HomeMy WebLinkAboutM-81-0075CITY OF MIAMI.
INTER-C)FFICE ME` OPANDUM
To Richard L. Fosmoen °'` February 4, 1981
City Manager
- Downtown Special Tax District
For Additional Police Services
FROM • �? REPFuc ••. ,
Jim Reid, Director
Planning Department
Enclosed please find a package of information pertaining to the
Downtown Special Tax District. Included in this package are the
following items:
1. Downtown Miami Special Tax District Proposal For
Additional Police Services - identifying the need
for a Special Taxing District;
2. Recommended Uniform Patrol. Staffin-- For Special
Tax District and Proposed Staffing Levels For
Special Taxing District;
3. Special Services Taxing District - A Cost Allocation
Model; and
4. Memo: Special Taxing District: Individual Property
Cost Increments For Alternative Increased Police
Service Levels - the three properties are: Revitco
Office Building, Howard Johnson Hotel and Restaurant
(SE 2nd Avenue) and Burdine's Department Store.
The Planning; Department proposes a cost allocation model that
• takes into consideration three (3) factors: property land value,
property buildin value, property street frontage. Each factor
is assi--ned the swile level of importance in the formula - 33`� .
The Police Department presented ttie Planning Department with six
(6) alternative sta.ffinn levels for the district over and above
the recommended staffin;; level. The cost allocation model was
applied to the following three alternative staffin( levels:
A-1 - 100' Increase in Services: All sworn in
officers = $1,1.94,657;
B-1 - 50M Increase in Services: All sworn in
officers = a 578 , 350 ;
C-1 - 25(11 Increase in Services: All sworn in
officers = $ 286,498.
U
Richard L. Fosm oen
City Manager
Page 2
February 4, 1981
The results were as follows for the three properties examined:
1. Revitco Office Building
A-1: $5,452
B-1: 2,640
C-1: 1,308
2. Howard Johnson (SE 2nd Avenue)
A-1: $9,986
B-1: 4,834
C-1: 2,395
3. Burdines
A-1: $14,759
B-1: 7,145
C-1: 3,540
Enclosures
t
l '
FOR ADDITIONAL
POLICE SERVICES
mw (O:fv m ff No
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
In
w
Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to identify the need for
a Special. Taxing District to hell) provide special police
services in Downtown Miami. This document is prepared
for the j&1t.ropol itan Dade County Planni n;; Director as a
basis for a subsequent petition to the Clerk of the Board
of County Commissioners for the establishment of a Special
Taxing District as outlined in Section 18-3 of tile Dade
County Code.
Additionally, this document should provide useful informa-
tion in the future investigation by the Dade County Manager
as to:
(1) the; boundaries of the proposed district
(2) the costs of the special_ services
(3) annual expenses to be borne by the district
(4) conformatico with the Dade County pastel• Plan
(5) his rc)cc.r,�;mendat ions concerning the need and
desirability of a district, and
(G) his recc)r;mendations as to the Levying* of
sped ,ll a.ssr.ssments and the ainotllit of such levy.
Scop(• and Content
This :,Ladd cc)n ;i:;t:, of' ttco secti0)1f`- The first describes the
itnp()rtanic: 01' ]l<,tintc)::n'ti 7e :ican,il. f()cus thrott;h an analysis of
curr(?nt, c:�)►t(i i t i r)n:, :t►td fui urc� trend:; . The secutld SQCti 011 ex-
ainines the special securi.ty tleed�; of Do\l'tltown as evideticed by
crime incidence data. This section det;ti is some of the special
COStS With 111e provision of these do'wilt-own services.
For th(. 1)tt rposes of th i :; :t n:t 1 t': i :; , the of interest proposed
for t:hr. ;t:1 di:;tri c:t the Downtown 1)cwelopmcnt: Attth-
ori L'y 's taN di:;tri ct rl(-)rt lh of t.h(, Miami Ri vcr, and port.iotis of
t;he 13r.icl:r-ll :u•(-1 south OF the li.i.vrr, (.,Ist Of the old ITC
ri;*ht-c)I'-�:;►�• f.c) I�i:;c:t}'tt�r 11,(y, and ..cmth to the SE, 1.5t.11 Road,
e:•:(:l.ticli.n;; Chr, enlidO^liniw"I deve.lorm(,►l1_ on Smith lkly-
slitwu Drive :11. P()int t'icrx. At.t.,cr•1 rionl; 1% i:; :t more exact (lc-:,cril)-
t i on of Lltt1)oun(l,u•i r.s .
-1-
Downtown's Regional Focus
Downtown Miami. is unique in southeast Florida and Dade County.
It is the business, banking, and office employment center of
the southeast Florida region. It is an expanding commercial
core with increasing national and international significance.
Downtown Miami is experiencing a resurgence in activities that
once located elsewhere. Expanding retail, tourist, and resi-
dential activities are reversing a twenty-year trend,which
is helping to produce once again a diversified downtown envi-
ronment; a Downtown with special. needs, unique, special prob-
lems and most importantly, virtually unlimited opportunities.
Downtown continues its regional focus for certain activities.
Recent projections indicate an increasing concentration of
doumtown employees in many business sectors. During 1970,
as identified by the 1970 Census of Population and Housing,
forty percent of Dade's employment has located in the City
of ;Miami (1) . The following table shows the importance of
the proposed Special Taxing District compared to the entire
City of Miami.
-2-
,
TABLE I
Selected 1975 Characteristics
Special Taxing; District and City of ;~Ji.ami (l )
Characteristic Special Taring District
Number As Percent of Miami
Retail Employment
7,399
270
Of f ice Employment
39,964
51c,o
IIotel-Motel Employment
1,789
65ro
Total Net Acreage
689.46
40
Estimated Population
13,109
4o
(1) Source: City of 'Miami. Planni.n„ Department
The concentration of Miani's non -manufacturing, co==ercial
activities is seen in Figure 1 which sliolrs the percent of
total not area by tr:cf'i c zone devoted to commercial. uses.
for Future Grov.t:h
Recant anal yti CUI. W021711Z prel7;trc�d for the J`()lvnto;cn Peopla �lover
Study Area, vc:ryin area to thQ proposed tax c}istriet,
indicate:, a continui_n; ill- oT doltintcnvn ,Miami as a
velrional focus;. Beli,.vOon 19GS and 1978) of :1.11,
office space built in Mi:uni. com,t:rutted in tho I mviltowli-
13ri c�I:nl I trr�a. Over 4. mi.l.l icon S(111:1ro foot of office space
wa!—; complr.i:od in J)cn�:ntc;:rn-i3r:ickel 1 pr i c,1• to 197 S (`? ) .
