BCC Minutes 06/29-06/30/2004 B (Budget Workshop)
June 29, 2004
BUDGET MEETING OF THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
NAPLES, FLORIDA JUNE 29 - 30, 2004
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, 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 9:02 a.m. in BUDGET
SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples,
Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Jim Coletta (by telephone)
Fred Coyle
Frank Halas
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Administrator
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
~
BUDGET WORKSHOP
AGENDA
June 29-30, 2004
9:00 a.m.
Donna Fiala, Chairman, District 1
Fred W. Coyle, Vice-Chair, District 4
Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3
Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED, REQUIRES
THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
1
June 29-30, 2004
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FY 2005 BUDGET WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
Tuesday, June 29, 2004 - 9:00 a.m.
General Overview
Courts & Related Agencies (State Attorney and Public Defender)
Administrative Services
Public Services
Transportation Services
Community Development
Public Utilities
Debt Service
Management Offices (Pelican Bay)
County Attorney
BCC
Airport Authority
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - 9:00 a.m.
Constitutional Officers
Property Appraiser
Elections
Clerk of Courts
Sheriff
Wrap-up
2
June 29-30, 2004
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now we will open our public, public
hearing on the budget workshop.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, Commissioners, it's indeed a
pleasure to present to you our budget for Fiscal Year '04. And I'll do
some introductory comments as we go along. The budget guidance
that the board basically gave us was to come forward with a millage
neutral budget. Millage neutral in our particular case in the general
fund, and it's on your screens and on the visualizer for the folks at
home, would be 3.8772 mills. And the budget you have before you
requires a reduction of $5.2 million.
Now, I did this slide yesterday with Mike Smykowski. I read the
paper this morning and it said that our assessed value rate is 11.8
percent, where 25 days ago or thereabouts, it was 11.1 percent, okay.
So it now requires a reduction of around $4.2 million, okay, because
that .7 percent increase that we saw -- now, our 12 percent, remember,
we estimated, we're getting closer and closer. In a couple more
months we'll be right there. But 11.8, that basically gives you a
million dollars more in ad valorem dollars general fund. It gives you
about $100,000 more in your 111 fund, okay. So just so you know,
and we'll go over these on the slide. So it requires about a $4.2
million reduction.
Second item is your MSTD general fund millage and that's your
fund 111. That millage rate is .8069 mills. Millage neutral, as of
yesterday, there was $50,000 available for unfinanced requirements,
or we fondly call them a UFR, a U-F-R. Now it's 150,000, based on
my earlier comment about the change to the assessed value rate this
year.
General fund capital, we set it in the budget guide and said .333,
a third of a mill equivalent. I'm sorry to say that in your budget we've
exceeded that third of a mill and it's at .4067 mills. That reflects an
additional commitment to stormwater in there. If you remember, we're
trying to get .15 mills for stormwater. And you'll notice I hand wrote
Page 2
June 29, 2004
it in on this particular slide up on your visualizer and on your screen.
What we did is we took an awful lot of the stormwater proj ects
and put them in the general fund capital to the tune of about $6.7
million. It was a significant amount of money. And it basically
brought us above our one -- our third of a mill in the budget guidance.
And what it costs us is we took some stuff out of the IT budget
and we took some things out of our facilities maintenance budget in
order to make that happen. So some people did have to pay for that. I
believe next year we'll be able to bring those items back into the
budget, because there will be a separate budget line for stormwater at
that handwritten part that says .15 mill, and that will pull them out of
this general capital fund millage.
Limit new positions in the county manager's agency. I'd like to
tell you that we did that, and we did. Our net was 20 new positions,
and there's even two positions in that 20 that count for two that we've
moved over from the Big Cypress Basin Board, that they're basically
paying their salaries, their overhead, their total burdened rate,
including retirement for two employees. So that was significant on
the part of staff.
Also in your budget guidance was a new thing, and we talked
about it last year a little bit at the end of our budget session. And you
remember last year we did pixie dust and magic beans. We ran out of
pixie dust and the damn magic beans didn't work.
But what we said we had to do is to have some metric, some
comparison to figure out how our budgets compare to everybody
else's. I mean, there's no golden rule out there that says your budget is
the best it can possibly be from an efficiency standpoint, or an
effectiveness standpoint. You try to do that through your inventory
report, you try to do that with your review of master plans, both in
utilities, transportation and the other departments we have in Collier
County. But there's nothing that you can kind of use to say well, am I
okay as far as the budget is concerned? Where do I sit?
Page 3
June 29, 2004
So the only way you can do it is go out and benchmark against
other people to see how they're doing. And, oh, by the way, just don't
do it against one, because they might not be so smart. And so
benchmarking against the dummy in the block wouldn't do you very
much -- it wouldn't help you a whole lot. It'd just say -- you know,
you could be sloppier than he is. So, you know, it's kind of like the
movie Dumber and Dumbest, or whatever that was. We don't want to
go there. But if you're trying to get a smattering of folks across the
way that basically say, hey, I've got some folks that are pretty well
equivalent. Sarasota and Lee, I'd say are on par. I'd say that Martin
County and Charlotte County are about 10 years, where we were 10
years ago. And I would say that Palm Beach County is someplace in
the future, as far as growth is concerned, of where this county is. So
you've got a pretty good smattering -- and they're all coastal
communities, two on the east coast and three on the west, so it gives
you an idea.
Now, I will show you the county manager's comparisons in just a
minute. The sheriffs budget did have comparisons in it provided to
you. The elections, supervisor of elections did provide those metrics.
The tax collector doesn't give us a budget until 1 August, so there's
still a due out as far as that particular budget is concerned.
The clerk is at a significant disadvantage, trying to do a
comparison with this Article 5 stuff going on, half of it's in the state,
half of it's in the county. Who pays for this? Who's going to put the
$65 ordinance in? Who's going to do the $15 ordinance? Who's not
going to do it? So I believe that they were at a significant
disadvantage this year as far as that metric is concerned. And I look
forward to see what their metric looks like next year, as everybody
stabilizes from this Article 5 and we get a better comparison upon the
clerk with other clerks in those five counties.
And then last but not least, the property appraiser basically has a
budget that's approved by the state, so we don't have a whole lot to say
Page 4
June 29, 2004
about that particular item.
So all in all, Commissioners, I think people tried to stay within
your guidance the best that they could as far as those particular
guidelines are concerned.
This is another piece of that guidance. I call it the old pies. How
well did folks come in on the pie side of the house? You basically
told folks, knowing that our assessed values would be something
different than the 16 percent that they were last year, you basically
tried to take some things in stride and say look-it, let's try to have
another control on our budget, basically said let's make sure we try to
keep everybody within the same percentages that they received last
year in their general fund budget. And we put those out as part of the
guidance, please submit a budget that stays within that guidance. And
the pie below that you see is the result.
And I'd like to take that pie below and put it in a bar chart so that
you have a better idea. But there are some exceptions to your
guidance from this chart sending out for the '05 budget preparation
versus what was submitted.
The -- you'll notice the BCC county attorney over at this
particular area, the blue is what your budget allocation was versus
your guidance, and the red is what was actually put in as far as their
budget was concerned.
Go to the county manager's agency, we're in -- we stayed within
that guidance as far as what you told us to do and what we brought
home.
Courts and related, same thing. A lot of the difference between
the blue and red in this particular case on the good side had to do with
the state funding their court system.
Brings us over to the airport authority. If you can read those
numbers, they're in the good, too. They're on the down side. They
came within the guidance.
Road program subsidy, that particular item did not. And it
Page 5
June 29, 2004
exceeded that -- your particular guidance. But that has to do with the
road program, the AUIR, and trying to put those dollars away in order
to fund the $260 million -- the number changes, okay, but it's around
$260 million worth of backlog that we had that we -- the referendum
for the half penny didn't pass, the voters basically told us take it out of
your general fund proceeds, and oh, by the way, don't increase taxes.
I think this board has done an exceptional effort in order to try to do
that.
And so when that happens, you get additional monies that have to
go in that road program subsidy in order to pay for those bonds and
that interest in order to pay for that.
Then it brings us over to debt capital subsidy, and we're off a
little bit there. And that debt capital subsidy basically reflects the cost
of debt service issued this year, because we've had additional
buildings that we're building that we've had to take that out for. And
an increase in the commitment to stormwater is what you see in that
particular case.
And then brings us over to the reserve side of the house, and that
basically provides a means to smooth the future general fund support
of the road program from 26.5 to 26 million -- and we'll talk about that
in just a second.
Clerk of courts is significantly down because a lot of his costs
basically are state funded at this particular juncture.
The sheriff exceeded the particular program that you basically set
out. They're about, in this particular chart, they're about $7.7 million
off of what you had in the program. If, for instance, they came in at
117, you would have given the clerk $15 million worth of new money.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sheriff, not the clerk.
MR. MUDD: I'm sorry. Excuse me, I didn't say that. The
sheriff. You would have given the sheriff $15 million in new money.
Last year's budget you gave him $10 million in new money. And his
request this particular year was looking for $22 million in new money.
Page 6
June 29, 2004
The property appraiser is under the budget at this particular time.
The tax collector -- what we see the tax collector's budget looking
like, they'll be under. And the supervisor of elections' budget is under.
I mentioned to you that we would go and take a look at the road
program subsidy, and you'll notice in my opening letter, I basically
mentioned to the board that if the board had not taken a very firm,
frugal approach to the budget last year and to this year into their
budget guidance, we would be seriously out of whack at this particular
time this year as far as the budget was concerned. When I say out of
whack, we would have more expenses than we have revenues coming
in. And it wouldn't be just $5 million or $4 million that we're looking
for, we would have been looking for 20 or 30.
Last year, if you remember, and this is the road payment program
for those bonds for that $260 million worth of backlog of roads that
isn't covered by impact fees. And in '03, you paid your first increment
of 5.9 million.
Last year, with the assessed values and the cutbacks we took on
manning in the county manager's agency, we had some dollars to put
aside. And what the board decided was not to just go up to the 13 --
the 13.3 mark as far as payment was concerned. They decided to put
another $6 million in, okay, and use those dollars at that one time and
put it up in your smoothing account. And if you remember, last year's
smoothing account was 10.2 million dollars. Just to refresh your
memory. So, that's where that 6 million went in there. It was 4.2.
You put the 6 in there and it went to 10.2.
This year, to go from this top of the yellow right here at 19.4 to
pay your 20.2, you're looking about $800,000 just to get up in the
yellow. Our recommendation this year is you put, sock away another
$3.8 million in reoccurring dollars to bring your column up to this
particular case so that next year you'll only have to payout about $2
million to get you up to the 26.
That $3.8 million going into your smoothing account gives you
Page 7
June 29, 2004
the ability to take your line right here that was at 26.5 last year and
bring it down to 26. That gives you the ability to lower those
payments as you go out to try to -- when your assessed value increases
are coming down where your payments aren't so bad. So staffs
recommendation is that you put another $3.8 million into that so that
you don't have to go from 20.2 next year to 26.5 and find a $6.3
million outtake next year when we believe your assessed value rate
increase will be less than it is today. And I'll show you the trend line
for that particular issue.
Any questions on that particular chart?
(No response.)
MR. MUDD: We showed you this chart -- and I didn't mean this
to be an eye chart. Let's see if I can blow it up just a little bit.
We showed you this -- we showed you this chart at the AUIR
when we were talking about the road program and how do we get at
our increased maintenance cost for roads when our road systems aren't
new anymore. Norm has been putting a lot of -- Norm Feder's been
putting in, transportation division has been putting in a lot of new
roads, but those roads, after a 15 year period of time, need to be
resurfaced. And how do you pay for those. How do you work on
bridges that start to be replaced.
