3/19/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the revenue has changed. At the time the budget was approved back in October, staff made it very clear that when the consultant's report came in, it would identify what increases would be necessary. Chairman Scurlock noted that the City of Vero Beach budgeted a 40-75% increase. He suggested the following three solutions to help mitigate the problem: 1) Lower the proposed charge from $8 a load to $2.75 or $3.00 for loads under 1 ton to encourage more dumping at the landfill. 2) Reduce some expenses, such as the $97,000 for capital replacements and play with that a little bit. 3) Perhaps set a cap and address it, but we cannot delay it forever. Director Pinto advised that he was going to suggest that we not spend $210,000 out of the capital fund for a 4 -wheel vehicle and capitalize that expense instead. However, there is approximately $140,000 in unanticipated costs for the Master Plan and Rate Study that were not plugged in. If we take that $210,000 and deduct $140,000 to fund the study, we can reduce the revenue stream by that much. OMB Director Joe Baird explained that we only budgeted $25,000 less in the 1985-86 fiscal year than we did in 1984-85; however, the actual 1984-85 figures were substantially less because we did not have the money there and we did not buy the equipment. What we did was put the equipment in this year. The reason our total budget went down was because we had to tighten our belts. He felt that the Board could leave the $97,000 cap on the R 8 R fund, but we would be replacing most of the equipment and would have the ability to capitalize that in the funding. Chairman Scurlock felt if we do that, there would be a decrease in revenue also, which might amount to a trade off. Director Pinto noted that an analysis in the report shows what the reduced rates would be for every $100,000 reduction in 20 Bou 63 F�. E 90