Ii' the trc.ncJ cont.inuc•s, 'Intl Hio 1:0:(!:,t. infor;natioll on s}.)�:ci.fic
do-vol olunent prol�c�r,;11 :, i nc1 i c aLghat. -lie Down tm n-
I3ri c1:c11 ;treat i:; c�xpcct �cl t.<� cantl�rc about :3.6 million -,quart
feat of 'Icicii l:ir,n:ll ;'ice �;pac.o by 198.5 (2).
- 3-
r--
In addition, by 1985, the Downtown-Brickell area is expected
to gain between 200,000-300,000 square feet of retailing and
perhaps as many as 2,000 now housing units. About 2,000 new
hotel rooms are planned, as well. These increases in commercial
activities are expected to increase, employment by nearly
29,000 workers between 1075 and 1985 to a total of about 87,000
employees (4).
Planning, for a Strong Downtown Miami
Public policy clearly identifies a strong, viable downtown .Miami
in the 19S0's and 1.9001s. llinmi's Central Business District (C.B.D. )
is the only recognized diversified, regional activity center
in Dade County according to the Comprehensive Development Master
Plan (C.D.M.P.)
Dade's master plan states that tho concept of a regional activity
center etnnha si:-es growth around "centers of activity" rather
than directionless; sprawl..
The Dade plan continues,
"tT':ttl: lt: faci litins and sr-rvicC:
should su; ,port t}io. shn.pin- and st:a ins;
of (1e%7( l op7^ent: , reduN elor,nent , and inten-
sification of the central blisi.tics:�, dis-•
tricts...." (5,n.7)
Miami 's Cc;mnrcAhen:ivn Idol;*,hboncond Plan 19: C-19SC identifies three
ecti.l c:a for do ntc:.n Miami-:
(1) Minml as a regional.
o f,f i_uc calif (:]-
(2) pro..otc: 1.1i.and its a financial canter, and
dcw:ntov:n etnplo-riont.
(C, p.IV-2)
Miami's plan al:;() of "contraliLy of office
lm'-at:ion" that: ;vill. hc_r rc:.int'c�rcccl ;;i_vcn rot;ic�nal rapid transit:.
I'IU1 on7�, i.:: L11,2 ,i:roll-th of cicr:-:nt:Own `.li.:uni. ;t Stated plrinning
gOal., bitt: :t :itrnn„ purl is eff'ot•t. is currently und(1r-
tra�•. Lii nrn i ' 19'7')- 1!"5 Cny) i t -al Pro,«1-1111 detail:
i00 '() lc.a11 i t a l i t::h 1-ov �t:Ie21 Ls which shott.l d encoural;e
a lte:tich.1 ba anc:e of l�ussinc�:;:s, l;c�vcrnt:.�nt:, anti rosidential
act:ivit-ie:;
2
Special. Needs of Downtown Miami.
This section describes some of the special, unique needs
of Downtown as identified by an analysis of recent crime
evidence. data.
Crime Characteristics in llowntown
The following table contrasts the crimes that occur in
Downtown versus crimes in the City at large. This analysis
is ba:�ecl on data contain(-d in the Miami Police Department's
Impact File for 1978 and .1079. The Impact File contains
data on major crimes such as rape, aggravated assaults,
murder and breaking and entering.
T,,'i BLIE I I
Llajor Crimps: Propo:::(1d Special
Tax District anyl1 gi.ty
of Miami
-1979-
Type of Cri=
Special Tax District
1;t!:.:l)
I'(�rcc:lt of City Total
Murder-mans1.alt ;h tc,r 16
10.6
Rapre I
11.0
Robbery 986
20.0
Aggravated Assault GUS
12.7
Br.'eaking and Entering 1,151_
11.2
Larceny 4 , !,:.;:
06. 'i
Vahi cle Thuft 34"t.
11.1
Arson 17
Total 7,—'ll�!)
-- 9.,,,
(1) For the- Rc•prrt.in-,,: Arcas
that: most: approxi-
m:it::I:c d
i :;!.:• i c:t: - 1 l:. , 1 1 ; , -.155, 156,
1GO , l GI , J G5 , 1 cc , l os , 170, ",
}'.c , ..'.i 3 . Tlv'ro are ap-
proxiMt,:l y :135 111l i c,;
Arc,a:, in t ho City of
As in '1ahle IT, cant• In:n1r)r crime
:ill f:ivci in Mia:::i occurs
within th" limits ni thc• prr,}g)sod tan:
district.
lii:C in t trwn is in mN,1 r)r vrj 1 .q ill I)� �;':Il
t' (,;"ll-1',1'.i c'.1:t'l l are all i ncli —
cat. cqn-r;;cnt!y P"line
survives are noveKsary.
a1 1 sh,,nn: t:l:e t:l'c:ncl: ill inaJor
crime types for 1979 and MO.
—5—
r
TABLE I I I
Trends in Major Crimes Special(Pr
District
19f8 - 1979
Type of Crime Numbpr of Crimes Percent Change
1975 1979 _ '1978 .1979
Murder -manslaughter
10
16
+
60
11.1pe
35
34
Robbery
635
986
+
57.8
Aggravated Assaults
450
608
+
35.l o
Breaking and Entering
SS3
1,181
+
32.90
Larceny
4,059
4,583)
+
12.
Vehicle Theft
361
344
--
4.70
Total
6,425
7,752
++
20.6`,0
(1) Excludes Arson which
was not
classified as
a major crime
in 1978.
The twenty percent increase in major crimes in the proposed
taxing; district at a time when major crimes increased by eight
percent for Miami as a whole, is a cause for great concern.
This large increase during; a time of general economic upsurge,
especially in Dotivntown-Brickell, is an indication that a
different kind of crime problem is emei, ing that necessitates
special crime prevention and protection measures.
An anal":^i.s of the cri.mo incidences shu,vs that during normal
bu:ai n�s:7 , daytir,�(-, hours (7 : 00 a.m. -G :00 p.m.) t�vo kinds of
all, major cri.cne5�c_��cur: This diurnal pattern has remained
constant since 1978 alAhotl,111h tyre proposed district has ex-
perienced a twenty percent ilicrea-:,p in major criR;es. Table
IV SLU;imFLI'i: e5 the ilnur:, o.f.* occurrence of m;ljor crimes iI1 Down-
town-Bricl:c;ll.