And what we tried to do, the previous chart with the bars that we
set up 26 million, I tried to provide that in dollar amounts for the
board at this, at this time. This column right here, this amount, is the
amount that you'll have to pay interest and principal in order to pay for
that $260 million backlog. And what we tried to do, if you add
smoothing, what would you have to take when you were at 26.5 in
those particular years, '06 through 2010 out of your reserve account in
order to pay -- to take the top off, or the peaks off the pain is what I
call it, you'd need $11 million if you left it at 26.5. If you brought
your smoothing down to $26 million, your amount in the smoothing
account would have to be $14,066,000, which was shown on the
Page 8
June 29, 2004
previous bar chart that I gave you.
If the board decided to, and I would recommend that they do at
this particular time, they decided to keep that $26 million in
reoccurring costs out there allocated to this particular case, after your
bonds start to decrease, as far as payments are concerned, then you
have additional ad valorem dollars that you can put up to the road
program that you could get at roads that are lime rock or whatever in
Collier County. And over till 2026 that would provide the board with
about $196 million for a road program or whatever you wanted to do
with those particular dollars, because they are reoccurring.
So I just wanted to show that to you. Right now down in the gas
taxes, in 2025 your 5 cent local option fuel tax, the 6 cent and the 9
cent go away by legislation. There needs to be new legislation in
order to get those put back in again. If they don't come back in again,
you'll be losing today's money around $13 million. If that happens,
maybe having that $26 million a year and keeping it going to that
particular program is rather prudent on the board's part.
But again, what is the future going to bring and can I proj ect
what's going to happen in 20 years? No, ma'am, no, sir.
What's driving this train as far as the road program is concerned.
And it's something that we all need to be cognizant of. Your assessed
rates, taxable assessed rates, your increases and your property values
don't necessarily stay at double digits.
And this is a historical chart, except when you get into little
green boxes, okay. And you'll notice that from '94 through '99 we
were in the single digit increases. Then in '00 we went to 14. '01 we
went to 13.6. '02 we had an all time high of20.5 percent. '03 we were
at 18.3. Last year we were at 16.4. And in '05, as of the Naples Daily
News this morning, we're at 11.8, okay, not 11.1. Again, I did this
chart -- sir?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I need you to give me a little more
comfort. We're not basing this budget on reports of the Naples Daily
Page 9
June 29, 2004
News, are we?
MR. MUDD: No, sir. Mr. Lily out of the property appraiser's
office talked to a reporter yesterday and gave him the number. The
number's due to Michael on 1 July and they released it a couple of
days early.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you've got something --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I asked Michael this morning. We
have a whole stack of paper in order to do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: On June 1 -- for the record, Michael
Smykowski, Budget Director. On June 1 the property appraiser is
required by Florida statute to provide for budget planning purposes a
preliminary estimate of the taxable value. That's what our initial
figures were based on. As of July 1, he has to provide a final certified
value. He provided that yesterday, a few days in advance of the July 1
deadline, to assist us. So we appreciate his efforts in getting that to us.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd just like to say that as we're
going through this proceedings, I want to thank staff for such a clear
picture of what's happening here. And it sure is a vast increase in
information and the clarity is unbelievable compared to what we've
dealt with in years past. And staff needs to be commended for such a
good -- a great job. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, sir.
The -- I would ask the board to hold on to their comments and
accolades until the end, because if we do a miserable job answering
your questions, or you find some problem in there, you might change
your mind, okay. And also, sir, if you -- you could reserve those
remarks and you can come back and tell us what a bad job we did, if
you'd like to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I just like all the pictures.
The pictures are worth 1,000 words and it's really clear. Thank you
Page 10
June 29, 2004
very much.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I'll leave the comments to the
very last. But up to this point, I love pictures.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. What we're trying to basically say is
we're at 11.8. We didn't believe -- we thought it was going to be
around 12. Yeah, it's 11.8 today, it's a lot closer. You know, in my
heart I was hoping for 13.5, a kind of a more gentle drop. To drop
some five points is a bit tough. And so we're basically in our
projections as we look out at next year and the year after that, we're
looking at 10 and nine, and we'll probably hang around nine after that,
and we'll see how it comes out.
Right now there's two components of this increase. Part of it is
the assessed values for existing homes and part of it is new
construction. Our new construction piece this year is around 3
percent, and our existing homes is around eight. And Naples came in
at eight, if you remember the stories that were reported and the
information that was passed. They didn't have a lot of new
construction. We had about 3 percent of new construction. And then
when I was talking to Commissioner Halas, I said if we had those big
towers and stuff that were coming into Collier County, our new
construction would be way up, okay, like it was at 6 percent. But I
think you've had a lot to do with bringing that new construction
percent down. So I can't cry too much about the particular number.
But I will tell you it's healthy, okay, we have a good assessed value in
Collier County. N ow we just need to live within the budget that we
have.
Commissioners, now the part that -- my part of trying to show
you some benchmarks, okay. And Mike did this in yellow, and I don't
know why, but I won't blame Mike. But we're going to try to break
this out in some charts for you a little bit. But I wanted to tell you
where the numbers came from. When you see bar charts you say well,a
Page 11
June 29, 2004
where did those numbers originate from. Basically did what you told
us to do, take a look at Lee County, Martin County, Sarasota County,
Charlotte County and Palm Beach County.
What we basically were looking at in this particular case is our
operational budget. Your capital budget, you can basically do the
master plans. You get to see those. You also see those in your
budget. Collier County is in a time of catch up and trying to maintain
a steady pace with the growth that's coming on. I kind of tell the staff
that we're basically doing double duty right now. We're doing catch
up plus we're trying to stay ahead.
I predict that some time around 2006 we will have caught up with
the roads. I think utility is pretty close. The water plant down in the
south is our big item right now to get that catch-up. And I believe that
we'll have caught up for the past sins of a decade or so ago, and we
will -- and we will be looking at our future growth, and hopefully at
that juncture we can take a deep breath. Not that we're going to stop
but we're going to take a deep breath. We're going to take a look
around and reexamine where we sit at that particular juncture, along
with the master plans. And I think the board, taking a look at the 2030
MPO plan for Collier County and how it links and other things that are
going on right now, is a step in that direction, because you're updating
that master plan for roads, too.
The adjusted totals for the budgets are on the top. We're at about
$301 million operational on the manager's side. Lee County is around
413. Martin is around 128 million. Sarasota is around 410.
Charlotte's 169 million. And Palm Beach County, which is
significantly ahead of us as far as growth is concerned, is around $737
million.
The unincorporated area that we serve are, basically, is the next
line. Collier County's right around a quarter of a million. Lee is at
269,000, Martin is 116, Sarasota is 238,000, Charlotte's 135,000, and
Palm Beach is a little over half a million. On the unincorporated side
Page 12
June 29, 2004
of the house.
Adjusted employees, that's the next line. Collier County's at
1,662. Lee is at 2,290, Martin is at 820, Sarasota is at 2,064, Charlotte
is at 905, and Palm Beach County's at 4,692.
You start talking about employees per 1,000 population, and that
gets you into a bar chart that looks something like this. What I would
say to you as you look at this chart is Collier County's in good stead. I
believe that we're trying to be as efficient as we can, holding our head
count and providing exceptional service to our customers.
Can we do things better? Absolutely. Every day . You just had
lessons learned on a permit issue for a construction contract. There
was some constraints that they were trying to work the time line in,
and guess what, the permits didn't come in as expected. Can we learn
from those? Absolutely.
But what's good about this is it's an organization, it's self
learning. We weren't self learning a couple of years ago. I believe we
are now. We take a look at those things. We look at them. We do
after action reviews of our big projects to take a look and see what we
could have done better. We take a look, try to meet with folks and
figure out a different perspective. We listen and see if there's better
ways that we can be efficient and we try to learn from that.
One thing this chart tells me is if you're Lee County, Sarasota
County or Palm Beach, you should be around 8.5 bodies in order--
per thousand in order to support. If you're in the growing counties of
Martin and Charlotte, you should be around a little less than 7. And
we're at six and a half. And we'll look at that as we go along.
What you don't want to do is get so lean that you no longer can
answer the questions or get the job done. So it's one of the things you
have to watch. I think we've done a good two-year program in order
to hold the head count down, in order to get at the issues that we have,
to try to find out if there's better ways of doing business, and I think
we've discovered that in a lot of places.
Page 13
June 29, 2004
The other line --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: May I stop you a minute and ask were
these all based on the county manager's office? They don't include the
constitutional officers --
MR. MUDD: No, they don't control the constitutionals. They
came in with their own -- they came in with their own metrics based
on information that Mr. Smykowski had acquired from those other
five counties in his office.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: In addition, Commissioner, we tried to
normalize -- obviously the various counties, some provide different
services that another may not. For instance, in one of the counties,
they provide county-wide fire service, where obviously in Collier
County the bulk of the population is served by independent fire
districts. So we removed those fire district costs and employees. We
attempted to make it as apples to apples as possible to make it a fair
comparison to the extent that we could.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Then you'll notice on the fifth line down, it says
adjusted budget per capita, and you've got a series of dollars. And it's
basically dollars spent per unincorporated population. And I have
another chart for that. When you take a look at the adjusted budget per
capita, we do pretty well as far as comparison with the other folks that
are out there.
I will tell you again, you have to kind of watch because you don't
want to underspend either, okay, and short your particular taxpayers. I
believe the CBIA survey that was just released says a lot about what
we are providing for that dollar amount with the employees that we
have, servicing 1,000. It has a lot to be said about what the
commissioners are doing from the dais and upholding high standards
as far as the county is concerned.
We watch that. I think it gives you a look at how we do -- and
that's what you asked us to do, benchmark against everybody else and
Page 14
June 29, 2004
see if we're in the ballpark or not. I believe we're in the ballpark and,
if anything, we're probably on the low end a little bit. And we have to
watch that. We have to listen to those citizens and make sure that
we're meeting their needs.
And the last piece, that -- I'll go back to that yellow bar chart, and
it's one that I didn't do a chart for. It basically says -- it's a budget per
employee. You can take a look at a budget per employee, and this has
nothing to do with what you pay the employee, okay, as far as the
dollar amount that's there. It's how much of operational budget. Yes,
it has some salary in there, it also has benefits, but it also has how
much does the proj ect cost in order to -- gas, you know, how much
does it cost to run the fleet; how much does it cost to air condition and
keep the lights on and everything else in your particular county, okay.
You've got those figures at the bottom.
Lee County, we're probably pretty comparable with. Martin
County we're a little above. Sarasota, we're under. Charlotte, we're
under. And Palm Beach, we're a little bit over from Palm Beach,
okay. But I'll provide those numbers as another kind of metric that
you can look at to see if we're doing well or not as far as a budget per
employee as it gets laid out.
So we've given you three different ways to look at those metrics
to see how those work to kind of give you an idea of how the county
manager's budget goes.
Then I'd like to turn the board's attention to Page 1 of the
operating budget in your budget books. And what I'd like to do is to
spend just a couple of minutes taking a look at Page 1, 2, Pages 3, 4, 5
and 6, 7, and then we'll have an idea so everybody knows. And then
we can go back to the tabbed items as you get your division
administrators' pitches in order to do that.
But on the first page, and I'd like to explain some items that when
you look at percent changes that your eyeballs open really big and you
go, oh, that was either one heck of a good cup of coffee or what's
Page 15
June 29, 2004
going on here? And I'd like to go down to the second line under
division agency on the page that says other general administration, and
it's in the 001 general fund account. And in that particular case you
see a 46.7 percent increase at the far end under percent change. Okay,
those expended dollars provide funding for the county's pro rata share
of expenses for housing juveniles in detention facilities. This was an
unfunded mandate from the State of Florida. And you'll notice in the
expanded position there, $1.425 million. And that's basically our
share of the $90 million unfunded mandate that we basically got from
the state that was passed. I don't know if that was a quid pro co (sic) --
a quid -- a tit for tat because of -- because -- so much for my Latin. If
that was just a payback for Article 5 as a mandate referendum and
they were trying to push a little bit back. I heard that particular case. I
hope that isn't the case at all. And that was done. But we have $1.4
million of unexpected expense that we didn't believe we had. Nor did
we have a say in it being done. But -- so there it sits and there's why
you have basically a 46.7 percent increase under that particular line.
