Loading...
BCC Minutes 09/19/2001 B (Budget)September 19, 2001 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, Wednesday, September 19, 2001 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 5:05 p.m. In BUDGET SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: ALSO PRESENT: James D. Carter, Ph.D. Pamela S. Mac'Kie Jim Coletta Donna Fiala Tom Henning Thomas Olliff, County Manager David Weigel, County Attorney Michael Smykowski, Budget Director Page 1 NOTICE: COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA Wednesday, September 19, 2001 5:05 p.m. ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PLEDGE OF ALI,EGIANCF, ,,ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINC -BCC FY 2001-02 Budget. A. Discussion of Millage Rates Funding the FY 2002 Budget B. Discussion of Further Amendments to the Tentative Budget C. Public Comments and Questions 1. General Topics 2. Health Care for the Uninsured Program D. Wrap-up Items E. Resolution to Amend the Tentative Budgets Public Reading of the Taxing Authority Levying Millage, the Name of the Taxing Authority, the Rolled-Back Rate, the Percentage Increase, and the Millage Rate to be Levied G. Adoption of Resolution Setting Millage Rates H. Resolution to Adopt the Final Budget by Fund 3. ADJOURN. September 19, 2001 (Meeting commenced with Commissioner Mac'Kie not present.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good evening. Welcome to the Board of County Commissioners second meeting on the review of the proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1 through September 30 of 2002. If all of you will please stand and join with me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. (The pledge of allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Mike, do you want to take us through the process as you've always done so well? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. CHAIRMAN CARTER: We will follow the agenda. If anyone is going to sign up to speak, there's an opportunity for that. You need to fill out the slips. MR. SMYKOWSKI: For the record, Michael Smykowski, budget director. For members of the general public who are present, there are speaker sign-up slips in the hallway as well as agendas for the meeting. If you could bring them to me or Mr. Olliff, we would appreciate it. Item #2A DISCUSSION OF MILLAGE RATES FUNDING THE FY2002 BUDGET The first thing to discuss pursuant to Florida statute is a discussion of the tentative millage rates and an increase of the rolled- back rate. On Item 2-A, the General Fund, the rolled-back rate is 3.0544 with a proposed millage rate of 3.9077, an increase of 27.9 percent. Within the General Fund we're opening a new regional library and Page 2 September 19, 2001 implementing the second half of the pay-plan adjustment within the sheriff's budget. There are positions that were formerly grant funded as well as new positions for the juvenile assessment center. We have a number of major capital projects proposed in the upcoming fiscal-year budget including the Immokalee Jail construction, a North Naples satellite government office facility directly adjacent to the new north regional library, purchase of a new county financial system, as well as touch-screen voting equipment within the Supervisor of Elections office. There are also additional animal control officers proposed due to demands for service from the public, additional roadway maintenance crews, additional staff required to acquire the necessary rights-of-way for major capital projects, especially utilities and roadways, and contributions to the redevelopment areas. Those include the Naples Downtown CRA, the Bayshore Gateway Triangle, and the Immokalee redevelopment areas. Water Pollution Control, there was a slight change in this budget. Since your last hearing, the revised millage rate is .0420 mills, which is an increase of 8.2 percent above the rolled-back rate of .0388. That's due -- one of the contracts that was budgeted in fiscal year '02, the reimbursement revenue from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, was approximately $40,000 higher than estimated which will allow us to reduce ad valorem taxes by a like amount. That is a county-wide tax. Unincorporated Area General Fund, the rolled-back rate is .7576, proposed millage .8069, an increase of 6.5 percent. There's the enhanced code enforcement staffing as well as enhanced staffing in parks and natural resources. We're increasing the amount of roadway resurfacing, and there's an additional landscaping crew to maintain median beautification projects as they come online. Golden Gate Community Center, the proposed millage rate is Page 3 September 19, 2001 .4330, an increase of 22.6 percent over the rolled-back rate of.3532. Major refurbishments proposed in the upcoming-year budget include painting the original building, recarpeting, as well as offering an after-school-care program and staffing of the new annex facility building. Naples Park Drainage, there is no tax levy proposed. Pine Ridge Industrial Park, due to increased carried-forward revenue, the tax levy required decreased by approximately $4,000. The proposed millage rate is .0485, which is a decrease of 20.8 percent below the rolled-back rate of .0612. Victoria Park Drainage, there's a $400 decrease in the tax levy. The proposed millage is. 1722, a decrease of 10.3 percent below the rolled-back rate of. 192. Golden Gate Parkway Beautification levies a constant millage pursuant to the advisory committee recommendation. The rolled-back rate is .4652. That's an increase of 7.5 percent. Naples Production Park, there's a $100 decrease in the tax levy. The proposed millage is .0304, a decrease of 1.6 percent below the rolled-back rate of .0309. Isle of Capri Fire levies a constant 1 mill. That's an increase of 18.1 percent to fund district operations. That's above the rolled-back rate of .8464. Ochopee Fire Control levies a constant 4 mills. That's an increase of 19.4 percent above the rolled-back rate of 3.3491. Collier County Fire also levies a constant millage of 2 mills. That's to provide protection in the unincorporated areas or people who are not within the boundaries of a dependent or independent fire district that's a means of taxing and providing funding to the departments who actually service those areas. It's an increase of 4.2 percent above the rolled-back rate of 1.9192 mills. Goodland/Horr's Island Fire MSTU, the proposed millage is .7377. It's a decrease of 6.9 percent below the rolled-back rate of Page 4 September 19, 2001 .7924 due to increased value within that area. That is a contract -- a service contract with the City of Marco Island to provide coverage in those areas. Radio Road Beautification levies a constant half mill tax levy. They're reserving funds for future improvements. Again, this is governed -- there is a citizen's advisory committee that made a recommendation to the board on the millage. It's a half-mill levy. It's 7.8 percent above the rolled-back rate. There's no proposed tax levy on the Sabal Palm Road MSTU. Lely Golf Estates Beautification is a 2 mill tax levy. That's 42 percent above the rolled-back rate of 1.4089. The citizens in that area had petitioned the board in the past year to increase the tax levy, the cap, from 1.5 mills to 2 mills in accordance with the advisory committee recommendations. The budget is reflective of those wishes. (Commissioner Mac'Kie is now present.) MR. SMYKOWSKI: HawksRidge Stormwater Pumping MSTU, there's a decrease of 44.5 percent below the rolled-back rate. The proposed millage is .0696. Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU levies a constant 1 mill. That's an increase of 6.1 percent above the rolled-back rate of .9422. Immokalee Beautification MSTU levies a constant 1 mill. That's 7.6 percent above the rolled- back rate of .9293. Bayshore Avalon Beautification, the proposed millage is 2. That's a decrease of 28.6 percent below the rolled-back rate of 2.7993 mills. If the board will recall, we had levied 3 mills for 3 years during the initial ramping up for the construction phase of that project. The construction is now complete, and we're moving or transitioning to a maintenance mode within that MSTU. Parks GOB Debt Service, the proposed millage rate is .0318. It's a decrease of 8.4 percent below the rolled-back rate of .0347. Page 5 September 19, 2001 That's for outstanding debts that were used to finance the construction of the initial five community parks within Collier County. Isle of Capri Municipal Rescue Debt, there is no proposed tax levy. Collier County Lighting, the proposed tax levy is .2002 mills, an increase of 46.7 percent above the rolled-back rate. There you're impacted by the increased cost of electricity as well as a decrease in available fund balance. Naples Production Park Street Lighting, again, it was affected by the increased cost of electricity. The rolled- back rate is .0375; the proposed millage rate is .0413. That's an increase of 10.1 percent of the rolled-back rate. Finally, Pelican Bay MSTBU, the proposed millage rate is. 1994 mills, an increase of 14.1 percent above the rolled-back rate of. 1748. That computes to an aggregate millage rate of 4.575, an increase of 24.58 percent above the rolled-back rate. Item #2B DISCUSSION OF FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE TENTATIVE BUDGET Mr. Chairman, that concludes Item 2-A. That will move us to Item 2-B which is a discussion of further amendments to the tentative budget. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Any questions on the part of the commissioners before we move to 2-B? (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Seeing none, we'll move forward with Mr. Mike Smykowski. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. We had some changes in the general fund since the first hearing. You had approved the United Arts Page 6 September 19, 2001 Council Funding request. There was also an adjustment to the sales tax and revenue-sharing estimates pursuant to the reductions in the state revenue forecast estimates. As I indicated previously, the pollution control -- there was an increase in revenue in the FDEP petroleum compliance inspections contract resulting in a net reduction in ad valorem of 39,500. We did move a few positions that are in human resources and purchasing that were remote for areas including transportation, community development, and utilities. We were budgeting those directly in human resources and purchasing with an offsetting transfer. The net impact in terms of ad valorem is zero. We're just budgeting those for direct accountability and recognize that those employees are, in fact, purchasing/human resources employees, so they can't effectively serve two masters being in operating divisions as well as trying to report to human resources and purchasing directors. The Adoption Awareness Fund is a new fund, Fund 170. The county has received, actually, a check from receipts from sales of specialty license plates, "Choose Life" license plates, to fund adoption awareness. We've already received a check, so as a result we have to budget for that. That is a brand new fund that we receive a nominal amount for. The Commercial Paper Debt reflects debt service on the new Horseshoe Drive building and the policy decision the board made on September 11 th regarding the purchase of the new financial management system. With that -- there was one other change in the Airport Authority. You had approved a pay-down of the commercial paper loan on September 1 lth as well, and we've made that corresponding adjustment to that budget to reflect your policy decision of September 1 lth. Page 7 September 19, 2001 Mr. Chairman, that concludes Item 2-B. With that we're prepared to take public comments, if we could, on general topics, and then we broke it out into a separate discussion item for the health care for the uninsured program prior to your reviewing wrap-up items and making any final changes to the budget. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some questions on 2-B. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. Question by Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: On Item 2-B, page 1, there are some carried-forward items and one example is MSTD General Fund 111. There's a carried forward of a half million dollars. Is that money earmarked for projects-- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that just didn't get done? Is that what it is? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. When the budget is put together, staff is estimating which capital projects will be under contract encumbered via purchase order by September 30th. Obviously they're doing that in mid March. At this point in time, to minimize the number of carried-forward budget amendments and rebudgeting items in the beginning of the new fiscal year, we simply take a final look, and any projects that are not currently under contract we simply rebudget in the next fiscal year resulting in that additional carried forward. But, yes, to directly answer your question, it is obligated for that media maintenance contract which will take place in fiscal year '02. COMMISSIONER HENNING: In each one of these carried forward, they are earmarked for projects that have been approved by the Board of Commissioners? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. It's simply a matter of whether or not they're under contract due to -- you know, when you Page 8 September 19, 2001 get into major capital projects for roads or utilities, permitting issues or right-of-way acquisitions may impact your ability to issue a contract by September 30th and, again, we are simply rebudgeting those specific projects in the new fiscal year to minimize the number of administrative budget amendments that would otherwise be at your first board meeting in October. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Another question on the Fair Board Fund 315. Wasn't there an agreement of payback to the board for the loan on the barn? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. The debt service on that loan is budgeted in Fund 299, and the revenue for the principal and interest component on that Fair Board loan is actually a contribution from the Fair Board itself. So they are defeasing that debt themselves on an incremental basis annually. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I was told -- I don't know how true it is -- that that was due in 2002, the total, or was there an agreement to extend that out? MR. SMYKOWSKI: No. There's a balloon payment, but they're making incremental interest payments. I think that was a five- year note when we took that out. It's about -- or probably will be in the year '02. So they still have a few years yet to make those improvements, and they'll be generating the cash to pay off that balloon note when it comes due. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No further questions. Thank you. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: On Bayshore, I was wondering do we already have funds in place from the 3 mills to change the bridge facade and also to put in the benches that they had planned initially? I know they got a grant for $200,000 for the bridge. I don't know if there was matching funds needed. I was just wondering if that is Page 9 September 19, 2001 moving forward and if those funds are already sitting there. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, I believe they are. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Item #2C PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS CHAIRMAN CARTER: No further questions. We would then move to public comment and questions. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, because most of the speakers didn't register for a topic in particular, I'll go ahead and just call them as I've got them. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Fine. MR. OLLIFF: The first speaker is Jennifer Hurley. Following Ms. Hurley will be Jane Varner. MS. HURLEY: Good evening. My name is Jennifer Hurley, J-e-n-n-i-f-e-r H-u-r-l-e-y, and I live in the North Naples/Vanderbilt area. This is the second time coming to a County Commissioners meeting and definitely the first time to speak. The other meeting I attended was the first public hearing on the 2001 proposed property taxes. On the morning of that first meeting of September 6th, I was very encouraged to read in the Naples paper of the united debate with City Council and its citizens regarding the same great concern as I and my neighbors have with the enormity and consistency of the property tax increases. I met the same great concern here that evening, and I was hoping that just maybe my presence at that meeting would lend the necessary support to my fellow taxpayers and assist in challenging the board's rationale in such large and disproportionate increases. That simple hope, however, quickly dissipated when reading the following day's paper that stated, "Collier County Commissioners Page 10 September 19, 2001 meet little resistance in guiding budget through the next-to-last hurdle" and that "although the commissioners' chambers were filled for the meeting, fewer than a dozen folks spoke." I could not believe I was reading about the same meeting as I had experienced the night before. Did that reporter and consequently the Board of Commissioners not hear the heartfelt cry of Robert Bums, Cedar (phonetic) Rosas, and Hank Brian and the heated response of the audience? I knew then that I could not go another year, another day, feeling silenced, sickened, and scared and that I would have to summon up my strength and speak for the thousands of taxpayers like myself. At that last meeting the board was presented a handout by Hank Brian. For those of you in the audience that are unfamiliar, it was a very well documented analysis comparing assessed property values and mill rates for the last seven years. Those numbers speak, clearly, for themselves. My numbers also speak very clearly and very loudly. As I said earlier, I live in the Vanderbilt area in a modest house by Naples standards. In real dollars my taxes have gone from $5,949 in 1999 to $8,525 in 2000 to a proposed $12,829 in 2001, a 115 percent increase in two years. In five years they have gone up 171 percent or an average of 34 percent per year. And if there is absolutely no change in the budget this year, my taxes will still go from $8,525 in 2000 to $11,407 in 2001, a 34 percent increase from last year, a 91 percent increase in two years. Plain and simply, how can anyone stand for this financially or principly? I cannot see where anyone could begin to argue that these increases are either fair or reasonable. And on a more personal note, how much longer will it be until I'm taxed out of my home? At the last meeting, there were a few other items that I would like to address. You spoke of the need to catch up. When will we ever catch up? The compounding monetary increases of catching up Page 11 September 19, 2001 will run us out. One also spoke that such a surge in population that we've seen in Collier County necessitates spending to keep up with the growth. However, growth should sustain spending. The taxpayers should not be subsidizing it. In addition, one stated that we, the customers, have many demands for services. Yet somewhere there has to be a balance between one's ability to pay and the desire of major capital improvements, parks, services, beautification, and maintenance. In my ten years in Naples, I do not believe there has ever been a year that the proposed budget has not been passed. Is this coincidence or blind passage? Lastly, after the September 6th meeting, the consensus of many that continued discussing the matter at hand was that it was a waste of time. Nothing would be changed. Will this be true? Naples is a beautiful place, but at what price? I'm assuming you fully recognize that the people that live here are not immune to the debilitating effects of a recessing economy and that the elected county representatives -- the government of the people by the people for the people -- cannot be immune to the ability of its people either. I kindly remind you that it is not too late. This budget has not yet been passed. We realize there has been a lot of work put into this proposed budget; however, it is my sincere hope that you heed the worrisome feedback of your constituents knowing that there are many more too intimidated to come forward. We urge you to reanalyze the items and challenge yourselves and the others on the board to take fiscally responsible and prudent corrective action that truly coincides and reflects current economic, political, and market conditions. Thank you very much. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ma'am, before you leave the podium, I just have a couple questions that would help me. One, have you ever Page 12 September 19, 2001 filed a homestead exemption? MS. HURLEY: Yes, I did have a homestead exemption. However, for reasons prior to 1997 when I understand the cap went into effect in 1998 1 was not aware of that, but you can be assured that it will be filed this year. I did not realize there was a cap in effect. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, ma'am. You know, that's a good message for everyone. There is a process that you can file for, and if you sell your home and move to another home, you must refile again. So you may want to have a conversation with the taxpayers' office. Your numbers were substantial as they went up, and if you would have filed, you would have found that you would not have been confronted with those increases. Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Jane Vamer followed by Victor Rosenberger. MS. VARNER: My name is Jane Varner, and I'm a member of the Taxpayers Action Group. I'm sure every one of you up there is aware of what happened last week. We were in somewhat of a recession before, but now we're faced with uncertainty. We don't know where we're going to be going from here. I think it's time you consider this when you're looking at this budget and see if you can't readjust it. There are going to be a lot of people in this county that are going to be suffering bad effects from what's been happening, and for you to go on as "business as usual" would be very irresponsible. Now, I have a couple of questions. I wonder when each department came to you with their proposed budget did you, you know, question their spending? Did you reduce it somewhat? I remember before they used to come in and they'd kind of get beaten down, so they would come in asking the maximum and then by the time they were through they were getting quite a bit less than what they asked for. Did you do this in the process? Page 13 September 19, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ms. Vamer, yes, we did. In fact, I'm going to let Mr. Olliff comment on that. There used to be a time -- and I would agree -- where you asked for more than you ever thought you would get, and you would expect somebody to beat you down, particularly at this level, so that we would get to what they thought they should end up with. We use a much more sophisticated process today. I know Tom pulled out $70 million in capital expenditure requests prior to it coming here, and I know that he has other numbers that he would be pleased to share with you. That's why we have instituted a tougher review process at all levels. And believe me, anyone that's sitting out there that's on staff knows that we have looked at this, we have peeled back, we have tried to do everything to be fiscally responsible. We understand what's going on in this country and are well aware of what not only has taken place this year, but what might happen next year. But I would like our county manager to respond to that specifically for you. MS. VARNER: Would this take into my time at this point because I just have a couple more -- a few more questions? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Why don't you ask your other questions. MS. VARNER: Okay. My other questions -- because I read that you were going to increase the budget by $125 million over the previous year; that's if the paper was correct with what they reported, $125 million over last year's budget. That's pretty significant, like about 20 percent. I don't know what's a fair percent increase. I mean, sometimes there's inflation and that. But then we learned from this that the roads aren't addressed in this, so we are going to be looking at a request for a half cent sales tax. Also, our solid waste disposal is not really in this either from my understanding, and so that will Page 14 September 19, 2001 involve increases for the people in Collier County also. Now, my question is, if you collect for the roads, how much do you have to collect each year, say, if you put it on property taxes or road taxes? What's the amount per year that you feel you have to collect for the roads? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, there's a multiple -- you've asked a number of questions. Maybe, Tom, we can sort all this out. Let me go back to -- you asked if there was a budget increase. Yes. Part of that is inflation, cost of living, and all of that. Yes, it's in there. Also, there were two very large pieces in there, and one was the second part of a pay-plan adjustment that I mentioned at the last meeting that hadn't been adjusted in eight years. What we did is take proactive action beginning last year to do half of it followed through with the second half this year, which is a substantial amount of money. However, if we wouldn't have done that, we knew going into this that for the last two or three years we have been losing a significant number of employees from Collier County. It's very expensive to go out and recruit and train new people. The sheriff's office in particular was having great difficulty with this. Since the initiation of the pay-plan adjustment beginning last year we have turned that around. So we are now saving the taxpayers money because any time any employee walks out the door, it costs you about 130 percent, at least, to replace and train them. So that gets to be very, very expensive. MS. VARNER: Is that where most of the increase is then? CHAIRMAN CARTER: There's a substantial amount of money in there, and I'm going to let Mr. Olliff give you the exact numbers. That's part of it. I think part of your other question was an issue of roads and to Page 15 September 19, 2001 address how much of that is covered through the regular budget and also to separate out the 20-year plan and the half penny for roads, that is an entirely different item-- MS. VARNER: Okay. CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and we can discuss that at any point. MS. VARNER: Well, I'll set that aside then. If I can just throw my last request in. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. MS. VARNER: Would you, in light of all of this, please reconsider instituting a new indigent health care plan? We would appreciate that. Thank you. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think that you will hear some very positive things on that tonight. Mr. Olliff, maybe you would like to address some of Ms. Varner's questions. MR. OLLIFF: I'll try. I'll try to back up and catch some of them. I know that the first question was about the budget review process, and I can tell you that not only is that same review process in place, but I know of at least $3.5 million worth of expanded requests that were made by departments that as part of either the staff review or the board's review during the summer got cut out of this budget and didn't make it into the final budget that you see here tonight. So there was a substantial amount of review and, frankly, weeping and gnashing of teeth and the things that just go into making a budget what it is. The board spent a significant amount of time over the summer reviewing individual department and section budgets, putting them through the same painful review that they have in years past. Other questions, in terms of the roads -- that's the only other question I can remember that went unanswered, Mr. Chairman, and I think -- the only way I know how to answer that is to be able to tell Page 16 September 19, 2001 Ms. Varner that in addition to the existing impact fee and gas tax revenues that we have, our estimate is there's an unfunded need in a four- or five-year period of about $288 million. If you finance that over 5 years, it comes out to about $50 million a year in additionally needed revenue. If you do it in 4 years, it comes out to about $70 million in additionally needed revenue. That's the issue that's really on the table with the half cent, or looking at a property tax is the other option. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is the per household if we -- I don't know if this is proper or not -- if we use a sales tax versus property taxes? MR. OLLIFF: To get to that, you have to use some averages, but using a blended average of an average single-family home and an average multi-family type condominium home, the value comes out to about $188,000. So based on that, to raise the same amount of money that we just talked about on a four- or five-year period, means that you're going to have to generate about $333 additional dollars per household through a property tax if you're going to fund it that way. Or if you're going to go through the half penny route you, again, will have to use some averages. And using a median income number here in this county which is, frankly, very high -- it's $65,000 which, I believe, is the highest median income in the state -- but by using that, the actual sales tax cost for a half penny addition would be about $178 per household, so that's sort of the best apple-to-apple comparison that we can give you. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And part of the explanation for that is that 26.4 percent, I think, of the sales tax is paid for by nonproperty owners or out-of-county residents. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. As Dick Lydon, the president Page 17 September 19, 2001 of the Vanderbilt Beach Association, said at a council meeting -- he's a wonderful guy. He said, "You know, everybody knows I'm cheap. I'll take a 26.4 percent discount versus paying it all myself." I think that's what it gets down to. We are taking what we said we would do -- we're bringing all the information out to you so that you'll have a chance to look at it, the questions that are raised, and all of us that are available to go into meetings as a staff, as there is a very large community group working through this to take the message to everybody so that they can have their questions answered so they understand that the money is dedicated entirely to roads. It's over a 20-year program. And I would much rather see people 14 and 15 years from now moving here having an opportunity to pay for those roads than I would have every taxpayer upfront having to pay for it. Secondly -- and we can never lose sight of this -- the State of Florida is going to make us build the roads anyhow. It's called concurrency. They're going to tell us, "You have to build the roads not because of the people that are coming in the future, but you have to build them for the people that are here. You can do anything you want, Collier County Board of County Commissioners, but at the end of the day you've got to build the roads. How do you want to pay for them?" So that's one we're trying to take out for everyone to have an opportunity to read. We have a nice little brochure that before I finish up here tonight we'll see if we can get copies put in the hall for you with general questions that are asked by everybody and hope that will be, initially, an opportunity for you to begin to digest it. They were great questions raised by Miss Varner. I appreciate that. I think we need to go to the next speaker. MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Victor Rosenberger followed by Ty Agoston. Page 18 September 19, 2001 MR. ROSENBERG: I think my two lady friends ahead of me pretty well answered a lot of my questions. But I was just going to say that I think-- I was amazed that we have a 29 percent increase. I don't know what's going to happen next year, because I think we're going to have a lot of belt tightening coming up. I know you've all noticed in the past that the market is totally tanking now. I'm opposed to this medical procedure. The thing that really irritates me is that we're silenced on a vote. You know, I feel that the people of Naples should have a vote on this. I know you people have been ignoring us, but I'm really opposed to that for that reason. I think that one of the problems I can see for the next year is that we are going to have a lot of retirees who are going to be moving right out of their homes. We're losing them because of the taxes, and we're going to lose them because they're going to be broke. You're going to find a lot of this happening. So when you're considering all your budget agendas and whatever, I'm not sure you're considering that. You're going to give free medical here, and we're going to lose these people over here. Basically, that's all I have to say right now because, like I said, the other individuals, the women, covered it pretty good. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. OLLIFF: Ty Agoston is your next speaker followed by Maurice Kent. MR. AGOSTON: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Ty Agoston. I live in the endangered Golden Gate Estates, and I'm also the co-president of the Taxpayers Action Group, and I'm speaking for them. Frankly, a couple of months back I read a little story in the paper. It came across pretty quaint. It was some type of an invitation for an old-fashioned ice cream sundae given by the parks department, Page 19 September 19, 2001 if I remember right, and I even laughed at the beginning of it until I recognized that I was paying for the damn thing. Frankly, I expected ice cream tonight. At the rate you commissioners are spending money, good grief, that's the least we can expect. There are many people living in Collier County who can well afford your fifty percent raise or fifty-three percent that you have raised on the vacant land I have next to me for my children or the lady's a-hundred-and-some-odd percent over a two-year period, and you cite causes. Apparently you blame prior commissioners. Maybe they were blithering idiots? Some of you were sitting at that podium with them. I remember attending most of the County Commission meetings. I didn't see you argue against them. You were sitting there very happy voting with them. So for you to today claim that you're catching up sounds incongruous. There were no indications before. Going on to the subject of indigent care, I guess socialized medicine is arriving in Collier County. I guess Hillary was not successful in Washington, but you, ladies and gentlemen, apparently will do this by hook-a-crook, and you're not going to pay any attention to the people who sit out here or sit at home not having the time to come and argue with you. But even if they do, you're going to sit there, and you're going to tell them that you were elected to make those hard, intellectually exacting decisions to help the poor. In light of what happened last week -- by the way, we might consider making some gesture to patriotism. There were a lot of Americans lost. But other than that, has anyone considered what's going to happen to the economy.'? How you budget, what you must prepare, with a peak economic growth in mind will reflect what's going to happen in the forthcoming weeks, months, whatever it will take. I don't see anybody stop and think what happens -- you see, Page 20 September 19, 2001 we're talking about the average income that Tom Olliff mentioned of $65,000 as one of the highest in the state. Actually, it's one of the highest in the country. The average salary in Collier County is $28,000. How those people are going to pay for your increases I wish one of you or some of you would consider that. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: If I might make a comment. Ty, you're a good businessman. You've spent a lot of years in business. You know budgets do not mean that you expend every dollar that is there. A budget says you have set aside the funds providing the revenue streams are there to do it. If, for whatever reason, we have to adjust downward, we will have to do that. So budgets give you the guidelines upon which you can meet the needs and the services. The general fund is made up of two income streams, property taxes and sales taxes. Now, property taxes we're all going to pay because that's been set. Each one of us is going to get out our checkbook based on what Mr. Skinner told us our property values were worth and by what the tax collector sends out to us, and we will all write our checks. Sales taxes will be fluid because we don't know. The general fund areas we may have to adjust and deal with accordingly. We'll have to face those decisions as we go along. So I hope everyone will just please keep that in mind. That's what we're doing here. We have already taken initiatives for the next fiscal year, particularly with the TDC and other things, and are beginning to look at what we feel will be the impact -- even prior to the tragedy of Tuesday -- as to how it might affect us and adjusting those things and adjusting our thinking accordingly. So we are looking to the future to deal with the circumstances as best we can and still provide the services that are requested by the community, whether it's EMS, sheriffs department, road repair, Page 21 September 19, 2001 libraries, parks, or whatever it is. And those are a lot of fixed costs out there, ladies and gentlemen, that don't go away. Like you have fixed costs in your home, we have fixed costs in running this business. After all, this is what it is, a half-billion-dollar-a-year business that we are trying to manage effectively and efficiently. And we don't like to have to sit in front of you and say, "You know, it's going to cost more than it used to." No one likes that. But it's a reality that we -- all of us duly elected by you -- have had to deal with. So we appreciate your concerns and your inputs, but just keep in mind that that's where we are. Next speaker, please. MR. KENT: My name is Mo Kent. I'm the president of the Port Royal Property Owners Association. I think we are all very aware of the hard decisions that you have to make, Mr. Carter; however, I think it's also very difficult for us to walk into our boss tomorrow and ask for a 3 5 percent pay increase. I think that that's, in fact, what you're asking for in many cases. So where you have a budget to deal with, you also have the ability to go out and get it; everyone else doesn't. Another issue that I would like to talk to you about today is homesteading. I know that you asked Miss Hurley whether or not she was homesteaded. Over 50 percent of the properties in Collier County are not homesteaded. So I can assure you of one thing. What we have in this room is 30 percent full at best. If homesteading were not in effect, believe me, we couldn't hold this over at the Naples football field and hold the number of people that would want to talk about it. I think the silence is deafening, and I'm very amazed by it, and it has an effect on people other than the homesteaders. Okay. The people that are homesteaded will be affected greatly by this. Page 22 September 19, 2001 Number 1, for those people that wish to move up and buy another home, their present homestead exemption will now expire and go to the new tax level. These people are affected dramatically. Let's face it. Real estate has been a huge part of the growth of Collier County. So to ignore the nonhomesteaders, I think, is a big mistake. I think also that -- and I was taking a look-- if you take a look at the half percent increase in the sales tax that we're talking about, that's $500 per $100,000 of spending; not income, but spending. Relatively, that's a drop in the ocean compared to what's happening to most people's tax bill. Well, from reading the papers and talking to people in town, what's talked about? The half percent increase in sales tax, not the real estate tax. The reason being is that the people that are affected by the increase in the real estate taxes, they're not in town. Okay. They aren't homesteaded. If they were in town, they would be homesteaded. At the Port Royal Property Owners Association, we have gotten a number of phone calls. And when I say -- we have 485 members of which probably 150 of them are homesteaded, and we've received well over 70 phone calls from people who are not homesteaded and they've asked, "What are you doing about it? What's being done?" I imagined people are in an uproar, and people are not in an uproar. The people that are in an uproar are in this room here tonight. And as I said, I think we could have that ice cream party, and I'd pop for it. It's not that expensive. So I really want to register a complaint. I think that 30 -- in Port Royal, I know we're not -- no one's going to hold any tag days and no one's going to have any garage sales for the people in Port Royal, but when I tell you that taxes are going from $25,000 or $29,000 to $52,000, that's dramatic. Those are real dollars. Okay. If you don't think it affects some of the retirees down there, you Page 23 September 19, 2001 bet it does, dramatically. So I really have to question the fiscal responsibility of the commission, of the budget director, of the staff, in coming forward with a budget such as this. In private enterprise if we tried something like this, we wouldn't have a job tomorrow. I realize you all have a difficult job, and I wouldn't want to sit where you're sitting because no one wants to be the bearer of bad news, and I don't want to kill the messenger. But I'll be honest with you, I don't know who else to sling the daggers at. You're all easy to take a potshot at, everyone in this room. But on behalf of the Port Royal Property Owners Association, I really am filing a very strong complaint at this sort of behavior. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that's all your registered speakers. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Olliff. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now we have general topics. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That was it. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If there's anybody who wanted to speak and didn't know you needed to fill out a little registration slip, you know, raise your hand and the chairman will entertain that, I'm sure, if you're here. I just thought I would ask. Item #2D WRAP-UP ITEMS MR. SMYKOWSKI: That moves us to Item 2-D, which is the wrap-up list. There were five items on your wrap-up list. One, legal opinion regarding use of GAC Trust Fund revenue to purchase road and bridge equipment. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great idea, but it won't work. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Good idea, but it won't work. I couldn't Page 24 September 19, 2001 have said it more'succinctly. It doesn't meet the legal boundaries of the existing agreement between the GAC and the county. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good effort though. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Item 2, Naples Park, there was a question raised. There were public speakers at the first public hearing requesting that the county purchase a couple of lots for a neighborhood park. Staff is recommending use of the parks capital fund for this purchase. There's $95,000 available as discussed at the first hearing resulting from the deferral of the Livingston Woods neighborhood park. As they re-evaluate that situation, the balance of the funds for the estimated cost of $150,000 would be available in the reserves within that parks capital fund. Staff is recommending that you proceed, and we will bring forth a separate executive summary recommending the same. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So if we want to support that in a motion that will be coming up later -- I'm just going to be curious about what the process is going to be -- will we need to move staff recommendation or move approval of the budget with these additions and deletions? Usually by the time we're to second hearing, it's not still this much yet to be decided, so I'm uncertain about what happens. MR. OLLIFF: Based on the board's decisions and discussions from the first budget public hearing, this is in the budget. So in the budget that you will adopt these changes are -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. That is in the budget already. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the GAC money is not in the budget because it wasn't possible. MR. OLLIFF: Right. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. I appreciate it. Thank Page 25 September 19, 2001 yOU. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. The third item is a policy decision from the board regarding the Naples -- the Botanical Gardens land purchase. The purchase price is $500,000. At the direction of the county manager, staff attended the recent Naples -- the Gateway Triangle/CRA Advisory Board meeting, and the CRA Advisory Board agreed in principle to a 50/50 funding arrangement with the county for that purchase. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I would very much like to see that happen. I don't -- is that currently in the budget or not in the budget? MR. OLLIFF: It's not in the budget-- well, I take that back. The funds are in the budget. Should the board decide to do this, this is actually a decision that needs to be made at a later regular board meeting. We just wanted to follow up with you and let you know what the CRA decision was. But there are some legal and financial issues that need to be worked out and the details brought back to the full board on a Tuesday. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So there's money available in reserves or somewhere if the board made a decision to purchase this, but I even agree that it needs a more thorough review. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. I agree, Commissioner. Again, it's one of those items that's there, but it doesn't mean you're going to spend it because -- Mr. Olliff and I had some conversations about this today. I asked him questions that were raised back through the process -- and I know we'll get all of that at a future board meeting -- to see if we don't have continued negotiations on that. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We've got some good news on the next one, I think. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. We do, in fact, have some good news. The supervisor of elections had budgeted-- had requested $6 Page 26 September 19, 2001 million in the budget for touch-screen voting equipment. Based on bids that were opened Friday and evaluation of those bids yesterday, we're happy to report the estimated cost is only $5 million now. We had proposed to finance that equipment purchased due to the initial upfront costs, and the estimated savings is $150,000. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Tom, on that item -- and I know there was two choices that we could make, whether a touch- screen, which is the Cadillac, or optical scan -- are we going to be making that decision at a board hearing? MR. OLLIFF: That's actually the supervisor of elections' decision. It was her decision to choose this particular type of equipment, and she simply submits the funding request for the selection that she's made for that equipment. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We can approve or deny her budget. MR. OLLIFF: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some questions about the choice. Is Jennifer here? CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't know if Miss Edwards is here tonight, but I believe a representative from her constitutional group is here. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We did -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: We had a discussion about it though. We were looking at pay now/pay later in terms of technology, and it seems to me from what I understood -- and the lady can better answer it than I can -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I understand what we did was we approved having a committee to take a look at the options, but I don't know if we ever got a report on that. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, we did. Page 27 September 19, 2001 COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We did. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would defer it to the supervisor of elections' office. MS. POCHOPIN: Pat Pochopin. I'm here representing Jennifer Edwards. I'm her administrative assistant. Commissioner Henning, yes, we did come back and report to you initially the recommendation that the Elections Resource Committee made, which was touch- screen voting systems. That, I believe, was in July before you recessed for the summer. And we will be coming back to you with demonstrations of the specific touch-screen as short listed from the RFP. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You see, there are choices among touch screens, but the touch-screen -- MS. POCHOPIN: It's a technology. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- technology, that's what we discussed in July. COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. MS. POCHOPIN: Yeah. It was going with that technology. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The optical was a choice, but am I correct in saying that eventually we would have to go to touch screen? MS. POCHOPIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I do remember the conversation now. Okay. CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's a great question, Commissioner, and I share the same kind of concerns. But I said, "Wait a minute. If I'm going to pay a lot of money for something that's going to be outdated tomorrow, then I'm not doing due diligence and being prudent," because I didn't ask to have to spend or approve $5 million of the taxpayers' money in Collier County. That came down from Mount Tallahassee who said that we must do this. Page 28 September 19, 2001 It was a mandate, ladies and gentlemen, and they got away from calling it an unfunded mandate by saying, "We're going to give you two choices," and in either case they really didn't give us much money in either direction to do it. They look at Collier County and they say, "Oh, poor babies. You've got the lowest millage rate in the state, blah, blah, blah, suck it in and pay." We've got all the people in West Palm to thank for that that could never figure out how to vote. So that cost us 5 million bucks, folks. I mean, I'm sorry, and I apologize, but we have to do it. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How do you really feel, Jim? Don't hold back. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I thought remedial reading and picture identification might have been a better program for the folks over there but -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think so too. CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- they didn't buy that. They didn't buy my sense of humor. Thank you. MS. POCHOPIN: Any more questions? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, just a comment. I did talk to Jennifer on the study recommendation of the pay-plan adjustment, and it was not funding a study. It was actually responding to the study. MS. POCHOPIN: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I got that answered. Thank yOU. MS. POCHOPIN: Good. Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: Mr: Chairman, the last item on the wrap-up list is the policy decision regarding health care for the uninsured. Mike is handing out -- and we've also got a copy on the visualizer, if Katie can go ahead and bring the visualizer up for us -- what shows a number of changes -- Page 29 September 19, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: -- that we've tried to adjust your budget to accommodate since the last public hearing. And there's a number of things that -- in fact, I told the chairman today that this is the reason they call long-range planning an oxymoron in county government sometimes. This is from two weeks ago when we had our first budget public hearing, and these are the number of changes that, frankly, are major that I need to walk you through. Based on the last committee report on the health care for the uninsured program, if you look at the bottom of that page, there is the original proposal that the budget is based on, which is a $2.9 million program. The middle column is the revised column that was presented to you by the health care committee primarily making major reductions in the primary care initiative, which is the bottom line there, moving from two point three six eight -- $2,368,000 down to $700,000. The difference there is a savings of $1,569,000. So that's the major piece of good news I have for you this evening. If the board decides to adopt that uninsured health program as it was presented, that you will actually net a savings of about a million and a half. In addition, we found in relooking at some of the EMS billing numbers that we are, frankly, just doing a better job in terms of getting some of our EMS billing revenues in which, in turn, reduces the amount of general fund subsidy required for that particular department, so we are also showing a $300,000 positive move for the general fund as the second item on that list. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great job. I mean, we just need to take a second, I think, and say "great job" to EMS for doing that. You know, that's a significant subsidy that comes out of general funds to EMS. The better job they do at collecting, you know, those Page 30 September 19, 2001 fees, the less of the subsidy -- you know, really good job. CHAIRMAN CARTER: It helps. MR. OLLIFF: We're doing a number of things, frankly, there to increase the percentage of collections there, and I think this is a conservative number. I think next year we'll be able to show you, actually, some better numbers than that. The next number is $150,000, which is also a number to the good side of the ledger, which reflects the lower touch-screen voting equipment number that you just heard from the supervisor of elections. That reduced the annual debt service number by $150,000. Then, lastly, we're showing some additional turnback revenue from constitutional officers, which means money that they had budgeted but will not spend in this fiscal year and will return to the general fund for the general county to use as revenue for next year. We're showing an additional $100,000 from that source. That's all the good news. On the bad news side we -- as a result, frankly, of the incident of last week, we got our new contract for property and casualty insurance that begins on October 1 st, and the increased insurance cost to the county for those two categories was about $750,000. The net impact of that is not all to the general fund. Some of that goes to proprietary funds, such as your utilities or solid waste funds. The amount that we've shown on this sheet is the $350,000 that is attributable to your general fund. The last item is the issue, frankly, that Ty brought up. I think it's the state looking at some reduced revenues going into next year and, in turn, reduced shares of state revenue-sharing monies that come back to individual counties. Now, they have said that there's going to be a significant decrease, but they have not been able to indicate to individual counties the actual magnitude of that or the amount. But from our projections and from our original conservative numbers, Page 31 September 19, 2001 frankly, that we budgeted in terms of state revenue, we think if we put $750,000 additional in the reserve account we should be in a good position to be able to absorb or deal with any changes in the state revenue-sharing side. So the result -- the net result of all of those changes, Mr. Chairman, would actually be a reduction to the budget that was presented to you and that was presented to the public in the first budget public hearing of $1,019,900. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have a question, Commissioner Carter. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On the health-care issue, if the newspaper was correct on the school health -- and I guess maybe Commissioner Coletta -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct. I was going to come to that in a minute. But you go ahead, Commissioner Mac'Kie. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. It was just a question, so you tell us what you know about it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, what I would recommend is the -- I have been badgering the school system, you know. I feel a little bad. Anne Goodnight, if you're listening now, I apologize for all the hell I put you through. They came forward with another $50,000 at the last minute to put into the school nursing program to help it reach the level that we're going to need to be able to function correctly, and that's a wonderful thing. I recommend that we match that from two hundred or two hundred fifty, but I would suggest that we take the fifty thousand dollars out of the -- let me put my glasses back on so I can see -- the prenatal care. I'm sure that we can find the private concerns out there to make up the difference. Then we can keep our budget for the medical end at the original numbers. But I would recommend that Page 32 September 19, 2001 minor change to be able to match the 50,000 from the school system. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do we have -- MR. OLLIFF: Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. But just on that point, do we have any questions about whether or not that will negatively affect the prenatal program? I mean -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I've already talked to several of the providers that are involved with it, and they believe, too, that the school nursing program is absolutely essential, that we get it out there for the maximum amount of dollars. If you remember correctly, we told the school system we wouldn't be involved unless they matched us dollar for dollar. Originally they were only going to come in with $100,000. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We got them off the stick on that and told them two hundred was the minimum, and now they grew it by fifty. I think I'm very much for that. I don't want to increase the dollar amount for the health-care initiative. I really don't. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I could support that. And then the primary-care initiative has the 700,000 budget, and that's the amount that the committee recommended. The process then will be it will go through an RFP to try to determine how best to provide that-- to spend those monies in the most effective way. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: COMMISSIONER HENNING: some help-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: COMMISSIONER HENNING: program, the school nurses' program. Right. Commissioner Coletta, I need Sure. -- with the Healthy Kids Is that just for kids that their parents are less fortunate to pay for health insurance? Page 33 September 19, 2001 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. It's -- in the school -- let's go with the Healthy Kids first. The Healthy Kids program follows the income level up there to a higher degree. You've got to remember, it's something that's only subsidized through some degree from the state, and the local hospitals have a subsidy they kick in. I believe it's -- what is it, $300,000 all together? MR. OLLIFF: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Three hundred thousand the local hospitals put in. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: COMMISSIONER COLETTA: eighty. I know we have some administrative costs that we're doing on it, but our amount that we're actually putting in is quite small from what the whole program is, but the people that are in the program are paying, like, $90 a month for each child. In other words, if you have a family that doesn't have a health insurance policy, they may very smartly decide to insure the children or provide them that level of care that they're going to need in times of trouble. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But I need to be real clear that the Healthy Kids program -- basically the only people who qualify to participate in that are children who qualify for the school lunch program or free lunches. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Getting off the topic -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So that is a subsidy for the poor, the Healthy Kids program. I just wanted to share that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Healthy Kids program. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: COMMISSIONER HENNING: nurse program. If I can just add -- We're basically putting in about Well, I wasn't talking about the I'm sorry. I was talking about the school Page 34 September 19, 2001 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: COMMISSIONER COLETTA: COMMISSIONER HENNING: School nurses? Oh. That's a good question, Tom. I'm thinking that this is a way for -- it's very difficult to teach kids that are not feeling well or that need medical attention. That is why I truly feel that we are interfering with the school board, and this is their responsibility to teach children -- (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- is to make sure that they're healthy. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the whole health-care system, I think -- and I know I differ with some of my colleagues, and I guess I need to tell you why I do. It's that I don't believe that it is something that the property taxes are responsible for or local government. But I respect your opinion and always will continue to respect you for your opinions. I think what I would rather see -- and I think that we all should agree that all the health-care proposals is improperly placed on the property taxes. And the reason I'm coming from that is Tallahassee is sending less money down; therefore, the less money we have to put in our general fund, the less money that we have to meet our capital needs, and there is a rising cost of health costs. And Tom just said it's $350,000 just on -- or $750,000 just on our needs for our health insurance. So as the health-care tax rises for our insurance premiums, so is the property taxes going to rise year after year. I hear the residents out there, and I'm sure you've heard the residents and the voters of Collier County stating, "Give us a chance to vote on this." I think it's up to the health-care community to convince the voters. It's not up to local government to convince the Page 35 September 19, 2001 voters that this is what we need. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may respond. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Therefore, what I would hope my colleagues would consider is taking all of the new spending for health care off of the property taxes and consider a half cent sales tax. And also, Commissioner Coletta, I know that you're looking at a trauma center here in Collier County, and it's badly needed. But these are some of the decisions that the voters of Collier County should choose, and I hope that we get a consensus up here on the board of taking this off the property taxes and having a sales tax referendum so the people can vote on it. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, if I may respond. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta, if you would respond, please. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. You're correct-- let me start right off the bat. Your statement was pretty lengthy, so I'm going to try to address the parts I remember. The school system should accept responsibility for this, but they didn't. There is an ever-present need, and if we didn't step up to the plate and become the catalyst, I can assure you that this year the school budget for nursing would have been $100,000. I've been working on this from day one. That was only going to happen because we screamed loud enough. It meant that there would have been a school nurse visiting these schools about two hours to four hours a week. During the whole week's time, that's all they would see a school nurse. There is a very big need for this particular service, and I'm hoping that eventually this program gets to the point that the school board will take responsibility for it. No argument there. I'd love to Page 36 September 19, 2001 see them do it. But I'm not going to have my grandchildren and my children and the children of the people that I represent be without this very necessary care because someone else didn't step up to the plate first. That's the first part. The other part that you mentioned about the tax part, bringing it up as a tax to be voted on in the future, it bears some merit. That's one of the reasons why at the last meeting I suggested we separate the items apart again rather than have them all lumped together under indigent care when school nursing has nothing to do with indigent care, and when you get right down to it, neither does Healthy Kids. And to separate it in such a way that at some point in time if we want to bundle it together -- and you're right about the trauma center. As you know, I've been very fortunate through the wisdom of this commission to inherit the Horizon Committee on public health and social services. Thank you very much for it. I think it's going to occupy about ! 00 percent of my life for the next 28 years. But I'm going to survive it. I'm going to make it work one way or the other. What I'd like to see is the possibility of a trauma center looked into fully. I would like to also look into the possibilities of the subsidy we have going to the ambulance, which I think you mentioned before is $7 million. Lump these things together so that the public can take a look at it and say, "What's in this for me?" And, also, we can bring the indigent part of this out, the part that we have set aside, and put that in there. I'd seriously like to look at that in the upcoming year with that committee I'm going to be working on, and we'll be keeping in touch with those people in the public. I'm hoping -- I'm very much hoping that TAG will take a very active interest in this committee and actually take part in the meetings, because I would like to hear their opinions before we get to this dais and then hear them from the floor out there. Page 37 September 19, 2001 My calendar has been open. I'm waiting to hear from people one on one. And this committee -- I know the health committee has never see anyone from TAG to the best of my knowledge. I need the input of these people, and I'm going to try to drag them to the meetings, so as we go through this process and get into it deeper to try to meet the needs of Collier County we can have all the different elements present to be able to reach a final decision and maybe a consensus as we go into it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, my concern is once we say yes to this program and you tell the voters at another date, whether it be next year or the following year, what you're proposing is and they say no, what are you going to do with these people that you're providing care for? