadline for Full Payment to receive discount By May 30, 2008 Deadline for First Installment (no discount) May 30, 2008 Second Installment June 30, 2008 City adopts Preliminary Assessment Resolution July 14, 2008 Third Installment July 30, 2008 Assessments Delinquent July 31, 2008 26