Other general administration 111, you have a 34.7 percent
increase. And this budget reflects costs of allocated insurance
premiums, IT charges for network support, and the largest component
and increase is in the indirect service charge payment to the general
fund. Expenses have increased in this fund due to implementing the
landscaping master plan and the pool of allocated charges. Cost to the
general fund departments has also increased.
The next item that rises on your radar screen should be the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA. And that's a 22.7 percent increase.
That budget reflects an incremental growth in tax increments on the
TIF dollars paid to the CRA. Funds are placed into reserves until the
redevelopment plan is completed and implemented. So you got
additional dollars going in, and there you're sitting at 22.7. That is not
bad news if you're the Bayshore CRA. That is good news. But on
your radar screen, as you're trying to do the budget, you need to
Page 16
June 29, 2004
understand what that costs.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: In fact, they were here last night working
on their master plan after hours last evening. So obviously that money
will get spent at some future date. In the interim, it's just being placed
in reserves for that master plan implementation.
MR. MUDD: The next item on your, on your item that you
should come up to see on as a double digit increase is the airport
authority operations. And in that particular case that, basically, budget
reflects the increased cost of fuel for resale. This budget does not
include any changes recently approved by the airport authority. And
you'll hear from them this morning and get at those particular changes.
And then Mike and I will annotate them on the budgets and get them
up to speed over the next month or so for your perusal. These changes
will be discussed today during their presentation.
The next item of interest that should have got your attention is
the admin services operation. And that's kind of a mixed bag. And last
year, I remember the board saying you mean you don't have the
increases to pay salaries, medical, dental in each one of the divisions
yet and you had us peel them back out, because we kept them in a
central fund. In keeping with that direction from last year, the admin
services operations, and I'm looking at the FY '04 adopted budget.
Let's just look at that first column. It says $64 million. There's no way
that Len Price's organization cost $64 million. What it is, if I ask you
to go down right after total county manager's operation on the row
side, it says admin services operation less internal billing. Does
everyone see that particular line? And it says $24 million, okay, that's
more what Len Price costs in her division to operate. Why the $40
million difference? Well, the $40 million difference is the HR cost,
the dental cost, the medical cost, the workers' compensation cost that's
in every one of the other divisions. Public utility has their own in there
so it's a double count. Public utilities got it, community development
has it in their budget. Public services, the constitutional officers that
Page 1 7
June 29, 2004
use our HR folks and our risk management have it in their budget
already. So the first thing where it's 64 million is a double count.
Those numbers are already there in those other departments. So what
I basically said is get the internal billing piece out of this so that the
board can see it straight up.
Now, in Len's particular instance, her percentage went way up. It
went from 19.6 percent on the original line where the 64 million was,
and I think that she likes it better up there because her percentage isn't
so great, and I always kid her about it. And it goes up to 34.5 percent.
So let's try to figure out why it went up to 34.5 percent. The current
services reflects an increase of approximately $7 million.
This reflects growth in risk management funds to pay claims for
property damage. There's some $2.4 million in reserve because the
law changed and said that we needed to have 2 percent of insured
property value in a deductible for wind damage, for hurricane. So that
equates, that 2 percent equates to about $2.5 million. We've got 2.4 of
that 2.5 in the reserves -- you say for a rainy day, in this particular
case, for a very windy day. And those dollars are there.
The other thing is our group health claims. We need to have $2.6
million in reserve in order to keep a balance in there in case we have a
year of high claims. And we had that a year or so ago. If you
remember, we had to go out almost for, I call it additional collection
of operational funds from everybody, starting in around May, because
we needed to come up with $3 million. We never want to be in that
particular crisis. And we've got 2.6 million in that reserve account.
I will tell you Commissioners, you have to be smart about the
decisions that you make, because a board or so ago made a decision
when they had $4 million in this account to have a -- Mr. Mitchell,
was it a premium holiday? They had a premium holiday. That was
bad. That was a bad decision, okay. That premium holiday basically
drew down on the $4 million and didn't charge premiums cost sharing
to the employees, nor on the commissioners' side of the house. So
Page 18
June 29, 2004
then you had no reserves. Then when you have a high claims season
that digs into it, you don't have a reserve to draw from. And we're
trying to make up for that bad decision a couple of boards ago. We'll
never have a premium holiday, okay. I can promise you that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think the other thing you ought to
bring out is that we're self insured, too.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And that's important in order to get the
very best rates that we possibly can get on our health and dental.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: In addition, there's an annual actuarial
study that is required for self-insurance programs to make sure they
are in fact solvent, and we are on a recovery plan following that bad
year that we experienced to build our reserves to the adequate level
that is recommended by the actuary.
MR. MUDD: And last but not least in the admin services
operation, there's a half a million dollars for worker compensation
claims that's in the reserves. So I've accounted for about $5.5 million
in those three big areas of that $7 million increase, and no doubt Ms.
Len Price will discuss that in greater detail with you as you go along
today. But I kind of wanted to let you know why it was at 34.5
percent. Not bad management, just we have some policies and some
deductibles that we have to have reserves for.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to make sure that we are
clear on a couple of issues, Jim.
Under other general administration, that expanded service
amount of $1.4 million is a state mandated issue pertaining to the
courts. There are offsetting -- or going to be some offsetting additional
revenues associated with the court systems as a result of changes in
our ordinances that we're going to be making before the beginning of
this fiscal year.
What I'd like to do is get an understanding as to whether or not
you anticipate that the expanded revenue resulting from our changes
in the way we're going to collect some fines will indeed offset the cost
Page 19
June 29, 2004
of this mandate.
MR. MUDD: No, sir, it will not offset the cost of this $1.4
million on the Department of Juvenile Justice that came down to us.
Those particular programs will get us close to breaking even. I said
close. We're still augmenting with ad valorem dollars the court
system. Collier County was a donor county for the very longest time.
As far as collecting fees from our court system, I believe our clerk is
probably the best in the state as far as getting those dollars from -- I
won't say from the crooks, but he's getting those dollars from the court
system after judgment's been put on. And we get -- he does a good
job. And that brought us in the county a pretty good sizeable revenue,
turnback or whatever you want to call it at the end of the year from the
clerk's side.
Well, those good deeds now go to the state from us, so we don't
get those revenues to come back in again. And in order to get close to
breaking even, and we do have a good court system in Collier County,
we have one of the better ones, and I think Judge Hayes, when he gets
up here with Mark Middlebrook and the state attorney and whatnot,
will tell you we have probably one of the finest court systems in our
county in the state. We didn't want to mess that up either, okay. You
don't want to tear it apart. And I believe those -- that $65 ordinance
where you could add a surcharge to certain offenses and the $15 that
got to lesser offenses that we just passed here at the last board meeting
go a long way in order to give us a break-even as far as the court's side
of the house is concerned.
But this $1.4 million, no, sir, we don't have any revenues that are
going to make up for that. We're just basically taking that one in the
ear.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, with respect to the 16.1
percent increase in the airport authority budget for the increased cost
of fuel, that should be offset by increased revenue from the sale of that
fuel.
Page 20
June 29, 2004
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. If you remember at the workshop, I did
state that one of the things that the chairman and I both agreed about
was we believe that the revenues from the gas sales was understated.
And that's something that you might want to discuss with the airport
authority when they sit at that table and talk to you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you.
MR. MUDD: And the last particular item that I'd like to talk
about is transportation services operation. We're still in the county
manager's agency, and you look at transportation services operation,
and it's a 14.6 percent increase. And we're basically -- and that -- part
of that 14 percent, and the expanded, I'm going to let Norman talk to
you about his expanded. What I'm basically trying to get at is why did
it go from 38 to 43, okay, why was there a $5 million increase
between adopted and current service in that particular year? That
doesn't show up on the expanded line.
Basically, current service reflects an increase of approximately
$4.3 million, reflecting an increase in anticipated gap service grants.
There's $800,000 there. An increase of $1.1 million in services for
beautification and drainage provided through MSTUs. There's an
increase of $1.1 million in budgeted landscaping and an increase of
half a million dollars in replacement capital equipment that's there in
order to replace some of the equipment that Norman's got for his fleet.
That wouldn't be expanded, it's just an old truck, he's getting a new
truck, or an old Bobcat and he's replacing it with a new Bobcat
because its life in the fleet is up, and so you have to replace those
particular items.
That's what I'd like to talk to you on that overview. You've got
the constitutional officers changes, and each one of the constitutional
officers will be in to talk to you tomorrow.
If we could turn to Page 2. Basically, talk about the revenues and
the shortages. At the bottom you've got $879 million as far as costs
are concerned, and your revenue is about $874 million, bottom line, so
Page 21
June 29, 2004
you're looking for five. And now with the change to the assessed rate
you're looking for about 4.2.
The position counts are there. It gives you an idea of how the
position counts work. I will tell you that I put a last column on last
year about position change. And what was happening in past years is
people would sneak in, sneak in expanded positions, probably good
things, okay, that needed to happen. I call it sneak because nobody
was keeping track of what you brought in mid-year that was over and
above what you had budgeted and expanded, and when you did
expanded for the next year all you worried about was the expanded for
the next year, and nobody kept a tally from what you had, the
budgeted, and what you brought in through mid-year or what got
reduced from mid-year.
So we brought kind of an honest broker column in there, and I
wanted to know change from budgeted last year to change to budget
this year so that you had a full accounting of those particular positions.
And you have that on the last column of your position change.
Pages 3, 4, 5 and 6 are the only -- are the only fun pages that I
show you anymore, okay. All the other hundred and some odd fun
pages I don't show you so you don't have to run back and forth. That
was one of the things that we did. The reason I show you these four
pages is because these are the ones that you set the millage on, the
general fund and the unincorporated general fund, the MSTD general
fund. So you get to see those.
You'll see at the bottom line on Page 3, you'll see that shortfall of
5.198 million. And then you, on the next, on Page 4, you have
revenues that come into the general fund. And then on your 111
expenses, you can see on capital overlay UFR that you've got about
$50,000 to the good on that particular account.
And then from Pages 7 through 15, 16, 17, 18, we basically have
a listing of the unfinanced requirements, and we have an explanation
for each unfinanced requirement. Had lots of questions on the first
Page 22
June 29, 2004
item on Page 7 from all the commissioners. Well, if we're going out
to referendum to see ifpeople are going to raise the taxes for this
particular item, then why is it on the UFR list? It's on the UFR list
because you have a desire, or at least you've shown a desire to
supposedly do the right thing. If this referendum does not pass, it's
still an unfinanced requirement, okay, and you have to make a
decision at that particular juncture after November what you're going
to do with it one way or the other. And I suggest you do nothing with
it in the fact that I've just itemized it on this particular page.
Commissioner, I would also recommend that we don't get into a
discussion about funding which unfinanced requirements until you get
a full briefing on all the budgets through today and half day tomorrow,
so that at the end of it you can decide. Mike and I will keep a tally of
what you've cut, what you've added, so I'll try to give you those
numbers. And then I'll give you an update tomorrow what that figure
is, if there's any positive dollars that you might want to put against a
particular project. Or you might want to talk about it and discuss it
tomorrow and make no decisions until September when you have your
-- when you have your public hearings and they're advertised, to see
which ones you want to fund. But a discussion of the items so that
everybody understands what they are and what the needs are would
probably be healthy.
Commissioner, without, if you don't have any more questions of
me, I'd like to go to courts and related agencies and bring those folks
up to the front table so they can discuss that budget with you, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Move on forward.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Commissioner, while they're sitting
there, I'd like to commend Judge Hayes and Mark Middlebrook and
Steve Russell and the public defender's office and everyone for a
pretty good budget that they basically presented. They worked with
us as they did that. This was a tumultuous time for them in the fact
that the state took some of it, we were left with some of it. Everybody
Page 23
June 29, 2004
was trying to figure out what was going on.