-6-
Tf1BLE, IV
Time of Occurrence for Major Crimes in Downtown-Prickell
-107J-
Type of Crime Time of Occurrence
Percent of Total by Type
1.2:00am 7:00 am 7:00 pm
6:59 am 6:50 pm 11.50 pm
?,lurder-lnan 1:111,'_;lll',(-r
12. 6",
62 . 5")
24. 9
Rape
311-1. 1.;
26. Y,
35'.4
hn}ll l' :,
'014. 8c.
Ag ravated Assaults
21 . r.-
�
46. �?'.�
32. l`,o
Brealcin- and Entering
22.5'�
5^.,.�?
23,Gro
Larceny
7. 4'.0
78 .0 ',
14. 6.0
Vehicle Theft
17.47,
63.4
22.2';0
Arson
47.3'0
11.81,.0
Total
13. g o
65.0 0
20. 3"0
The daytirle peals of cri.mi.nal acts coincides with the greatest
activity Dovntor:n: the largest daytime popul:ltion, employees, shop-
pers,,;touri.sl:s , etc.; the most traffic, etc.
When crime occurrences are e:•:aminod by Police Area.,
definite land -
use jcri.me i
r. ol.ation.shi
pF, -aro id(nt i fis cl. Given the
e-xpected ad-
ditional
growth in the
llcm:nt0.tin-l3ric:?:czl7. area, crime
tren(ls before
1985 will
indicate a
cri.ti.ca'l nc�c,c? for -iddi.tio na.l.
polle(I 1-esou1rces
over .ins,
ahov(• thww
pru.-wnt !v avai.l:lble.
.1 ,
T LlJlQ V 011 tllc? 1'0110wi ll;� crimp i.11cic?c tic,c�: by
subareas:; within the pj,op .,;(2(l ta:; di :_It ri.c t . Note tho 11i;,11
nw,,il)r,.' of ills] U('ll! f':; ill tllf_' ";.li.:;�!cl ("('ro" , i tl "Oillil 1-: �!:L1'<;" , and
in "Ilea:c l ? I'll -•:10 1.11t c c! .1I C:II: 1LCC-01111 L IM- 110,LI.INI rM-ty-
�.i.:, pore. 11t: I•ir: 11'c':1.
19 'i 1J'r'9 j .;Itcr., t.h:tt 11()Lo]. t,c, t:lu. .,,.i ?
Core", :111t? "i,1'] c:l:c'.1 1" :.1.1'�' ]Ile' 1'e:l'; ] I1;; th" i 1' -Olal-o of' total C1':1::11'
1 I1C i clC'I1 r't!:' ,
TABLE V
}Major
Crime Occurrences
by Seib -area
- Proposed Special
Tax
District
-1979-
Type of Crime
Sub -Area
Percent
of 'Total by
Type
Omni-Sears(1) Bicentennial(2)
Park West (3)
Hotel Row(4)
Bayfront(_5)
Park
Areal _
Park.
:.;artier -Rages
4 .O
19.5
4.6
16.5
1.4
1.8
I;,�h1 _.1•�
.} , G
G . 3
16.2
14.0
2.3
A.: SailI t5
(3. 3
;' S
' •
15.1
10.9
0.4
13re;i1:in„ and Entering
G.7
5 2
7.4
10. 7
1.6
L.irc. --nv
214.2
:3. 9
2 . 3
14.8
1.5
Ve11ieIo Theft
7.6
3.8
`1.9
T�L�1
lu 'l=�
`�.�;�
(continued)
Type of Crime
Office Core(6)
Rental Core
"'ixr-d Core(8)
Retail�0)
Coui:thouse(_10)
Parlcing
.Gov_.t. Ctr
1 .4
1 .4
15.3
1.4
1.4
2.5
Iioi i er
0.9
0.9
19.4
0.9
5.3
.As.s;l is
2.1
2.1
13.3
1.2
3.0
J3t•c;�1: i n; and
Entering 4.7
4.7
10.4
2.5
3.1
Larccny
2.8
2.8
19.5
2.2
2.6
3.5
Vehirle Theft
3 5
-
.3.5
8A
17. 1
2 0
3.2 0
Total
` . h`%
�i . 0'%
0
.0
(continued) .
fType of Crime
Brickell(11�
Al
Others(12)
-_----
Murder-Rapes
18.3
Robbery
3.6
Assaults
10.3
i;rc:aking and Entering
18.7
LarcenS
7.2
Vc;liicle Theft
16.9
Total
9.4%
29.3
26 A
23.1
26.6
20.3
29.E
?.2.9%
k
i
I'
i
i
P
i
i
i
i .
i
,
f
F
f
tlajor Crime Occurrences by Sub-area-1979
Footnotes to Table V
Area
(1) 1.13
(2) 1G1
( 3 ) IC)0,165
(4) 170
(5) 171
(6) 174
(7) 173
(S) 169
{0) 173
(10) 163
(11) 249,202
(12) 15C1, 149, 155, 1663, 172
i
A )Miami Police Department (NIPD) staff study concludes
that no internal. readjustments could be made in the
MPD to put more officers on patrol without degrading
other community -wide noels. Patrol coverage in Down-
town (Miami and in Brickell could not be increased
at the expenses of other areas in the City.
The MPD recommends the hiring of 16 new officers
and the purchase and equipping of 8 cars or three
ivhccicr:- to provide additional coverage over and ahove
the current police commitment. The 16 additional NIPD
officers would provide plainclothes officers concen-
trating on pick -pockets, street frauds, purse snatches,
robberies, drug sales, muggings, panhandling, and shop-
lifting. Additional uniform coverage would concentrate
on traffic flow, vagrancy, park patrol truancy, walk-
throughs of largo buildings, burglary of autos, im-
proved arrival times and would provide a visibility
presence.
The MPD estimates that the yearly cost of placing one
new uniformed officer in Downtown is S-10,000. This cost
estimate includes pension costs, automobile, insurance,
training and administrative support. A detailed cost
brealcdo:cii is included in Attarl=,nt 13, provided by the
'Miami. Police Department.