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm going to give them your home phone number. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, I'm going to give them your cell phone number. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, you make a good point. I'll remind you, too, that these programs have come into county government and left county government many times before. One of the things that excited me to civic activism was a number of years ago -- I believe it was 1988 or 1989, and that's when Anne Goodnight was on this board -- there was a notice in the paper that they were going to close the Immokalee Clinic. And I had nothing to do -- well, I had very little to do with Immokalee at that time. So I gave Anne Goodnight a call. I had never talked to her before in my life. I said, "What can we do about it?" She said, "Well, if you want to arrange to get a group of people together, maybe we can change the course of history here." I said, "I don't know anybody. I really Page 38 September 19, 2001 can't do it." But it bothered me that that was discontinued. At that point in time, there was a real need. The point I'm trying to make is, as you go through life, none of these things are ever forever. They do come and they do go. They've come in and they've gone many times. Our own public health has had a clinic in place that's been removed at least once that I know of. There's nothing new under the sun that we're doing here. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I know Commissioner Fiala would like to comment, but if I could just say a couple things here. Number one, gentlemen, you're both right. These are line items. They can be voted up or down or out in any fiscal year. Number two, if you look at who pays for the school nursing program and you say it should be paid by the school board, the school board's revenue stream comes from property taxes, property taxes alone so, sure, I would like them to budget it all. I think that that's where we need to be. I don't disagree with that. On the other hand, I support making sure that the kids are taken care of, and next year we'll have an opportunity through either one of the proposals that are made here to revisit the situation. I have a very open mind on that. I want to do it. I want to do the right thing. It's a line item. I can revisit this at any time. It is in the general fund, so what pot does it come from? Property taxes or sales taxes. It's a mixed revenue stream. So I'm going to stick with that. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to ask a question. I just wanted to make sure that I had understood correctly. From the workshop they said that by passing this now we would then be entitled to grant money from the state or from the federal government to augment this program if we so desire. Is that correct? CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's-- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can apply for grants. Page 39 September 19, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: You can apply for grants. COMMISSIONER FIALA: To be eligible. But if we don't have this in place, we are not eligible. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That is -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you could try. The system works best when you have local initiatives, as we have found out in road building. It's the same kind of process. The local initiative speaks louder than if you don't do anything. So we said, "We've done it." COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think what Commissioner Carter is saying is, you know, you can apply for grants, but they're going to be ranked in a point system. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the programs, the applications without a local match have little to no chance of success. The only other comment I'm going to make about this -- because everybody's already heard everything I have to say for five years on this topic -- is the reason that this year's budget item is not appropriate for a referendum is because it is $700,000 in a half- billion-dollar budget. Respectfully, the people who are upset about their taxes need not be distracted by this little red herring. This is a $700,000 question in a half-billion-dollar budget. You've got other issues you ought to be -- other fish to fry. That isn't one of them. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that -- oh, that's $1.3 million. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, every other item on there but the $700,000 is something that is not new. We do dental services today. We don't do them for adults. We fund Healthy Kids money today. We have always had the prenatal program. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Paid by grants. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Partially. But we have Page 40 September 19, 2001 participated in that in the past as well. The school health is new and the primary care initiative is new. Everything else is the same old. We've always done it. There's seven hundred -- maybe you could say nine hundred thousand dollars out of a half-billion-dollar budget. Don't be distracted. That's not where your money is being spent. It's a small amount of money. If you want a referendum, you know, pay attention to the road tax. There's some real money. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question, Mr. Olliff. Is this -- last night was the final budget hearing for the school board. I think it's correct that they have one more. MR. OLLIFF: No. I believe that was their final budget public hearing. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the last final comment -- because I see I'm losing ground here -- is if the residents do not pass the road referendum, you know, I think We all know what we need to do. That shortfall over the next five years, as Tom has stated, is $288 million. Therefore, I feel that we're ever increasing the property taxes to pay for the needs. You know, some of the concurrency items that we must do. This is not a must do. This is a "I'd like to do." COMMISSIONER FIALA: How much does it cost to go to referendum? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it depends on -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, if it costs, like, $500,000 to go to referendum then-- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What's our half penny tax budget for that? It's a big number. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's one item. But you're talking next year, so that's going to be on a gubernatorial ballot. So it's going to be peanuts compared to what it is this year. MR. OLLIFF: There is a significant difference in cost between a special election and one that's on an existing ballot. Pat is much Page 41 September 19, 2001 better able to answer those questions. MS. POCHOPIN: Commissioners-- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Your name for the record, please. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Your name for the record. MS. POCHOPIN: For the record, Pat Pochopin from the supervisor of elections' office. Your special election is more expensive than going on a government total state national election, and it will cost approximately $280,000. COMMISSIONER HENNING: For -- MS. POCHOPIN: For a special election. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And opposed to, like, next year the governor's race would be -- MS. POCHOPIN: Next year you would have a portion. We would bill you proportionately to whatever was on the ballot. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So it would be much, much less. MS. POCHOPIN: Much less, probably less than $100,000 unless you have a lot of things on the ballot, because we could do one ballot. You have a ballot for this election, and that is all that's on that ballot, so everything was done specifically for that one item. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The comment I would like to make about the potential for property taxes to be raised for the necessary expenditures for the road improvements is the good news is that we don't have stupid constituents, and they are fiscally responsible, and they're going to be able to see two things. One is, how much does it cost among property taxes versus sales taxes, and the Dick Lydon line now about taking a 26 percent discount to let somebody else pay. I'm confident that they're going to do the right thing. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if they say no, you're saying they're stupid then? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm saying that they must be ill Page 42 September 19, 2001 informed, because it's clearly economically a better decision to go with the sales tax. Without question, clearly mathematically, arithmetically, it's just playing on numbers. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can we move on? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure. If you've all had a chance to say everything you wanted to say. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, if there's no other changes, then we might conclude the budget. Just for the record, the budget will reflect the revised health care or the uninsured program numbers you see in that column, the $150,000 revision as requested by Commissioner Coletta, and then I assume based on the comments after that that was what the majority of the board wished to do as well. Item #2E RESOLUTION 2001-364 AMENDING THE TENTATIVE BUDGET - ADOPTED COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do you need a resol -- that Item E, do you need a resolution? A motion? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That's Item E. We would need a motion for the resolution to amend the tentative budget. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Olliffs comments. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved in accordance with Second. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie. I have a second by Commissioner Coletta. Any questions or discussion by the board? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Discussion. I'm going to vote for everything except for the health care. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You can't vote that way. Page 43 September 19, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: You have to vote yeah or nay, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm going to vote for it, but I just want to make that -- publicly state that I'm not in favor of-- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We know, and I respect that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know you know. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. I respect you sticking to your guns on that. CHAIRMAN CARTER: (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed by the same sign. Motion carries 5-0. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I just say -- I think it's so nice. You said before and you always practice this. You said you always treat each other with respect. Even if you don't agree with them, you do, and I just want to say that it's very apparent. Thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I take it back what I said about giving out your home phone number. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I always like it when we make nice up here and have peace in the tepee. Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And now our favorite part, the public reading. Is that the long one where you do all that reading, Mr. Smykowski? MR. OLLIFF: It will be, and just before Mr. Smykowski takes his big breath and starts reading the individual millages into the record, we need to have a paper change here. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's take a break. CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. It won't take that long. Well, I guess we have to wait five minutes -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. We don't need a break. Page 44 September 19, 2001 take CHAIRMAN CARTER: No. We don't need a break. You may a trip if you want. He'll still be reading when you get back. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you ready? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: She's ready, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Are you ready, ma'am? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. Item #2F PUBLIC READING OF THE TAXING AUTHORITY LEVYING MILLAGE; NAME OF THE TAXING AUTHORITY; ROLLED BACK RATE; PERCENTAGE INCREASE AND THE MILLAGE RATE TO BE LEVIED CHAIRMAN CARTER: May we proceed, Mr. Smykowski. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We're onto Item 2-F, which is a public reading of the taxing authority levying millage, the name of the taxing authority, the rolled-back rate, the percentage increase, and the millage rate to be levied. General Fund, the rolled-back rate is 3.0544. The adopted millage rate will be 3.8772, a percentage increase of 26.9 percent. Water Pollution Control, Fund 114, the rolled-back rate is .0388 mills, proposed .0420, an increase of 8.2 percent for a total county- wide millage rolled-back rate of 3.0932. The adopted millage rate will be 3.9192. A percentage increase of 26.7 percent. Unincorporated Area General Fund 111, the rolled-back rate is .7576. The proposed millage rate is .8069. The percentage increase of the rolled-back rate is 6.5 percent. Golden Gate Community Center Fund 130, the rolled-back rate is .3532 mills; proposed millage .4330; a 22.6 percent increase. Page 45 September 19, 2001 Naples Park Drainage Fund 139, there is no proposed tax levy in fiscal year 2002. Victoria Park Drainage Fund 134 -- oh, excuse me, Pine Ridge Industrial Park Fund 140, the rolled-back millage rate is .0612, proposed .0485, a decrease of 20.8 percent. Victoria Park Drainage Fund 134, the rolled-back rate is. 1920, proposed millage rate. 1722, a decrease of 10.3 percent. Golden Gate Parkway Beautification Fund 136, the rolled-back rate is .4652. The proposed is 1/2 mill, an increase of 7.5 percent. Naples Production Park Fund 141, the rolled-back rate is .0309 mills, proposed is .0304, a decrease of 1.6 percent. Isle of Capri Fire Fund 144, the rolled-back rate is .8464 mills, proposed 1 mill, an 18.1 percent increase. Ochopee Fire Fund 146, the rolled-back rate is 3.3491, proposed 4 mills, an increase of 19.4 percent. Collier County Fire Fund 148, the rolled-back rate is 1.9192 mills, proposed 2 mills, an increase of 4.2 percent. Goodland/Horr's Island Fire MSTU Fund 149, the rolled-back rate is .7924, proposed is .7377, a decrease of 6.9 percent. Radio Road Beautification Fund 150, the rolled-back rate is .4637, proposed 1/2 mill, 7.8 percent increase. Sabal Palm Road MSTU Fund 151, there is no proposed tax levy. Lely Golf Estates Beautification Fund 152, the rolled-back rate is 1.4089, proposed 2 mills, a 42 percent increase. HawksRidge Stormwater Pumping MSTU Fund 154, the rolled-back rate is. 1254 mills, proposed .0696 mills, a decrease of 44.5 percent. Forest Lakes Roadway & Drainage MSTU Fund 155, the rolled- back rate is .9422, proposed 1 mill, a 6.1 percent increase. Immokalee Beautification MSTU Fund 156, the rolled-back rate is .9293 mills, proposed millage rate 1 mill, a 7.6 percent increase. Bayshore Avalon Beautification Fund 160, the rolled-back rate is 2.7993 mills, proposed 2 mills, a decrease of 28.6 percent. Parks GOB debt service Fund 206, the rolled-back rate is .0347 mills, Page 46 September 19, 2001 proposed .0318 mills, a decrease of 8.4 percent. Isle of Capri Municipal Rescue Debt Fund 244, there is no proposed tax levy. Collier County Lighting Fund 760, the rolled- back rate is. 1365 mills, proposed millage rate is .2002, an increase of 46.7 percent. Naples Production Park Street Lighting Fund 770, the rolled-back rate is .0375, proposed millage rate .0413, an increase of 10.1 percent. Pelican Bay MSTBU Fund 778, the rolled-back rate is .1748 mills, proposed .1994, an increase of 14.1 percent. The aggregate millage rate is 3.6723 mills, proposed 4.5445, an increase of 23.75 percent. Mr. Chairman, that concludes Item 2-F. A strict reading of statute requires two motions for the adoption of the resolution setting the millage rates, one for the pollution control since it is a dependent district and then a second motion for the balance of the taxing district's levying taxes. Item #2G RESOLUTION 2001-365 RE SETTING MILLAGE RATES- ADOPTED COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I move approval of the millage rate for pollution control. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Fiala on the motion. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.) Page 47 September 19, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then a motion for -- what we did was 2-H. I guess I took them out of order. Is that right? MR. SMYKOWSKI: 2-G. The balance of the proposed taxing districts exclusive of water pollution control. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, 2-G. It's just two motions. Oh, I'm sorry. Then I move approval of the millage rates for the balance of the funds excluding pollution control. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second it again. CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie and a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed by the same sign. Motion carries 5-0. Item #2H RESOLUTION 2001-366 ADOPTING THE FINAL BUDGET BY FUND - ADOPTED MR. SMYKOWSKI: Mr. Chairman, that moves us to Item 2-H, a resolution to adopt the final budget by fund again -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved. MR. SMYKOWSKI: -- with two motions, one for pollution control and one for the balance. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved as to pollution control. Page 48 September 19, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And a second by Fiala. CHAIRMAN CARTER: A second by Commissioner Fiala. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion cames 5-0. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved as to the balance of the budget. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that again, I guess. MR. OLLIFF: I just want to make sure for the record that you understand that the budget you are adopting is a full $1 million less than the budget that you were actually reviewing two weeks ago. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good job. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for stating that publicly again. CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. One more time, we pulled $1 million out of the budget tonight. Any other motions required? COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I made a motion. We need to vote on it. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Motion by Commissioner Mac'Kie. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second by Commissioner Fiala. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Hearing none, all in favor signify by Page 49 September 19, 2001 saying aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. We are finished. Two quick things. Number 1, I want to thank Mike Smykowski and the staff for their excellent job of taking us through this total budgetary process and for the healthy discussion by the Board of County Commissioners. Like everyone else, I respect each and every commissioner's opinions here and discussion and input, and I think we demonstrated one more time that this commission is working together to meet the current and furore needs of this community. And I'll say it over and over. I'm very proud of each and every one of you, and I thank you for everything that you've been doing. The last comment I must make to you tonight is October 15th we do meet with our counterparts in Lee County, but that meeting has been rescheduled for the Lee County Courthouse because there was a conflict of meeting space at Florida Gulf Coast University. There was also a concern -- it has now been dispelled -- that the administrator for the library at Florida Gulf Coast University said the students could not wear the American flag because it might upset the foreign students. The university says it was totally out of line because there was no policy, no statement by the university in any way, shape, or form, and the students can wear the American flag anywhere they choose. I said, "Well, Amen, I'm glad we clarified that" because I called my counterpart, and I said, "If that is true, I'm not meeting on their facility because each and every person has a right to wear the flag, and if you're a foreign student or foreign anything here visiting the United States of America and you don't like us wearing our flag, you Page 50 September 19, 2001 know, the airport's not too far away and have a nice trip back to wherever you came from. As I'm ending this now. You know, there's been a lot of pain in this community this week for a lot of reasons from the disaster that took place last Tuesday. I think we've all cried, we've all prayed, and we're all pulling together. That's what makes this country and this county a great place to live and be. And I will say it always, God bless America, God bless each one of you, and we will come out on the right side of this thing because we've got the intestinal fortitude to take on any challenge the world presents us. Thank you. With no further comments, Commissioners, we stand adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:45 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZON1NG APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTRO~ ~ JAMES .~~C~RTER, Ph.;i' CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Page 51 September 19, 2001 These minutes approved by the Board on ~ 2 kay/, as presented v-''/ or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC. BY MARGARET A. SMITH, RPR Page 52