I will also tell you that probation was an item that was on my
radar screen, and I know it was one that was on Commissioner Halas's
screen, because he gave me this maximous (sic) folder yesterday. And
I haven't had time to share that with Mark Middlebrook. But I will tell
you that they've made huge strides. Last year probation had to have a
subsidy from the general fund of some $375,000. And I believe this
year it's down to -- they've cut at least $200,000 off of that subsidy in
order to get it down into a more reasonable level, and that had to do
with an increase in their particular fees.
But I will tell you that the judge, everyone that's sitting at that
table, have been working hard to balance this particular budget and to
make sure that it doesn't have additional cost to the taxpayers of
Collier County. And it's been a tough time because of Article 5 and
some other things. And all of us that are sitting in this room weren't
necessarily players, we were more receivers on that particular
language. We all had comments. Sometimes people took them and
sometimes they didn't. But I believe that the rules that we were left
with, we did a pretty good job for the taxpayers of Collier County as
far as this budget is concerned.
And I turn it over to you.
COURT AND RELATED AGENCIES (STATE ATTORNEY AND
EllBLICDEEENDER )
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm
Mark Middlebrook, Senior Deputy Court Administrator for at least
two more days for the 20th Judicial Circuit. Chief Judge Hayes is
here. Mr. Russell, your State Attorney and Mr. Jacobs, your Public
Defender.
The Chief Judge and I will only be addressing the court
administration and judiciary budgets. And the other constitutional
Page 24
June 29, 2004
officers will address theirs.
Basically we've reduced our budget submission by over $2
million. We went from 56 employees to 32 and a half, of which the
probation makes up 26 of those employees. And we project that they
will actually generate revenue in next year's -- the '04-'05 budget, and
will be cost neutral, if not actually generating revenue to the county.
So in essence six and a half employees remain as county funded
employees that we have no revenue to address them with.
Chief Judge, I'm not sure if you have anything you would like to
address here.
JUDGE HAYES: Let me just, if I could, briefly -- for the record,
my name is Hugh Hayes, and I have the pleasure of serving as the
Chief Judge for the 20th Judicial Circuit. But even more important
than that, I have the pleasure of serving as a circuit court judge in and
for Collier County, Florida, for which I am extremely proud to come
from this particular locale.
I would like to say that -- for me this is the last of the three
commissions that I am appearing before on the issue of our budgets.
Yesterday I was in with the -- well, in fact so was Steve and Bob. We
appeared in front of the Lee County Commission yesterday. And I
think that I can speak on our behalf by saying that our relationships
with the county staff has been extraordinary. I think that we
appreciate the fact that everybody understands that to some extent we
feel like the stepchild in this whole process who has not been in a
position to really argue one way or the other with anybody. We're just
trying to -- we're kind of reeling from the punches, so to speak. And
as I tell our staff, our people, it's my visualization that we are the
phoenix rising from the ashes.
The last time that we went through such a significant change in
the State of Florida was actually the first year I began practicing law
in 1972. And at that time the Florida legislature changed the Florida
constitution to go from what we used to have as what we call
Page 25
June 29, 2004
magistrate courts. You would have the city traffic court judge and we
had multiple layers of the legal system out there, not necessarily good.
It's what I used to call the old Georgia system, where somebody could
be a sitting city court magistrate and also own the local car dealership.
And we did make a significant change for the better in 1972.
This is a significant change, obviously, with Article 5, revision
seven. And even though we in general have been a very insignificant
portion of the county's budget historically, I think that it's clear we're
becoming a less significant portion as time goes on and the state is
making an effort to pick up some of these expenses and employees.
But it still remains to be said clearly that we believe that we have one
of the best circuits of the 20 circuits in the State of Florida. As far as
personnel, as far as judiciary, as far as the state attorney and the public
defender are concerned and the employees that work with us. I have
said before and I know you remember that the 20th Judicial Circuit is
number one this year in percentage of growth of the 20 circuits in the
State of Florida. We were number two the year before. I don't think
that that's going to change significantly. I think that we will be in the
top three for the foreseeable, probably next 8 to 10 years.
The -- as I say, our compassion, I think I can say, actually, that
we receive from the county manager and the staff is more of an
empathy in understanding the situation that we're in, trying to work
with us. We feel like that -- speaking on behalf of the -- on the
judicial side of the equation, I think we have made a very strong effort
to be forthright, to be up front, it's the old, you know, the old Army
story, when you're in trouble, tell everybody. And that's what we've
done. And we've taken some serious and significant cuts in our staff
and in our positions. We've gotten down to the point where I think
we've gone as lean as we can go without substantially and critically
interfering with our ability to deliver services. I think that we are
fortunate, as you know, to have the $65/$15 fee provided to us by the
legislature. Luckily near the end of the session, they did hear a lot of
Page 26
June 29, 2004
pain coming from the FAC and from the courts, because we could see
it coming and we knew we were going to be substantially damaged.
And I mean damaged, not just neutralized, but we were going
negative, in my opinion, and it would have affected our ability to
serve the citizens. I was fully prepared, I'm glad that we won't go
there, to pull our judges out of the civil divisions and have them go
more into handling the criminal cases, the juvenile cases, the
dependency court cases. They would have all gotten priority. The
civil cases would have gone onto the back burner. And that has
happened in other states in the United States. And fortunately, I do
not believe that's going to happen to us. But it was very, very close. I
mean, it was -- it's scary.
This -- but anyway, we appreciate the work that you -- the staff
has provided to help us work our way through this system. It's
something that's new for us. As I say, it's been a drastic change. We
are fully cognizant of the fact, such as in the juvenile justice program
that we are under the impression, at least, that we may be able to get
some help from the legislature in that area next year. We're also
cognizant of the fact, as you are, and I know that county manager is,
that if the voters -- if it gets on the ballot, and we'll know from the
Florida Supreme Court very soon, if it gets on the ballot and it's
proposed to the voters in November, that the homestead exemption be
doubled, I can report to you, as yesterday we appeared in front of the
county commission and the property appraiser, who's more than happy
to take credit for that first $25,000 passage of that law, was very clear
in telling the Lee County Commission yesterday that he is adamantly
opposed to the passage of this new proposal that would double, up to
$50,000, the homestead exemption, because of the severe impact it
would have on ad valorem taxation. So we're cognizant of these other
world view issues that don't just affect -- that don't on a day-to-day
basis apply to us, but we're trying to keep those in mind as well.
So as far as the judiciary, we'll be glad to answer any questions,
Page 27
June 29, 2004
or we can let Steve and Bob --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas has a question, and
then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Judge, I appreciate your candor in
regards to where you get yourself to the point where you're lean and
mean. I just hope that we keep our eye on what's going on, that we
have customers -- that we really make sure we take care of the
customer, the customer satisfaction. I've been myself, my career, I've
dealt with a corporation that cut way too deep, and issues, serious
issues, started falling off the table to the point where it was to the
point where we lost customer satisfaction and we lost really where we
were focused for. So not only you, but I think the county, we really
have to make sure that we keep both balls in the air and make sure that
that gray area, we address that, so we are lean and mean, but we also
take care of serious issues and customer satisfaction. That's primary
concerns that I think that all of us should have here in Collier County
that represent the constituency.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Court operations,
the staffing level for this year, would you say, rank it as understaffed,
adequate, sufficient?
JUDGE HAYES: I would say at this point we're right on the
cutting edge. I mean, I don't -- honestly, I don't think we can go any
deeper. I really believe this is a phoenix program. This is my whole
theory. Thank God, and hopefully this is going to be true, but I have
told everybody in our program, staff circuit-wide, that as in any
business, everybody ought to be required to periodically go back and
justify their existence. And that's what I think we're doing. I would
hate to think that we would have to go into this kind of detail and this
degree on an annual basis. And quite frankly, I know some of the
staff feels the same way. They're not used to sometimes dealing with
us as intensively as they have been in all the counties.
Page 28
June 29, 2004
But I think that it's a valid analysis that periodically in any
governmental organization, you should be required to go back and
justify your existence. That's what we're doing. If there are programs
that we cannot honestly justify to you that we think are valuable and
should be kept, they should be gone. I don't have any problem with
that at all.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great. I have more questions.
JUDGE HAYES: And I think that what we have come up with is
to tell you that these are programs that we do believe are valuable.
We do believe we need to provide our services to the public, to the
taxpayers. And honestly, I -- you know, I honestly don't see where
else we can go. I mean, I don't see how much farther down we can go
in cutting. We're going to be relying to a great extent on the probation
department, as you know, to collect these fees that we are passing
through these ordinances, the 65/15.
As the manager has said, this county is probably clearly -- I think
it's number one, honestly, but it's within the top three of the 67
counties in the state in its collection efforts. And that's been clearly
the directive from this county commission over the years. Plus through
the direction of the clerk.
So I think we'll continue to do that, but you've got to have the
people, the probation staff, to go out and monitor those people,
because as we know from the criminal law system, you run a
straighter course and you're a straighter arrow all the time when
you've got somebody on your back. And the probation department is
that institution. They are able to go out and monitor these people, to
work with them, to help them -- yesterday Commissioner Janes had
that question with regard to collecting child support. And we run a
child support program through that as well, so that if someone comes
in and they don't have the $1,500 to pay their back child support
because they just blew it off because they gave up, we work with
those people in one of the programs we have to say okay, so you don't
Page 29
June 29, 2004
have the $1,500, don't just blow it off, because you leave us as judges
no option except to, guess what, put you in jail, to punish you, to
extract something from you that you fear more than coming up with
the money. So we work out a payment schedule with them. You
appear every Friday and we say, how much can you pay? Now that's
pretty much worked out through the clerk of the courts. That program
works. Extraction is a very bad word but we -- in a sense -- but we
extract those funds and we keep them on a payroll plan is what it is.
So that's how you collect this money. And you have to have
employees and staff to do that. Otherwise, if we didn't have the
probation department we would just say fine, you know, give you 30
days in jail. That has an impact, of course, of 60 bucks a day across
the street that we also are hopefully saving the county from having to
pay for those.
So we are -- we have gone lean and mean. We've gone to
baseline. We understand -- my theory is we're in a rebuilding mode,
and we'll have to come back just like every other agency and justify
our existence and our needs every year. But I think we wanted to go
down this year to a level we felt we can be honest with ourselves and
say this is it, we can't -- we don't feel like we can do much more.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your Honor, I'm not asking you
to cut your existing positions, but if we can talk about your expanded
positions, one of them is an administrative assistant. How many
administrative assistants do you have now?
JUDGE HAYES: Is that -- which one is that specifically?
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: I didn't think we expanded any
positions, did we?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: One position, administrative
assistant. And then you have a computer specialist, office assistant,
legal secretary.
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: We didn't expand any positions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're not requiring to expand
Page 30
June 29, 2004
any --
JUDGE HAYES: I don't believe we did.
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: We're at the same number of employees
in court admin that we had in '03-'04.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Then we can just strike
this out from the budget page.
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: I'm not sure what you're referring to.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll show you what I have.
JUDGE HAYES: We have -- I mean -- and I don't know if this is
one of those things, we have people like a receptionist that the state
didn't pick up. We don't want to, quite frankly, send all those inquiries
over to the county commission receptionist. I mean, we -- there's
certain things we have to have to -- just to exist on a day-to-day basis.
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: Those are our current positions, sir. I
believe I know where you're looking at. It's down here. Those are just
our current positions that the county will be funding that you've
always funded. Those aren't expanded.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
JUDGE HAYES: We're definitely not trying to expand, we're
just trying to maintain as best we can.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you for the clarification.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I appreciate your efforts
trying to meet the budget requirements here.
Do you feel that we jointly have explored all of the opportunities
for raising additional funds to support our court operations? Do you
have any other ideas as to how we might be able to do something
here?