Total. costs projected for a I,(:, , 16 man Downtown force
total $6.10, 000 per N?(-nr.
-in-
ATTACHMENT "A"
SPECTA1. TAXT`G DISTRirT
At the point of ht•s;inninti; at the ccntcrli.ne of the
intersection of N.W. 5th Street and N.U. 3rd Avenue,
cut' nor of the diatrLct, thence rrinrtiitg soittIterIy to
the cettterIiite of Wt!-;t F1aglcr Street at the 1ntcr:,ec-
t1ort of N.1J. 3 r d Avenut! and Wy05t Flag 1er Street, thenru
westerly along; the c(interILite of IJr:;t F1.agler Street to
the centerline of the Ptiatit i River, thence southeasterly,
f0LLowing the centerline of the i'tiami. River (rncanderint;
line) to the ensterLy right -of -way litre of Mctropolita11
Dade County Rapist Transit Corridor, thence running;
southerly along; said ea:;tern Rapid Transit Corridor right -
OE -way line to its intersection with S.E. 15th Road, thence
southeasterly alon;; the. centerline of S.E. 15th Road to
a point midway between Brickel.l Avenue and S.E. Bayshore
Drive, thence northeasterly to S.E. 14t}t Street, thence
easterly on S.E. 14th Street to the westerly bulkhead
(Dade. Count;✓ bulkhead) line of Biscayne Bay, thence
northerly clan ; Said Dadoi Cotmt}• bul}•.hcad line following
tho bulkhe;:d projo(-t:n•d jlurcherl�: across the lriiami River
to the Dade Count• bulMicad and tale southerly boundary
Of th<� DuPont P1,1-a Center property, thenk.e northeasterly
on a line remaining parallel to the southerly boundar;• of
the DuPont Plaza Center and the St, Joe Paper Companv
pronorty to a point southerly of tli,! ea ;tern bul}.i1e3d line
Of t11c St. Joe Paper Comj,anv, tht�nce northerlyalon,, L11e
bulk"le 1d line of Fray; runt Par.:. and file Bayfront Parr: lac}lt
Doc:::.:, continui:: ; northerly alon,, the bul:.head line to a
point ou the centerline of N.E. 17 th Street e::tenct2d,
tllece westerly along tile centerline of i\. E. 1/ th Street
to the eastern right-of-wav line of the FEC Railroad,
thence southerly along the eastern side of the FEC Railroad
ric,lit-of-way to the centerline of N.W. 5th Street, thence
westerly along the centerline of 5th Street, to the
point of begi:lni.tl�,"
IF .4
EX Ii:1T "•"
` •75
ATTACHEMENT "B"
P17ojectcd yearly direct coits to place a
now police
Officer in Do�vnioi;,n Univorin Patrol (effective
October
5 t 1980)
Starting salary
$16,752
Medical In,,urance. Coverage (4.29%)
824
Pension costs (40.94%)
1 6,858
t!'
Workers Compensation (5.08')
851
Uniforms, Equipment and. firearm
1,200
(first issue)
Vehicle- mileage (Est. 50e, per mile
3,807
x 36.6 miles per day x 208 days)
Vehicle purchase (5 year pro -rated
800
1.6 shift relief factor)
Shift differential (Q 40� per hour)
480
(see note 41)
Average paid overtime (excluding
1,035
compensatory time)
(see note 1112)
Radio, M.D.T., portable radio,
600
(7 year pro -rated 4. 1.6)
(see note 9 3)
Training (South East Flordia
495
Institute Criminal Justice)
Range ;u-nmunition
26
Yearly Physical
75
City Self Insurance Fund
728
(P '_rc -rated 1,000 Epl.) Fire
q-
Theft - Tort - Collision
Liability
Supervision (Base Salary
4,614
SerUcant step 13 + Fringe 7)
T
-
-ort and
s up,,
Mi s ce 1 !Q 310 o us c 0 11 c a t i 0 11 s ,
records, etc.)
885
$40,000
Noto 1111r.111) r 1-
pit jjr�_. per %.;c,(!)- 5 0 $ 4 0
Pit. ('40-hr'S. per wcuk) (50 $.40)
:mb c. 1 2
overti
r A 0 2.72
Timc�antl-ihalf
.0079
$293,173
x 1. or)
y 1.0 , 7G 3
360
1,035
AV
0
G 0
Boo
480
1),-iid overtire (Iollars 1979
(Patrol share)
M-ty rai.,;o 19 80)
(officers in pjt_-01 on zivorarie
dIIII-ing 10 79 )
,%%,c,rage pat,rc)l overtime paid
per Officer
flote number 3
1 3 Patrol ',-,ould not include I,I.D.T.Is.
lot "I
a
(V
2
t 7--
N.W. 38 ST.P. :
Z7�
cr -;z
N.W. es ST.
f-- 7-
_7
N.W. 20 ST.
6
N.W-114 ST.- —M
p
N.W. 7 ST ST.
N.W. 5 ST.
15 Aaumpm
FLAGLER ST.
CLAUE3KfrON
ISLANIJ
S.W. t3 ST., L
V
PLANNING DISTRICT 8
CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JULIA TUTTLE
CAUSEWAY
VENETIAN CAUSEWAY
MAC ARTHUR CAUSEWAY
11110N ISIILNO
VOWNTOWt4
IAIAM%
16WUAL -I`P�x446 ID15T(ZICT
HN I
0 750 .500
RECO1,LMENDED UNIFORt•1 PATROL STAFFING FOR SPECIAL TAXING
DISTRICT AND CITY OF MIAMI AS A WHOLE AT BUDGET STRENGTH 814*
S.T.D. CITY AS A WHOLE
Units Men Units Men
"A" SHIFT - 6:30 A.M. TO 4:30 P.M.:
3 3 31 41
PSA 9 9 28 28
"B" SHIFT -
3 P.M. to 1
A.M.:
3 3
30
40
K-9
1 1
6
6
PSA
-- --
18
18
"C" SHIFT -
9 P.M. to 7
A.M.:
3 3
27
37
K-9
1 1
6
6
SPU - approximate time 8:30 A.M. to
6:30 P.M.:
Footbeats
10 10
(6 days)
10
10
3-1heelers
7 7
(6 days)
18
18
Horses
3 3
(5 days)
6
6
Paddy Wagon
1 2
(7 days)
1
2
21 22
35
3G
S.T.D.