JUDGE HAYES: This is not -- the answer -- first, to the
question is no, I don't know of anything else we can do. We are -- this
county, Collier County, is number one in the state now as far as
charges for probation fees. We're number one. And other people love
Page 3 1
June 29, 2004
that, because they can always hold us up and say well, when they go
to their county commissioners and say we would like to raise the fees,
then they can always say, but we're not the highest, Collier is. So we
could go higher in that area, but we're already number one, and I think
there's a -- we're trying to do this -- what we have now is a staged
procedure where as of July the 1 st, we're going up $5 a month. As of
next July 1 st, another $5 a month. There comes a point that I don't
know how much, you know -- the answer is yes, you can raise more
fees, I guess, but there is a point of diminishing return. And I think
that that's where -- that's why I wanted to phase this in first with the $5
this year. We still are, you know, we are number one in the state. So I
don't know how much farther out we want to go in being number one.
And we have, you know, I believe we've looked at all the
expenses that we can. We've looked at all the factors such as the
65/15. Our judges are going to -- in fact, I, you know, made sure.
We've talked to Dwight Brock and Brock has said that -- I told him, I
said I'm concerned we're going to have to remind all of our judges
each time these people come in to assess these costs. And he's assured
me, don't worry, our people are going to do it for you. So it's
automatically built in. And so we're working that closely to try to
make sure we collect the funds that are available.
There is some degree -- for our numbers, we basically threw out
the felony assessments. So anything we get in the felony area has not
been counted on by us, because I think that's a very, you know,
amorphous type thing to get your hand around, because when you put
somebody in a felony situation, you're more than likely going to take
their job away from them. So if they go into this county jail system,
it's going to be for a lengthy -- could be a lengthy period of time. And
if they go over that, they go to state prison. So they're not realistic in
my opinion. Even though we'll assess the fee against them, we're not
counting on collecting that from them.
That's where the probation department comes in so importantly
Page 32
June 29, 2004
because we do think we can realistically collect from county court
cases, misdemeanor cases and from those traffic offenses, the four
particular traffic offenses that are first degree misdemeanors: DUI,
willful, wanton, reckless driving, those kinds of things.
And so those are probably real numbers. I mean, we have a
history on those, and we really believe that we will be able to collect
that fund. But there are some funds that we've been talking to the
manager's office we've agreed, that we just kind of -- we didn't --
they're there, we're going to assess them for you, but it's not -- I don't
think they're real numbers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: As you know, we are creating a
position for a special master to .deal with certain fines.
JUDGE HAYES: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are there any other opportunities
to your knowledge for doing that sort of thing so we can retain more
money here in Collier County to support your activities?
JUDGE HAYES: Not that I know of. This is part of an ongoing
process. As the manager said, we have been one of those donor
counties. It's probably up for another day and another discussion, but
it's been -- it's quite interesting, as somebody who was a political
science major, I mean, but we have gone into a truly different
philosophy, and it's been interesting that the political party that's in
charge of the government is the one who has created a very socialized
and centralized governmental system as far as the judiciary is
concerned.
And so those counties that have had resources such as Collier,
Lee, Charlotte, Sarasota, the coastal counties, are definitely, the
extraction term can be applied to them as well, and that is to provide
for the have-not counties, particularly in north Florida. But we have
two of those in our circuit, in Glades and Hendry. So those counties
that have not had the tax resources and the ability to provide certain
services to their citizens in the past are getting it now by compulsion
Page 33
June 29, 2004
or otherwise, I guess. But it's being directed by Tallahassee and it's
being a centralized system.
We have some circuits in north Florida where they're getting --
hearing officers now are magistrates like we already have. We only
picked up one new magistrate position of the roughly 80 or 90 that
were provided by the state legislature this year. And we've got some
circuits up in the northern part of the state who, quite frankly, their
county judges that don't even, I'm not even sure are overworked to
meet their burden, and now they're going to have one magistrate in
each one of their counties and they don't even know what to do with
them. And so -- they don't even have the growth we have.
But this is part of the state's perceived mandate to equalize or
whatever, maybe socialize is too strong, but to equalize services
throughout the State of Florida to all counties, no matter what their tax
base may be. And this is just something, for me it's kind of a new
process or concept to go through mentally and philosophically, but
that's definitely where we are. And it's just kind of ironic that it's from
the government that's currently in power.
MR. MIDDLEBROOK: Commissioner, we have gone so far as
to instruct the director of probation to make sure that the probation
fee, which is currently $65 a month, is collected first and then the
additional $65 -- of the 65/15 is collected before -- that money is
identified prior to paying any of the fines that this county does not
receive. So in essence, the first dollars coming in are going to be
county dollars. We are going to ensure that this county collects every
dime that we can collect from the probationers. And then any other
money will be going into the fines which go out to the state.
JUDGE HAYES: We're working pretty closely with Dwight on
that to try to figure out how we can, you know, not break any -- cross
any lines improperly, but to stay as tight as we possibly can. Because
I think you probably realize, his attitude is the same as ours, and that
is he's not planning on sharing one dime with them that he doesn't
Page 34
June 29, 2004
have to, one penny.
And so we're -- I think several counties are in this situation that
Collier -- Lee is in the same situation. And I think that we're
somewhat disappointed that, you know, that everybody's, you know,
going to the piggy bank so to speak, for other rural counties in the
state. And it's just a philosophy issue, really.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, we still have presentations
from other people with regard to the courts. But we have a court
reporter here who needs a 10- minute break. And I hate to do that to
you right now but I'm going to give her a 10-minute break.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, we might be done with those other
speakers in a relatively short fashion. I mean, I --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You think?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, the--
MR. JACOBS: Yes, we really don't have anything to add.
Robert Jacobs, for the record, public defender, 20th Circuit. We want
to thank staff for working with us. And what you see is what you get
with us. It's a bare-bones budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Steve?
MR. RUSSELL: Just briefly, Steve Russell, state attorney for the
20th Circuit. I want to just briefly echo those sentiments. We've had
tremendous cooperation in working these issues out back and forth
with the county manager, the budget director and staff.
And likewise, our budget is out there. There is a reduction, it's
primarily Article 5. In my particular position, it didn't go down
percentage-wise as much because we didn't have positions that were
transferred out of our budget to state. We did pick up some positions
on witness coordination, but they were under court administration's
budget so they'll reflect that reduction there.
Other than that, if there are any questions. There is just one thing
that I think I didn't see in any of the paperwork was that I know that
Page 35
June 29, 2004
the legislature did put in a recording fee to help pay for data
processing costs which are under the county's responsibility. Four
dollar fee, $2 which was to split between the courts, public defender
and state attorney. So there is some positive revenue stream there, I
believe.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, what we're trying to do in those particular
-- and that's a good point, Steve. There's another issue that's still on
the table from Article 5 that we still have to clean up. We have to get
into agreements with the public defender's office and state attorney's
office so that they can basically try violations to your ordinances.
Because under Article 5 basically takes your ordinances and makes
them toothless until you come up with agreements. And we still have
to do that. And Mr. Russell's office provided a letter yesterday, and I
know the county attorney's been working on it a couple of months
now in the process in order to get those agreements. And we'll work
through that process.
Now, those agreements are going to have an hourly fee, okay, no
doubt, okay, for both offices. And we're still going to have to take a
look at those in the budget and figure out exactly how much that's
going to cost based on violations in previous years to come up with an
estimate.
Mr. Russell also brought up an item about the $4 fee for filing
charges for public records. Two dollars for IT, this is basically for IT
related, $2 of the $4 comes to the Board of County Commissioners,
$1.90 goes to the clerk of courts, and 10 cents goes to a state fund to
make interconnectivity between all the organizations in a seamless
environment.
I'm still going through the court budgets to itemize their IT
expenses. Right now there's ad valorem dollars against their IT, and
I'm, in concert with one of my budgeteers, are in communication with
their offices to find out how much money -- and I call this $2 yellow
money, okay, and I'm calling general fund money purple. I'm trying
Page 36
June 29, 2004
to figure out how much yellow money I can interj ect into their budgets
and get purple dollars back, get ad valorem dollars back. We believe
that's to the tune of about $390,000 right now. And we're working
that -- we're working on it. That's all I can say to you.
At the same time there's additional charges with these agreements
that we need to get into with the public defender and the state
attorney's office for them to represent us as we get violators to our
ordinances, to prosecute those in the court of law. And so I'm looking
for a revenue source and that's what I'm trying to find. At the same
time, I know there's some additional cost. We're just still working on
it. It's going to take us before, about 1 September to get those figured
out. But there's two more issues out there that we're working on.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jim, very briefly, the one
connection I'm not getting here is that although there has been a 35.6
percent reduction in court costs and court and related agency costs as a
result of Article 5, I don't see a corresponding reconciliation of
revenue adjustments. It would be helpful for us to evaluate the impact
of Article 5 on us and to stimulate innovative ideas about how to deal
with this problem if we can track the changes in revenue and the
changes in expenses relating to Article 5 implementation.
So if you have that, you know, keep it, give it to us and let us
review it at some point in time before this budget process is over with,
because it's sort of important that we begin to tie those two things
together.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Absolutely.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I believe at this juncture we're still
subsidizing a court system to the tune of about a million dollars.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that more or less than we were
subsidizing before?
MR. MUDD: I think it's a little less. But I'm going to get you the
exact numbers, just exactly how you specified. I'm giving you what I
Page 37
June 29, 2004
-- it's still about a million bucks. But we'll get to it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Your Honor, as I look
through the division of summary here, I notice that you have
something here for drug assessment. What about mental illness
evaluations and mental illness assessments of people?
JUDGE HAYES: The -- well, some of these we have as -- in the
past have had sharing agreements with some of the -- like David
Lawrence and things like that. As the, I'm sure the staff analysis
probably showed you last week, the week before, under that 969.185,
where we take that 25 percent, 25 percent, 25 percent type analysis,
the legislature provided the funds and -- actually it was a good deal.
They provided the funds but then they told you where it was going to
be paid. And the -- the worst part was prior to that, they were going to
take the funds and have all of these collected and sent to Tallahassee,
then to be redisbursed back to us upon request based upon the
programs. Luckily, everybody panicked on our side of the street and
through the legislature was able to adjust that so -- that statute so that
it would come back and stay local, so that these funds can be used in
those areas.
The original source of the revenue, according to our records, is
not going to be available as a result of this Article 5 revision. But I
think under those four criteria, and I -- if I'm correct, and we haven't
really, because it comes on line July the 1 st, I don't think anybody
knows exactly at this point. You can't spend the money before you
get it, number one. But number two, it will require people to, I think,
come to probably through the county commission to say we have
these programs that we would like to have funded by part of those
funds.
This is probably a Category 1 fund and it may be a Category 3
under the help -- drug court programs, mental health court programs.
Page 38
June 29, 2004
These -- during the legislation session, 939.185 was an attempt to
address a disparity within the state. The problem would be -- a good
example is, one day Steve and I were sitting up in Tallahassee, and I
like to tell this example that occurred in the House Judiciary
Committee where they were talking about drug courts. And this did
not go through the state legislature as a supported, recognized. The
Governor was in favor of it. Lot of history to that, of course. But all
the counties in the state did not have drug courts. And so when we
were sitting there some guy says on the committee, one of the
legislators, actually, said, well, we don't have this problem, that's a
Dade County problem. We don't have that problem. And he was
from north Florida. And without us turning over our shoulder to see
who the wise guy was, somebody said, who was -- who -- behind us in
the audience said no, you guys just grow it all.
And so that was, that was kind of interesting. I mean, it was kind
of humorous, and we were actually surprised that the sergeant at arms
didn't throw somebody out, but it also expressed an issue, a problem
that we have in the state. And that is not all counties have the same
focus and the same needs. This statute was intended to alleviate those
concerns, so that if you wanted a drug court, you can use this money
to go start your drug court, your teen court, a drug court for teens,
which is important. It can be used for the much discussed law library
problems, which I think were probably overplayed. And they weren't
-- we didn't go into that, we didn't jump into that box. We felt that we
were able to handle this internally within Collier County very well.
So those are -- that's one of the things that they're looking at, and
that's probably where we're going to go to look at those areas and say
can we go to a mental health court. In Palm Beach County, in
Broward County, in Dade County they have the mental health courts.
Lee County has the mental health court. Judge Starnes runs that for us
in Lee County. The county, in particular Commissioner Janes, has a
particular interest in that field and he has yesterday told the Lee
Page 39
June 29, 2004
County Commission that no matter what the budget's concerns were,
he wanted that program maintained, and we are maintaining that
through the court administration program.
So we're going to be able to address those, I think, and this
939.185 should be our funding stream to do that. But it's not going to
happen overnight. And we can't, as you would know, we can't spend
that money before we get it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much, Your
Honor.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you have anything that you'd like to
add?
MR. RUSSELL: No, that's all. We appreciate your
consideration.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. County Manager, anything
further?
Okay, fine. Thank you very much for all of the information that
you shared with us.
JUDGE HAYES: Thank you for your cooperation as well. It's
been a very interesting year, for everybody.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We'll take a 10-minute break.
(A brief recess was taken.)
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have a hot mic.
The next item on our agenda is admin services. And I'd like to
turn this particular item over to Ms. Helena Price.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, before we do
that, if we could set some procedural matters here so we can get
through this budget. The last two items were very painful, in my
opinion. We can get the divisions -- give the divisions 15 minutes
each to present and answer questions of the board. If they go over
Page 40
June 29, 2004
that, for every minute, we take out 1 percent of their budget.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or eliminate one position.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, we will try and -- I appreciate your
suggestion because the last one went on a little bit. Yes, if we could
maybe -- and I'm sure you will stay right on the subject, and that way
we'll move it along a little bit quickly. And don't expound on what
other counties are doing, I'd appreciate that.
MS. PRICE: Thank you. I'm willing to negotiate with you. If
we go under the 15 minutes, can you add it back?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: No.
MS. PRICE: Good morning, Commissioners, for the record, Len
Golden Price, administrative services division administrator.
First I'd like to thank you for the past year, it's been exciting and
challenging for me. I cannot think of a better group of people to work
with and a more professional agency to be a part of and be able to live
in paradise, too.
The administrative services division mission is to serve the
departments that serve the public. And that is what we try to do. And
the budget that we've put before you is one in which I believe we can
give the quality services, tools and facilities needed to provide
services to the public. We were able to stay within the 2.1 percent
guidelines that you set forth in terms of our controllable expenses.
And the county manager has explained to you some of those
uncontrollable areas. We are making every effort to contain costs
under health insurance and property/casualty insurance by taking
some mitigating and proactive measures so that we can cut those in the
future. And I'll allow the department directors to elaborate on that just
a little bit more as we go on. Fuel prices are starting to level out just a
little bit and we're hoping that that will be a continuing trend.
One highlight I'd like to point out to you, something that I think
is a real positive thing, is the Dori Slosberg Driver's Education Bill
was passed. We now collect $3 on every traffic violation, and that
Page 41
June 29, 2004
will go towards driver's education for our young people in Collier
County .
With that, I'll introduce my team to you and they can explain
their departments and what we're working on, and you can ask any
questions that you have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, is that you with
us?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've been with you, ma'am. I'm
here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, great. Okay, fine. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How's the fishing?
MS. PRICE: I'll start right here with Steve Carnell, Purchasing
Director.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: With a new mustache.
MR. CARNELL: New mustache. It's part of my efficiency kick;
less shaving time each morning.
Madam Chairman, members of the board, just briefly, the
purchasing department budget reflects some significant change for
Fiscal Year '05, and it primarily focuses and centers upon the adding
of a contract administration section. We had originally proposed five
additional positions to focus in two primary areas of our procurement
process. One would be adding resources to the negotiation phase for
contracting, and the second would be the delivery phase after the
contract's negotiated, and executed and underway, providing more
support across the agency to all of our departments with the delivery
and performance of contractor and vendor services.
The way the budget has been submitted and approved by the
county manager, he has authorized a request of three additional
positions, so there were two that were not funded. So what we've
elected to do with that in terms of the proposal to you is to take those
three positions and focus most of the resources on the delivery end,
which is, again, as I mentioned, the period in time where we're under
Page 42
June 29, 2004
contract and receiving services from contractors and vendors.
The gist of the role of these three individuals that are going to be
added is going to be to provide day-to-day support to our project
managers in the various divisions of the county manager agency.
Much of their time and attention would be directed to the construction
area, and so that means supporting the transportation division, the
public utilities division, your facilities management department and
your parks and recreation department. Those would be our four prime
customers in terms of construction services support.
What we do not have funded is adding resources on the
negotiation side. We'd like to be able to add a negotiation specialist
position and be able to provide more support in that negotiation phase
where we could assume more of the responsibility and provide more
resource in the negotiation arena. We do some of that now but it's
essentially limited to what the purchasing agents can afford in their
time. And the purchasing agents are the individuals who handle the
bidding process and handle the source selection, if you will. And to
the extent that they have time available to assist departments with
negotiations they do. The proposal that we had in mind was to have a
dedicated individual who could focus on that task and essentially two
resources for that.
So that's our budget in a nutshell. And I'll entertain any questions
you have at this point.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The contract negotiation is
something that I think that we all have been wrestling with. And I'm
sorry to hear that the county manager cut that out. If during the end
the day, if you could show where the board can save money in the
overall operation of the county, I'd be inclined to consider that
position.
MR. CARNELL: Okay. I can provide you some past history
later in the day, if you'd like, regarding some savings that we've
Page 43
June 29, 2004
achieved in that area in the past.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just one commissioner. I
don't know if any of the other commissioners are open to that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm certainly willing to hear it.
Okay. Any other questions?
Okay, let's move on.
MR. WALKER: Good morning, Jeff Walker, risk management
director. I'm going to speak to you this morning about three particular
programs, your property/casualty program, your group insurance
program and your workers' compensation program.
In terms of expanded requests, on Page AS-44, which is the
property/casualty program, we are asking for an information system.
The other cost drivers within this budget are simply operating
expenses, such as reinsurance and so forth. We are not asking for
additional positions within this budget, but we are asking for an
information system to help us become more efficient with the staff
that we do have.
We process approximately 500 claims a year through the office
without any kind of information system, so it's very paper driven,
which tends to be very manual driven. And so we think that will help
us now and in the future. So that is what we're asking for within that
budget in terms of expanded requests.
Turning to the group insurance program, that would be on Page
AS-46. There are a couple of expanded requests within that particular
budget. One of the things that we want to pursue is a primary care
facility on campus. And we want to do that through a contracted
mechanism. In other words, put an RFP out and have a medical group
respond to it.
Let me explain to you why we want to pursue this. The average
age of our group right now is a little over 46 years old. With age
comes, obviously, chronic health conditions, things that need to be
managed, and to keep conditions from getting worse. We believe that
Page 44
June 29, 2004
we have a great opportunity here to contain costs, to control
particularly the four leading causes of illness within our group: Heart
disease, cancer, diabetes, kidney disease, those sorts of things, by
managing those folks who present with those kinds of problems.
We've got an outstanding wellness program going now. We're
identifying upwards of eight to 900 folks a year in terms of assessing
their health conditions. And what we would like to do is take that a
step further by funneling those people into a primary care facility to
manage them.
We have a lot of folks walking around out there with
undiagnosed diabetes or uncontrolled diabetes and those sorts of
things. And what tends to happen with those cases is they get worse
and worse. Kidney problems develop and those other things. And
they're very costly.
We believe that this is a proactive way through an outsourcing
method of helping us get a hold of our health care costs to some
degree here. And it's what we want to do in terms of pursuing this.
We originally requested this in terms of FTEs, and I think rightly
so the county administrator said look, why don't you look at
outsourcing it. And I think that makes a lot of sense. And so that is
one of the expanded proposals we have in here.
Essentially, the way it would pay for itself would be through the
redirection of services that would have gone elsewhere now into this
facility. And so what you gain by that is convenience and you also
gain productivity, because your employee now can walk down, see a
nurse practitioner, and perhaps go right back to work, where they
might spend two ours or three hours traveling around town.
So that's our goals with that program, and we think it has a lot of
potential, without really costing a lot of money. And so that's one of
the expanded requests that we have.
With that, we are asking for some capital money to do a little bit
ofreconfiguration within the office facility, because we would need,
Page 45
June 29, 2004
obviously, to create a couple of exam rooms and we would need to
move some folks around. But that is the other part of that expanded
position request.
And then finally, in terms of your workers' compensation
program, and that would be on Page AS-48, we are asking for an
expanded position in terms of a safety technician. We have a very, I
won't say serious problem, but a significant problem in the county in
that we are running into more and more employees who do not speak
English as their primary language.
We probably have between 150 to 200 employees who are
working in field positions and high hazard positions who we simply
can't train because they don't speak English. And it's just a fact, they
just don't. And what we would like to be able to do is to hire a
bilingual safety person so we can get these folks trained in the various
occupational and health exposures that they run into, because we can't
deal with certain -- with our staff as it stands right now.
We believe that this investment is going to come back in return in
terms of reduced workers' comp claims and the associated lost time
that accompanies those. And it's just a pressing need that we have.
And so that position is one that we've placed within the budget and
which has been approved by the county manager and the division
administrator.
And then we are also budgeting within this budget the other half
of a risk management information situation, because it will support
both of these programs, and of course, as I said before, we want to get
efficiencies out of that program.
So those are the primary things that we have asked for.
Essentially one expanded position is it, the main one. What it takes to
operate these funds are mainly claim costs, reinsurance costs, and
those things are driven by growth and so forth. We're not asking for
anything else other than that. I'd be glad to answer your questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, I have a question, then
Page 46
June 29, 2004
Commissioner Halas, then Commissioner Henning, then
Commissioner Coyle. So we're all lining up.
My question is, with the primary health care facility right on the
campus here, do you have any -- that's how they used to do it in olden
days, isn't it --
MR. WALKER: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and right on the property. And do you
have any idea of how much money actually, because we're self
funded, it would be saving the county by -- it seems to me it would
save a great deal of money, but -- just an estimate?
MR. WALKER: Well -- I did a business analysis for this when I
originally proposed it, in terms of hiring staff to do it. We estimated
that if we could redirect about 20 percent of our primary care services,
meaning that the other 80 would still go out, that we could pay for this
in less than a year.
The cost of this is in the neighborhood of about $375,000. That's
equal to about one week's worth of claims. So there's a tremendous
amount of return that could come out of this. If you could -- for
example, if you could get a diabetic managed or you could identify a
person with a heart condition and get them managed, or if you could
do preventive care -- so we think that by being proactive in doing this,
that we can get return from it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I have a couple of questions to
start off with. You're talking about bringing up a new software
program in regards to addressing your efficiencies in your office.
Have you made any kind of determination on how many man hours
you would save or the reduction in head count? I shouldn't say man
hours, how about person hours? And what's the reduction in head
count going to be in your staff with this new software program?
MR. WALKER: Well, we would manage that program with our
current staff. We would not add staff to do that. The problem we're
Page 47
June 29, 2004
running into is --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I hope we would decrease staff
with more efficiency and less paperwork.
MR. WALKER: Well, we're not going to be decreasing staff,
simply because right now what's happening is that our staff are
overloaded with the paperwork that's associated with that. What we
are trying to do is to offset the addition of staff in the future. In other
words, to become more efficient, so that by using this system we won't
have to add staff in the future.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's the answer I'm
looking for.
The next question is you're talking about having some type of a
program whereby you monitor people with sugar diabetes and people
with heart disease, but I didn't hear anything about smoking cessation
classes, and that's the primary source of all these problems, these
ailments.
MR. WALKER: That's a very good question, Commissioner.
Weare one of the only employers in Collier County that have a
smoker rate in our health plan. If you smoke, under the Collier
County group benefit plan, you're going to pay more than if you don't
smoke. We also offer a variety of classes, including smoking
cessation programs. If an employee goes through that program and
successfully completes it, then they receive the reduced rate.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because that's where a lot of
liabilities on our health care lies, the people that abuse their bodies.