N
CITY AS A
WHOLE
TOTAL SWORN:
32 Units
33 Men
135 Units
166
Men
S.T.D.
23.79. Units
19.9 Men
--
--
TOTAL PSA
9 Units
9 Men
46 Units
46
Men
% S.T.D.
19.6% Units
19.6 Men
--
--
TOTALS
41 Units
42 Men
181 Units
212
Men
% S.T.D.
22.7% Units
19.8% Men
--
--
- -
- - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
*This presumes all Police
- - - - -
Officers
- - - - - -
to be fully
-
trained and capable
of functioning as a One-man
Unit (January
1982).
2/2/81
P&I
RECOMMENDED AVERAGE PATROL STAFFING FOR SPECIAL TAXING
DISTRICT (S.T.D.) AND CITY OF MIAMI AS A WHOLE - 7 A.M.
TO 7 P.M.
S.T.D. CITY AS A 1-91OLE
Units Men Units Men
"A" SHIFT*:
Total
3
3
31
41
SPU - 7 A.M.
to 8
P.M. (FLEXIBLE):
Footbeats
10
10
10
10
3-Wheelers
7
7
18
18
Horses
3
3
6
6
Paddy Wagon
1
2
1
2
Total
21
22
35
36
PSA - Monday
thru
Friday 8 A.M. to
4 P.M.:
Total
- - - - - -
9
- - -
9
- - - - - - - - -
18 (of 46)
- - - - - - - -
18
- - - -
•S.T.D. CITY AS A WHOLE
SWORN TOTAL: 24 Units 25 Men 67 Units 77 Men
PSA TOTAL 9 Units 9 Men 18 Units 18 Men
TOTAL 33 Units 34 Men 85 Units 95 Men
% S.T.D. 38.9% 35.8%
*NOTE: "B" Shift Picks up "A" shift staffing.
2/2/81
P&I
am
POLICE OFFICERS NEEDED FOR SEVEN DAYS COVERAGE RADIO
PATROL AND SPECIAL PATROL UNIT (SPU) DAYS AS INDICATED
"A" SHIFT -
"II" SHIFT -
"C" SHIFT -
SPU:
Wagon -
Footbeats -
3-11heelers -
Horses -
41 men per day
46 men per day
43 men per day
2 men x 7 days
10 men x 6 days
18 men x 6 days
6 men x 5 days
TOTAL MAN HOURS PER IMEK
- 2,870
man hours
per
week
- 3,210
man hours
per
week
- 3,010
man hours
per
week
- 140
man hours
per
week
- 600
man hours
per
week
- 1,080
man hours
per
week
- 300
man hours
per
week
11,220
- 11,220 man hours . 40 hours = 280 police officers need to
staff for one week.
- Each police officer uses an average of 276 hours per year
"V", "EO", and "I".
- A two year study (1978 - 1979) indicates that police officers
use 276 hours of "V", "EO", and "I" per year or are available
for 1,804 hours of work (2,080 - 276 = 1,804). Therefore:
2,080 hours x available police officers 280 _
1,80.1 hours available
Number of police officers needed to cover V, EO, I.
- 323 Uniform Officers needed to covet the City of Miami at
reco.;,mended staffing.
2/2/81
PSI
POLICE OFFICERS IN PATROL
814
Sworn positions
-201*
Management and Supervisory Positions
613
Police Officers
613
Police Officers
57%
to Patrol
350
Police Officers in Patrol
323 Uniform Police Officers
+ 27 Task Force + administrative duties
350 Police Officers
- - - -
* 1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chief
2
Assistant Chief
1
Executive Assistant
6
Majors
14
Captains
37
Lieutenants
140
Sergeants
201 Management & Supervisory Positions
2/2/81
P&I
PROPOSED STAFFING LEVELS FOR SPECIAL TAXING DISTRTCT
- 1980 COST -
STArFING SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT (without additional
assessment) - January 1982:
Units
Men
Patrol Cars
9
9
A 9
2
2
Footbeats
10
10
3-Wheelers
7
7
Horses
3
3
Paddy Wagon
1
2
PSA's
9
9
TOTALS
41
42
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Plan A-1 (100% increase all sworn)
Type
Total Staffing Net Gain
Unit Men Unit Dien
Cost per TOTAL
man COST
Patrol Car
15
15
6
6
x $38,294
= $229,764
K-9
2
2
-
--
---
Footbeat
26
26
16
16
x 34,121
= 545,936
3-Wheeler
14
14
7
7
x 38,631
= 270,417
Horses
5
5
2
2
x 35,976
= 71,952
Paddy Wagon
2
4
1
2
x 38,294
= 76,588
PSA
9
9
--
--
--
_ ---
TOTALS
73
75
32
33
$1,194,657
PLAN A-1 (100g increase all sworn) TOTAL COST = $1,194,657
Page 1 of 4
Plan A-2
(TOOL
increase
sworn +
Total
Staffing
Net
Gain
Cost per
TOTAL
Type
Unit _
_ Men
Unit
_t_1e-n
man
COST
Patrol Car
13
15
4
6
x
$38,294
= $229,764
K-9
2
2
--
--
--
---
Footbeat
20
20
10
10
x
340121
= 341,210
3-11,heeler
12
12
5
5
x
38,631
= 193, 155
Horses
5
5
2
2
x
35,976
= 71,952
Paddy Wagon
2
4
1
2
x
38,294
= 76,588
PSA'S
17
17
8
8
x
23,456
= 187,648
TOTALS
71
75
30
33
$1,100,317
- - - - -
PLAN A-2
- - - - -
- - -
(100%
- - -
- - - -
increase
- - - -
- - - -
sworn +
- - - -
- - -
PSA)
- - -
- - - - - - -
TOTAL COST =
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
$1,100,317
- - - - - - - -
Plan B-1 (50g increase staffing all sworn)
Patrol Car
12
12
3
3 x
38,294
- 114,882
K-9
2
2
--
--
--
Footbeat
18
18
8
7 x
34,121
- 272,968
3-1-7heeler
11
11
4
4 x
38,631
= 154,524
Horses
4
4
1
1 x
35,976
= 35,976
Paddy Wagon
1
2
--
--
--
PSA'S
9
9
--
--
--
TOTALS
- - -
57
58
1G
16
$578,350
- -
PLA14 B-1
- -
(50
- - - - - - -
increase all
- - -
sworn)
- - - -
TOTAL
- - - -
COST =