MR. WALKER: Absolutely. And we have taken steps to try to
address that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And the other question is, ifpeople
are employed with the county and are in a high hazard area, I would
think that one of the prerequisites of getting that job would be an
understanding of the English language so that we will be able to
communicate with them. If that's not the case, I would think that we
Page 48
June 29, 2004
need to address that issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a problem, Jeff, with
funding a position for employees in order to communicate. I can't
even communicate with that employee, and probably the majority of
the general public can't. There are programs in the education -- the
school boards where they teach people who do not speak, understand
English. And I mean, I just can't approve that.
MR. WALKER: I appreciate that concern. And I understand it.
It's an issue that we have considered in terms of trying to get these
folks into classes where they learn to speak English, at least
functionally. I think the problem for us, as your risk management
department, is that we have folks who are coming into our orientation
who we can't train in orientation even. And it's really a matter of time
for us. We would like to be able to communicate with them when
they walk in the door while we try to solve that other problem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I'm not sure by hiring a
bilingual is actually helping that employee. I don't think it is at all.
Because just in, you know, day-to-day life you need to communicate,
not only with your job, but outside your job.
MR. WALKER: I understand. I mean, I understand your
perspective on that. We just want to create an environment where our
employees are able to understand training and so forth in their
language so that they work safe when they're out in the field. And
that's really our goal with this, because we want an immediate result of
reduced accidents. That's what we're trying to get to with that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Don't -- or rather, don't people in general
have to be able to speak English at least functionally in order to apply
for citizenship?
MR. WALKER: I don't know the answer to that question, to be
honest with you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think they need to say the
Page 49
June 29, 2004
Pledge of Allegiance, sing God Bless America --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And be able to read and answer questions.
I just thought that, you know, maybe --
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, some of our laborers are not
United States citizens but are legally registered to work in the United
States.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They have green cards.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thanks. I didn't understand that.
Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: And ma'am, if you're born in the United States,
okay, you're a United States citizen, you don't have to take a test. And
if your parents don't speak English and they never spoke a bit of it
when you were growing up, you still have a problem.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me tell you, I have a problem, and I
was born here, and I have a problem with the English language.
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: These employees that you're
talking about that you're having a problem with in regards to the
language barrier, are these long-term employees or are they employees
that just have recently been hired here in the county?
MR. WALKER: We have some problems with some long-term
employees, but what you're finding is it's more recent hires than it
used to be. In other words, we run into it primarily when we're in
orientation. And it becomes just a barrier to getting them trained. And
I would like to add, you know, this position will not deal only with,
you know, non-English speaking persons. It will deal also with
English speaking persons as well. So I don't want to understate that.
But that is the problem that we're running into. And we're
finding that, you know, like a lot of the country, a lot of our work
force are coming from non-English speaking persons. And that's the
issue we're trying to deal with with this.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, my concern is, not only this
Page 50
June 29, 2004
person can't be on the job at all times when you assign these
individuals in the field to do jobs, how do they know if they're in
harm's way if they're associated with other workers that may not know
how to speak Spanish and to warn them of impending danger? How
do we address that?
MR. WALKER: Our experience has been, and your folks within
those operating divisions could probably speak to this better than I, but
our experience has been that what you find are that you have
primarily, for example, Spanish speaking persons on a crew, and
typically the supervisor is functional in Spanish or may be Spanish
speaking. That is what we are finding. And so you run into situations
where those individuals are dealing with hazardous materials, or PB
issues or equipment issues. And we want to take them through the
same type of training that we take our other employees through, and
that's -- unfortunately we're hindered in getting that process done.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just hope it doesn't have an effect
on our workmen's compensation rate in regards to being able to
communicate in case there is a danger, where employees have to tell
somebody that hey, you might be in harm's way. Any time you're in a
work environment, there's always that unforeseen time that takes place
that there might be some type of a danger that all of a sudden pops up
and it's an emergency, and you want to make sure that you warn those
individuals to evacuate the area or to at least get out of the way so that
they don't get harmed. If we have a problem with the language
barrier, then I'm hoping that doesn't, like I said, affect our workmen's
compo
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, did you have any
questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I thought -- sorry about that
-- I thought it was a very interesting conversation. I think we're
covering it very well, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. Okay, let's move on.
Page 51
June 29, 2004
MR. AXELROD: Good morning. I'm Barry Axelrod, the
director of the IT department. The IT department's budget, operating
budget and current services was submitted within the guidelines, so I'll
just concentrate on the expanded services.
We have one expanded head count that's dedicated to managing
transportation division programs and is funded by non-general fund
sources. We have an expanded request for $80,000 for a software
system that will help us manage desktops. That has to do with
security patches, updates, deployments and new applications, asset
inventory, work orders, service level agreements. And that's basically
hitting our biggest pain area right now, which is to make sure we can
keep good service levels on IT work orders for our 1,050 desktop
customers. And that's basically our expandeds.
We have one unfunded request for one additional person in the
computer support area, again, targeted at service levels for internal
customers. This is primarily due to expansion. Weare now supporting
21 EMS stations, which we hadn't done before this year. We also
have to continue to expand as the county moves into new facilities.
We'll have a north government center coming up. We'll have a north
regional park. We have a utilities facility coming on-board, both
water plants and management facilities. And that stretches our people.
And when your computer is broken, somebody eventually has to visit
your area, and that's stretching our staff right now.
And that's basically the expanded areas and unfundeds in our
budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have no questions. Did you have
a question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think I do. With respect to the IT
requirements of, let's say the constitutional officers, is there any
opportunity at all for combining these functions?
MR. AXELROD: That was a question that was raised last year
as well. And as a result of last year's hearings, we convened a pretty
Page 52
June 29, 2004
regular meeting, not every month, but certainly every quarter, with the
IT executives from each one of the constitutional officers, and we've
investigated those areas. We've in fact even had the school board
involved in that as well. And there have been some areas where we
have found that we can cooperate and share resources.
But the missions of the various constitutional officers are so
different, and there is no overlap at all in the applications that the tax
collector would run, the property appraiser runs, the sheriff, for sure.
They are very separate for security reasons. Through our GIS
programs, we are getting into some cooperation. We have some joint
funded parts of GIS with the sheriffs office. The property appraiser
runs a GIS system, and we are very much in cooperation, working
cooperation with the property appraiser.
And we've got a fiber project now where we're putting fiber
throughout the county, which we're working with the school board on,
and the transportation division is basically the main sponsor behind
that effort. It's a real success story from government cooperation. So
there have been some things that come out of it. But to the core
applications that the constitutional officers run to do their business,
there's really no overlap at all.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Barry, I'm probably one of the
biggest users of your service. It seems like I'm always needing your
assistance. And I want to tell you the service I've got in the past has
been excellent. That unfunded extra position that you're looking for,
my question is how much of your payroll now is overtime?
MR. AXELROD: We are all exempt employees, there is no
overtime at all. And that's beginning to be a bit of a difficult issue
because on top of the geographic coverage, we are now posting
applications that are expected to be up more than our working hours.
Page 53
June 29, 2004
Certainly the e-mail system has a high expectation on it. We've got
the agenda system now, which has a high out of hours -- out of work
hours usage component. We have a parks and rec system now that's
used after hours, on weekends. So we are being stretched not only
geographically but also with respect to business hour and salary
coverage.
If we want to extend, and we don't at this point, to 24-hour
coverage, we have to add staff. We're not doing that. But as these
applications and as the citizens request more coverage -- you know,
when something goes down, somebody's got to answer the bell to
restart the system or do whatever it takes. And we don't pay overtime
to exempt employees, what we end up doing is dealing with these
issues with rotating work hours, so that hurts us during core hours
when we have less staff present.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I see. I never realized, Barry,
that your people were not on a regular system -- wages where they got
paid for overtime. I think when the time comes where we start to
examine the unfunded mandates, we have to take very good, very
much care in this particular field. I'd hate to get to the point where
we're stretched so thin that a necessary part of this government service
that we have, not only to our internal customers but also to the public,
is going to be put in jeopardy.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you have any other questions or
comments, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's fine. Thank you very
much, Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're welcome. Back to Commissioner
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'd like to apologize for
having to step out of the meeting, but I had a question concerning risk
management. I'll just jump back real quickly. Did anyone raise the
issue of employees not being able to speak English while I was gone?
Page 54
June 29, 2004
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's all we talked about.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I hope you solved that problem.
MR. WALKER: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We didn't? Well, I hope we would
have a requirement that people don't get employed unless they speak
English. It's that simple. I mean, I think it's dangerous to have people
who do not speak English working for us. And I think that should be
one of the primary job requirements, that there be a basic English
language requirement. But, again, that's my feelings. I don't know if
there's enough commissioners here--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I go along with you,
wholeheartedly, Commissioner Coyle. I felt the same way.
Especially if they're in an environment whereby they're in a dangerous
work situation and they're tied in with other people that may not be
able to speak Spanish and they're in harm's way, and we addressed
that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not only a safety issue, it's a
quality control issue, because if they can't understand the instructions,
they're not likely to be able to do the best job they can do. And that
leaves us in the position where the public might not be well served.
But the other question I have for you is the contracted primary
health care facility.
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's a good idea. I don't
understand how it really is going to work. And I'd like for you to just
explain to me briefly, and I don't want to belabor the point too long,
but explain to me how this is going to solve a problem.
MR. WALKER: Well, we will locate the facility here on
campus, and where my office is right now, we will redesign that. And
what that facility will be staffed with is a nurse practitioner and a
support person. We will, in our fee, have to hire a firm to come in and
Page 55
June 29, 2004
place those people in here. We won't hire those folks.
They will provide primary care services to our employees. Here
is an example. Right now I have an occupational health nurse. That
nurse sees between 250 and 300 folks a year for general health visits,
unsolicited. In other words, we're not even asking for the business and
they walk in. And what happens in those cases --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: These are who?
MR. WALKER: Employees.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Employees.
MR. WALKER: Employees. And what happens is, for example,
they can walk down from their office, go in there and go right back to
work. So you've got a productivity issue. That's one of the issues
related to it. But the big issue that we're trying to get at, and as I
explained earlier, is we're really trying to get at preventive issues and
chronic care issues. Obviously, if somebody has the flu or an infection
of some kind, you can get them down there and get them an antibiotic.
That's a good way to take care of it.
But the bigger issue, the high cost items are things like kidney
disease, heart disease, diabetes, those sorts of things. And what we
would like to be able to do with this is when Marilyn Hamacek say,
your wellness nurse, finds somebody that's an undiagnosed diabetic,
that we get them in to see a physician, but then we manage these folks.
In other words, we have them come in regularly, we make sure that
they're staying up on their meds, that they're tested, those sorts of
things, so that they don't go undiagnosed. Because the problem you
run into with those folks is that if those problems are not managed,
you run into much more serious problems, amputations, kidney
failure, stroke, you know, the things that are the real high dollar items.
And we're seeing more and more of that. As a matter of fact, the
reason our health care cost went up so much a couple of years ago is
because we had just an onset of those. We had kidney transplants, we
had strokes, heart attacks, cancers, just coming out like crazy. And,
Page 56
June 29, 2004
you know, we're just getting older. Our average age is 46. We're not
going to get any younger, none of us. And it's just something that we
think we need to get ahead of and manage. And we think this is a
productive way of doing it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I understand the problem of
detection. But it appears to me that once somebody is diagnosed with
cancer or kidney disease or with heart disease and are referred to a
physician, the physician in almost all cases likes to monitor those
people and isn't really amenable to having other people do it for them.
MR. WALKER: And we are not going to suggest that they not
see their physician.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is a detection process.