- - - - - - - -
$578,350
Page 2 of 4
Plan B-2
(50%
increased
sworn + PSA)
Total
Staffing
Net Gain
Cost per
TOTAL
Type
Unit
Men
Unit
Men
man
COST
Patrol car
12
12
3
3 x
38,294
= $114,882
K-9
2
2
--
--
---
Footbeat
15
15
5
5 x
34,121
= 170,605
3-Wheelers
11
11
4
4 x
38,631
= 154,524
Horses
4
4
1
1 x
35,976
= 35,976
Paddy Wagon
1
2
--
--
---
PSA'S
12
12
3
3 x
23,456
= 70,368
TOTALS
57
58
16
16
$546,355
- - - - -
PLA14 B-2
- -
( 50 %
- - - - -
increased
- - - - - -
sworn + PSA)
- - - -
TOTAL
- - - -
COST =
- - - - - - -
$546, 355
— Plan C-1
(254
increased all
sworn)
Patrol Car
9
9
-
-
---
K-9
2
2
-
-
---
Footbeat
15
15
5
5 x 34,121
= $170,605
3-Wheeler
10
10
3
3 x 38,631
= 115,893
Horses
3
3
--
--
---
Paddy Wagon
1
2
--
--
---
PSA IS
9
9
--
--
---
TOTALS
- - - - -
49
- -
50
- - - - - - -
8
- - - -
8
- - - - -
286,498
PLAID C-1
(25%
increased all
sworn)
- -
`I'O`I'AL COST =
- - - - - - - -
$286,498
Page 3 of 4
Plan C-3
(25g
increased
sworn +
PSA)
Total Staffing
Net
Gain
Cost per
TOTAL
Type
Unit
mien
Unit
Tien
_ man
COST
Patrol Car
9
9
--
--
--
K-9
2
2
--
--
---
Footbeat
12
12
2
2 x
34,121
= 68,242
3-Wheeler
10
10
3
3 x
38,631
- 170,605
Horses
3
3
--
--
Paddy Wagon
1
2
--
--
PSA'S
12
12
3
3 x
23,456
= 70,368
TOTALS
49
50
8
8
-
- - - -
$ 309 , 215
- - - - - - -
- - - - -
PLAN C-3
- - - - -
- - -
(25%
- - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
increase sworn + PSA) TOTAL
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
COST =
- - - -
$309,215
- - - - - - -
2/2/81
P&I
Page 4 of 4
C(!ST FhCTOPS : 110M Ci: Oil- i CER
Projected yearly direct costs to pli+ce a new Police Officer
in Uniform Petrol (eff(,ctive Octubr,r 5, ]S'80)c
Starting Salary Recruit
$15,912
t;edical Insurance Coverace
856
Pension Casts (40.94%)
6,514
Worker's Compensation (7.42%)
1,181
Uniforms, Equipment and Firearm .(first issue)
1,200
Vehicle miles (estimate 38t per mile x 36.6
miles per day x 208 days)
2,893
Vehicle purchase (five year pro -rated 1.6
shift relief factor)
800
Shift differential H40� per hours)
480
Average paid overtime (excluding compensatory
time)
1,035
Radio, M.D.T., Portable Radio (seven years
pro -rated . 1.6)
600
Training (Southeast Florida Institute
Criminal Justice)
495
Range Ammunition
26
Yearly Physical
75
City Self -Insurance Fund (pro -rated 1,000
employes - Fire, Theft - Tort - Collision
Liability)
728
Supervision (base salary - Sergeant -
Step 3 + fringe : 7)
4 , 614
Mministrative support anti micellaneous
(Communications, Records, etc.)
885
TOTAL COST
$38,294
9/23/80
Planning b Inspections
l' ,G
CITY OF MIAM1, FLORIDA li
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Lt. Thomas F. Paine
Commander
Planning and Inspections i
-"-- --J'
FROM Lt. B.vRiggs
S.P.U.
The following represents cost factors as requested:
(1) Foot beat officer:
(per yr.)
Starting Salary
15,912
Medical Insurance
856
Pension
6,514
Workman's Comp.
1,181
Uniforms, Equip &
Firearm
1,200
Average paid O.T.
1,035
Radio (Portable)
600
Training(S.E. Fla.)
495
Institute
Range Ammo
26
Yearly Physical
75
City Self-insurance
728
Fund
Supervision
4,614
Administrative &
Misc.
885
Total
$34,121.00
(2) One Mounted officer same as
Above
One horse (donated)
Vet -Feed & upkeep per year
Total
$34,121.00
2,855.00
$35,976.00
DATE January 19, 1981 FILE FI14 2-6
SUBJECT Cost Factors
REFFRENCLS Special Taxing District
ENCL OSURf.S
I
i
Lb'M
4...
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Sngea►c.t D. DeJong
Su1?eaty is o•t
P.Cann.i►cg a►id Inspecti.ions
/( a lj:c�l I
rRo�, 066.ice,-L D. L CaCdcve t
Aci-ing Supe-tvi,6c'
Canine Dc.ta.it
el'
DATE Ja► uaAy 21, 1981 rILE PTL-2-2
suB,EC1 Cost Fac-toh (yca,7ty)
o 6 M t.t.i ►ig a Ca►i i►te ---w------ __._._.
066.i.ce,t on .the St' -Lek r --
i '
RFFEAF:NCES
1 11
ENCLOSURES
v �-
P.tejected yca4t'.y di ',Lcct co.s.ts .to p.Cace a new Canine 066.icut i►�i_.___
Uji.i6o.tm Pa.t.to.C:
Sat'a:cy (avenage 5 yea-c o66.icen)
21, 396
Med.icaC Tnsutancc Cove.tage
856
Pension Costs (5 yeast o66.ice)t)
g) 772
wonfze.t'b Compensation (6o.7 o66.icc lt in 5th cfca.t)
1, 497
u►z.i6o.tms (cvs.t o6 ye.a.,Zy .i.s.sue)
262
Vch.ictc mites (c•s-t.irra.te . 38� put mite x 14,000 ►n.it:es
pc,,-yeast-incC(tde.s -taking cvL home)
5, 320
Veh.i.c.Ce. Punchasc (5 yeast p.to-Aatcd)
1 , 200
Sh.i6.t Vi'I)o -,enti.ia.0 (at .40� pc.t houns)
480
Ave,tagc Paid 0ve.t-timc (exc.Cuding compensa.to.ty time)
1,035
Radio, 1d.D.T., Pc ab. c Rad�icy (seven yca,ts pLo-Aa-tcd i 1.6)
600
Range Armnunit-ion
26
Yea ,Uy Phys.icat'.
75
City ScL'-7n.sUtancc Fund
728
Supc-tv.is.ion (base- Sa ra'Ly-SV;gc_ant-Step 3+ F �.irige + 14)
2, 307
Adrn�nE.s.t�at.ivc Supt:c,t.t and ;.1.i-.sceCt'ar.e0us
L 8 5
Vetii►taSian (aveimage_ co.s.t pc, deg yeat.Cy)
360
hfisccUaneous dog suppt:.ics and ►na.in.ianance o6„C.i.ty
issued F.Cas1i£.ight
200
Deg Food
250
CoveLaC£s (4 pa.i•t pe-1 ye(js)
60
T tai►u►:g Suppt:ies (avvcage cost puL dog at 15 dogs)
30
46, 339
4 �r.
PUBLIC SERVTCFS AIDE
COST FACTOR
SALARY
FRINGE (INS., FICA, WC)
TOTAL
$11,569.56
2,468.76
$14,038.32
TUITIO14 - MIAMI-DADE $
185.00
OUTSIDE MEDICAL:
EKG
15.00
X-RAY
25.00
UNIFORM COST PER YEAR
286.00
MDT RADIO (7 YEARS PRO-
RATED : 1.6)
600.00
VEHICLE PURCHASE (5 YEARS
PRO -RATED : 1.6 SHIFT
RELIEF FACTOR)
800.00
VEHICLE MILEAGE (ESTIMATE
-
384 PER MILE x 36.6
MILES PER DAY x 208
DAYS)
2,893.00
SUPERVISION (BASE SALARY
SERGEANT -STEP 3 + 7
FRINGE : 7)
4,614.00
TOTAL COST TIER YEAR = $23,456
2/2/81
P&I
The City of Miami. Special Service
Tax District -A Cost Allocation Methodology
This paper will propose a taxing; formula to cover the
costs of additional police services within the City's
proposed Special Service Taxing District. The need for
increased police protection in the District was outlined
in an earlier Planning Department study - Downtown Miami
Special Tax District Proposal for Additional Police Ser-
vice (see attached). This need has been transformed into
the required increment of police service and cost for this
service as set forth in a study prepared by the Police
Department staff: Proposed Staffing Levels For Special
Taring District (see attached).
As the "special services" have already been clearly quan-
tified, the problem then becomes how to allocate this total
cost among properties in the District's geographic area.
Like property taxes, special assessments are levied against
property rather than against persons or organizations. Spe-
cial assessments are often included on the property tax
statement, and collection and foreclosure procedures are
similar.
On the other hand, there is an important difference between
property taxes and special assessments. Property taxes are
levied for general public purposes, and there is not require-
ment that the taxed property crust receive services or bene-
fits in proportion tn tho tali levy. Special assessment,
in contrast, are levied to finance Specific projocts -
usually capital improvements - and the levy is distributed
on the basis of a formula or procedure which relates the
charge against -a parcel of property to the services or bene-
fits received. "
Economic justification for the use of special assessments
rests upon three arguments: (1) equity, (2) promotion of
economic efficiency, and (3) revenue hroduction.l
In its -j.mplest form, the equity .argument is that if the
benefits of local improvements or services accrue to tho
o.,:ners of specific pieces of property then those owners, ra-
ther than the public at large, should be assessed for the
costs.
1� Fisher, Glenn 17., Financing Local. Governments by Special
As se:;tinuent llunicinal Finanoe Officers Association, 197.4.
-1-
It is not equitable to pay the cost of producing such pri-
vate benefits from revenues collected from the general
public or from a small group of individuals other than
those benefited.
Special assessments when properly used may contribute to
economic efficiency. Since it would be extremely costly
for individual properties in the District to establish their
own security systems and maintain them at a level equal to
that of the City Police force, economic efficiency would be
prompted by establishing a district -wide service. This
district -wide service is what is known in economic terms as
a "public good". By definition, a public good is one from
whose consumption it is not possible to exclude those who
do not pay. Therefore, efficiency can only be achieved
if equity is enforced. In this case, the City taxing authority
would require that all those properties which stand to
benefit from the service- a public good, bear their share of
the cost.
On a somewhat more pragmatic basis, special assessments, are
often justified as a revenue source which avoids some of the
legal restrictions on local taxation and borrowing, and which,
under certain conditions, may be more acceptable to taxpayers
than are other sources of revenue. To the extent that spe-
cial assessments are utilized for projects desired by a large
percentage of those who will be assessed, special assessments
may be more acceptable to citizens than are increased tax
levies.
Economic and le„al theories of special assessments assume
that increased services financed by spocial assessments bene-
fit both the. public at large, and specific parcels of pro-
perty. It is assumed for purposes of t-his study that public
benefits are small in comparison to those private benefits
received by the individual properties in the District. There-
fore, to simplifv the allocation process the full cost of the
increasdd services will be assumed by individual property
owners in the District.
In order to understand the procedures usually followed, it
is important to distin-uish between the allocation of costs
and the allocation of benefits. In the first place, benefits
are expressed in some more or less arbitrary unit, often
dollars.
The thooreti.cally ideal method of allocating private benefits
i.nvolvc-s subtractinu the value of each parcel before the in-
creased service is in the picture from the value of the par-
cel after it has increased as a result of the increased service.
Of fr ,
The benefit to each parcel divided by the total benefit would
be the proportion of costs to be allocated to that parcel.
A case can be made for taxing away the entire increased in
value that results from the improvement even though this may
exceed the total cost. This has not been the practice in
the United States, and such a procedure would probably face
serious constitutional barriers. Actually little use has
been made of the direct appraisal method. Common practice
has hen to use a formula involving one or more factors
which serve as an index or proxy for benefits. Among the
simpler of these are formulas based on front footage or area.
An even simpler approach is to assume that all lots benefit
equally. Often however, more complicated formulas in-
volving a weighted application of two or more factors are
used.
For purposes of this study, it is assumed that benefits to
the District's individual properties will -far exceed the
cost of providing the increased service. The equity condi-
tion is met on the assumption that individual property bene-
fits would be so great that virtually no chance exists for
a property to be assessed a service charge in excess of the
benefits it would receive. This being the case, the problem
then transforms itself to formulating a methodology whereby
properties are assessed on their ability to pay. It is ex-
pected that the ability to pay for the service, as measured
by some proxy for income or vnlue, correlates highly with
Vie benefits to be received since the potential dama_e
to a property from crime would correlate hi:;hly with its
income or value of goods and property.
One method would be to distribute the cost of the increased
service amonti properties on the basis of their relative pro-
perty Value. Properties with hi ghr.r land values NN-Ould pad•
a larger share 1s would prop(?rties Nvi.th greater imnrovements.
Total property va.luc is the sum of its land value and build-
in- value. Ullld value for a property is calculated using
comparable proport,; sailos in the irlmrdiato urroundin, areaat the time of the valualLion. The Special. Taff T)istri.ct would
have roughly 5 (iii'ferent: land va.11i(?s issociatod with different:
parts of thr� lli�,t.rict. These land "'allies, calculated oil
a por squaro foot: bnsis, w(nild be Vised in determinitl', total
latild values for all proportios in that part of tjlc District.
l3nildin!, value i , calculat( (1 (m al per S({unre foot rrplacenu-Tit
cost at time Of val.liation basis aec:ountin„ for the followin-
factors: duality of construction, typO of constructioll and
extent of extra bui lciin;; fentur(,�a. Tkis "nd,justed" per square
- 3-
foot figure i
lowing: age
economic and
adjusted and
plied to the
the building
This building
to arrive at
s then depreciated with regard to the fol-
of the building and extent of functional,
extraordinary physical depreciation. The
deflated per square foot figure is then ap-
figure for number of total square feet on
to arrive at the property's building value.
value can then be added to the land value
the property's total value.
A final factor which will be included in the allocation
formula is the length of property frontage on streets.
this factor is included to account for the added benefits
which would accrue to properties with wider frontages on
streets, especially corner properties. These properties
are considered to more susceptible to crime, and
therefore, more likely to benefit from increased police
service. This factor is mathematically calculated for a
particular property by dividing; that property's front foot-
a;e length by the total length of front footage in the
District. This figure is then weighted by a factor of .33
and added to the land and building property value figure
which is weighted by..di. The resulting figure then rep-
resents that property's share of the Districts total
annual cost for the increased service.
-4-
W
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
1 INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Jim Reid, Director
Planning Department
FROM Mike Levinson, Chi �N
Economic Planning
Planning Department
()ATE February 4, 1981 FILE
SUHJLi;T Special Taxing District - Individ-
ual. Property Cost Increments ror
Alternative Increased Police
Service Levels
RE'FFREN(J.S
ENGLOSUr, ES
The purpose of this memo is to provide estimates of assessed
annual costs to three (3) individual properties in the Down-
town Area for three alternative levels of increased police
protection for the proposed City of Miami Special. Taxing
District.
Three (3) individual properties will be assessed using the
Planning Department's cost allocation formula as set forth
in the enclosed paper - "The City of Mi uni Special Service
Tax District - A Cost Allocation Methodology."
The three individual properties to be considered are:
1. Itevitco Office Building 178,.179 adj. sq,ft,
44 Wost Flagler Street
2. Howard .Johnson hotel and 260 units
Restaurant
200 SL 2nd Avenue
3. Burdine's Department Store 467,158 adj . sq . f t.
22 East Flagrler Street
The cost allocation formula considers three factors:
1. Propertt' Land Value
2. Property Building Valu(�
3. Property Street: Frontage,
A full explanation of theso factors is included in the aforo.-
mentioneci plannin;; study. I1:1C.11 of tho three factors -is assigned
an equal weight, of once -third of the overall cost assessment.
Down t own Area Total Land and Bu i ld i.ng Value - $879 , 5G2 , 000
Doxntown Area Total Street Frontage - 1.10,600 feet
f
Jim Reid, Director
Planning Department
Page 2
February 4, 1981
The cost for increased police service is derived from a
Police Department Study entitled "Proposed Staffing Levels
For Special Taxing District - 1980 Cost", issued January
1981, which set forth three alternatives:
Plan A-1 (100% increase staffing all sworn)
Plan B-1 (50`e increase staffing all. sworn)
Blan C-1 (2510 increase staffing all sworn)
The three properties will be assessed for each of the police
staffing alternatives.
Police Staffing; Cost: Special
Alternative Taxing District
A-1
$1,194,657
B-1
578,350
C-1
286,498
I. Property 1
- Revitco:
Land Valise
$ 829,250
.67
(S 5,801.,025) _ .00419
Buildi.nn Value
4,971,775
879,562,000
TOTAL VALUE'
$5 , 801 ,
025 . 3�
( 62 =+. 000145
.;1,10 , 600
Street Frontage
62
feet
Overall
Property Cost: Factor = .00.156-1
Total Service
Alternative
Cost
A-1
(.004564)
x
$1,194,657
= $ 5,152
11-1
(.
00.15G-1) x
578,350
= 26,10
C-1
( .
00.15G.1) x
28G., 498
= 1305
NVION ---
Jim Reid, Director
Planning Department
Page 3
February 4, 1981
II. Property 2 - Howard Johnson:
Land Value $2,421,320
Building 7,497,330
Value
Total Value $9,918,650
.67 (S 9,918,650) = .007554
879,562,000
.33 ( 343 )=+.000805
( 140,600
Street Frontage 343 feet
Overall. Property
Cost
Factor
Total Service
Alternative
Cost
A-1
(.008359)x
$1,194,657
= $9986
B-1
(.008359)x
578,350
= 4834
C-1
(.008359)x
286,4 9S
= 2395
III. Prnrwrty 3
- Burdines :
Land Value
$7,355,170
.67
($12,877,2SO)+
13ui.Idin'; '
5,189,1.10
(879,562,000)
V,i Iue
.�
Total
$12 , 877 , 280
.33
( 1085 )
1,10 , 600
street Ff'onta'�e 1.085 feet
Ovora l l Pl*opert y Cost Factor
Total
Service
,11 t i
Cost
A-1
(, 012,35.1 )
x $1 ,104 , 657
= $1. 4 , 759
13-1
( , 01235-1)
x 575*, 350
= 7 ,1.15
C-1
(. 01235,1)
x 286,198
= 3,540
= .008359
009 SOS
+.0025.16
. 01235.1