MR. WALKER: It is a detection process but it is also a
management process. For example, if you have a high cholesterol
issue and you want to get that tested, that would be an opportunity for
you to stay on top of that. If you are a diabetic and you want to come
down and have your sugar tested once a month, let's say, so that you
can stay on top of that process, you can do that. And that's a cost
effective way of dealing with those sorts of issues. It's a way to make
it convenient for people to manage their health care and to have -- and
be coached and counseled. That's what we're really trying to get at
here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas. I'm sorry,
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I'm sorry. I just had to
make a comment about the -- when it comes to the requirement that
we may place on future employees to speak only the language -- or
speak English as a -- to the point where they're functional in the work
force. I'm not too sure where we're going from that. And I think
Page 57
June 29, 2004
before we go too far, we give the staff direction.
We need to get an appraisal from staff to see if this is something
that's already been met, does this already present a problem at this
point of time. Because we have a number of people in our county
staff now that serve a very valued function, and they've been with us
for a number of years and they do speak a limited amount of English.
I would hate to jump so quick at it as to make an assumption that
would be -- do harm to the people in the working force for years,
possibly might be able to bring this back at some future point in time
for staff evaluation of where we are.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's have a vote of commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: As to whether or not we want to
direct staff to do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Did you hear that, Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Vaguely. I heard Commissioner
Coy Ie with his little, little soft talk. Could you repeat it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I think we ought to take a
vote of commissioners to see if there's sufficient support to do this. I
just can't believe that there can be any county employees who have
been working for us for years who don't have a working knowledge of
the English language.
But nevertheless, if -- I think we need to depend upon the
majority of the commissioners to make that decision and provide the
guidance.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll tell you, what I'd like to see happen, if
it were me, I believe long term employees, they all can speak English
anyway, even if it's limited, they at least know what's going on around
them. And we would have already known. They would have created
a pattern for themselves whereby they were a danger to themselves or
the work force around them by not being able to speak English. We
Page 58
June 29, 2004
would have known that by now. And being that that hasn't surfaced,
we're only talking about relatively new employees.
I would suggest that possibly a cooperative effort with the school
system to have somebody -- they have teachers that are always
looking to teach English classes, and possibly they could -- we could
have the school system come in, because these are usually like a $15 a
session course, and come right into whatever department would have
six or eight or ten employees and help them with that English, rather
than hiring a person to do that. But that would be my own suggestion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I guess my feeling is that by
having a job requirement --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- that an employee have a basic
command of the English language would provide an incentive for
people to actually learn to speak, because they would like to get the
jobs. And there are ample opportunities to get involved in English
language training at a number of facilities throughout Collier County.
So I think it's a matter of providing the incentive for people to get
the training and not having the county assume the liability if they don't
speak the language.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have any legal problems with this
if we move forward with that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do we have a lawyer here?
MS. MERRITT: It's questionable.
MR. WALKER: I would make the suggestion that we have the
county attorney's office look into it from the standpoint of whether
there's any case precedent in this area, just to make sure we're on solid
ground. I don't know off the top of my head. Jean may know
something that I don't know. But it's something I think we should
have the attorneys look at as well.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Maybe we could ask Ms. Student.
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, can I suggest that we come back to
Page 59
June 29, 2004
you with a report that explains all of our options and what our
employee breakdown is, et cetera, so that you can look at the whole
picture.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that's great. Especially,
we're trying to do the budget hearings here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. And comments from the county
attorney as well?
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. And let's move forward.
MR. CAMP: For the record, Skip Camp, your facilities
management director. And I'll speak very quickly. I want to thank
Dan Rodriguez.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Skip, I'm so sorry. Commissioner Halas
just said he had a question and I didn't get to him, I'm sorry. Excuse
me.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is for Barry. In regards to,
with our present head count, my concerns are if people are being
asked to work a substantial amount of overtime in the IT department
and then have to report to work the next day, I think maybe our
efficiencies would be falling off. So I'm wondering if you've looked
at the possibility of with the existing head count, if you have maybe
one or two people that may be on -- would be placed on afternoons
and you could rotate them so everybody had a fair shake at this,
maybe every two weeks somebody would be required, one or two
people, to work afternoons to address all those particular type of issues
that you've brought up. Is that a possibility? Is that feasible?
MR. AXELROD: We've done that. We've had people on
rotating shifts. In fact, we have to cover service hours -- core service
hours are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., which is beyond the 8-hour day
anyway. And what happens is we just can't deal with any vacations,
any illnesses, anybody missing a shift, because we become unstaffed
for those times that they're there. To sustain an operation where 1,000
Page 60
June 29, 2004
people depend on you, that's below what we want to see as a service
level standard.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So what you're telling me is you're
below head count, then, of what you should have to maintain
facilities?
MR. AXELROD: As the demands on outside 8:00 to 5:00 hours
has grown, yes, we're now below what I'd like to see for service
standards.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think what you need to do
is make another assessment of where you are as far as manpower and
head count, and make sure that the facilities are adequately taken care
of, because if we have any serious downtime with the computer
service, you're not only just affecting your shop but you're affecting
the whole county, and that's man hours lost.
So I think what you need to really do is don't deprive yourself of
looking at head count because the end result is, the productivity of the
whole county is based on what's going on with IT. So I think maybe
you ought to -- just as a suggestion, maybe go back and look and
reassess where you really are so we make sure that we cover all bases,
especially from what your last statement was in regards to vacations
and if somebody's ill or has an emergency leave.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now move forward.
MR. CAMP: Now, for the record, I'm Skip Camp, your facilities
director. I do want to thank Dan Rodriguez, Jack Crognale, Chuck
Harrington and Christy Eager for their help in this year's budget. It
was a big effort.
You know what we do, but you may not know that we do it 50
percent in-house and 50 percent we contract it out. We've been doing
this for years. Janitorial, grounds maintenance. A lot of our big tasks
are outsourced, outtasked.
This year highlights, no additional positions. This will be the
third year. Hopefully next year, we'll get a better year and we'll come
Page 61
June 29, 2004
back to you for that.
Expanded services include for the most part, most of the money
(sic) are going to new facilities getting the same service: Building
maintenance services, janitorial and grounds maintenance for new
buildings. We do have some other ones, expanded services, a new lift
to get on bulb replacement outside, gutters and roofs. We have a
security officer. We're asking for a contract person, contract security
officer for the health and public services building.
We want to add a magnetometer and an X-ray machine. No
additional people, but more machinery, so we can have a -- better
serve the bar association and the people that use the main courthouse,
to get them through the line quicker. Now, our lines usually last less
than five to seven minutes, and I think you may have heard recently
that they had a two to three-hour wait in Atlanta airport two weeks
ago. So we're real proud of the amount of time, but we want to get
people through there as soon as possible. And if we can do it through
technology versus more bodies, we're proposing that.
Also, on the UFR list, we do want to mention that with
maintenance, you're going to pay now or you're going to pay later, but
you're eventually going to pay. And I think we have a CEO right now
that understands that. And we're really looking forward to next year.
We understand this year is tight, but putting off maintenance forever
doesn't work, because it's never going to be cheaper.
And the last thing I'll say on the UFR list is that we work very
closely with the health department. They're a good client, a good
occupant. And we hope that if there is an opportunity to somehow
fund their expansion or reworking the space that they have, we would
like to see that. They work very closely with our staff and they're not
asking for additional space, but just to rework theirs. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Skip, you're talking about
additional security measures over in the courthouse. Have you
Page 62
June 29, 2004
thought about any additional security measures here in this particular
compound, in this building?
MR. CAMP: Yes, I have. And while I was sitting back there, I
jotted down two that I will not share with the public but I would be
happy to share with you in your chambers. We absolutely have. And
we probably add one or two new procedures a week. And because
this is a high-rise building located relatively close to the airport, we're
doing a number of items currently with your CEO's office, with Leo in
particular, on how to better protect the occupants of this building, and
also some other targeted areas that I would prefer not to be specific on.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Because of concerns we
have so many elected officials, not only just the commissioners, but
other elected officials in this building, and I just -- yes, I'd like to have
you spend some time with me on that.
MR. CAMP: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Me, too.
Okay, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Skip, one of the things on the
UFR list I think is like $60,000 for the tax collector?
MR. CAMP: That's on the UFR list. We are going to find a way
to do that this year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to do that this
year?
MR. CAMP: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: See how I stuck right to the
budget and I didn't deviate.
MR. CAMP: Sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You get a gold star.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to add my support to a
security review of this building. You need a lot of work here. And we
Page 63
June 29, 2004
really need to start addressing it. We've talked about it now for two
years, and we really need to start doing something with it.
MR. CAMP: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Next?
MR. CROFT: Morning. I'm Dan Croft, fleet management
director . We provide the centralized fleet services for all the county
vehicles and equipment. We operate as an internal service fund with
direct chargeback to our customers. There weren't many changes in
our budget this year. Two that I would like to discuss.
One is an expanded position, which is a -- $49,000 for a -- it's a
combination fuel truck driver and small equipment mechanic. And the
other is we've had a significant increase in our cost of fuel. That fuel,
that's a $750,000 increase in fuel cost in next year's budget. We
budgeted for an estimated 1.2 million gallons at $2.10 a gallon. And
where fuel is going we're not really sure, but we thought that was a
safe figure.
Have one unfinanced requirement, and that was for an
automotive technician. And we need that technician to support that
ever increasing maintenance cost of our CAT bus system, because it's
very maintenance intensive, our buses. They run about four to 6,000
miles every month, and we're adding buses as we speak.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you tell me what your present
inventory is on buses at this point in time?
MR. CROFT: 15 buses -- I'm sorry, 13 buses. We've got two
we're going to order.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And what's your
anticipation for next year as far as increase in buses?
MR. CROFT: As far as I know, it's two right now. We don't
know yet. None? Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions? Boy, that was short
Page 64
June 29, 2004
and sweet and simple. Next? Is that you, Jean?
MS. MERRITT: Yes, thank you. Jean Merritt, human resources
director.
Our budget was submitted within the guidelines and we have no
expanded requests.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners, any questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sounds good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then it looks like we're finished. Do you
have any other presenters?
MS. PRICE: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. PRICE: Thank you all for your attention.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I would go -- Ms. Price, if you
would go to the capital projects piece of your particular tab, just to go
over that real quick with the commissioners and see if they have any
questions.
MS. PRICE: I'll turn that right over to Skip.
MR. CAMP: If you have any questions, it's Page 52 in my book.
MR. MUDD: AS-51, 52.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 54 million?
MR. CAMP: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have the same problem I
do.
MR. CAMP: I was going to use your glasses.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I -- if we're all done with
questions, I would like to give guidance -- to see if there's enough
support.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other -- any questions from
any of the commissioners? Any comments?
Page 65
June 29, 2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: On the emergency -- the EOC
building, and we've got allocated 28 million on that project, when is
that going to get off the ground? I know it's out for bid at the present
time, I believe.
MR. CAMP: It's in the latest stages of design.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. When do you anticipate us
breaking ground on that?
MR. CAMP: Actually -- excuse me, I'll give you the exact date.
March of'05, pending a positive outcome of the PUD.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, it looks like we have no
questions.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I move that we remove the
expanded request from risk management.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: For the one person?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: That's the bilingual speaker in order to do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second. Motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning, a second by
Commissioner Coyle to remove that one position from risk
management for the bilingual person. Any comments?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: With the thought process being
that we could supplement this person with outside assistance possibly
from the school system, is that what you were saying, Commissioner
Fiala?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, that's what I said, yes. I would
think that that would be a free service that we could ask to receive,
and I think it would work just great. I think we should pursue looking
into that.
Page 66
June 29, 2004
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, so we're not necessarily
voting against working with people who need the assistance, we're
working (sic) that we're not going to use county staff, we're going to
use the existing facilities that already exist.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't suppose that that could
be entered into the motion as part of the motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's -- Commissioner, the
school board is a different function. It's not a part of the Board of
Commissioners. And I'm sure if we would ask the county manager at
a future meeting to direct staff to try to find assistance for the
non- English speaking employees, that's most appropriate. But it's not
appropriate in this motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. I agree. I think we need to give
direction to the county manager, but I don't think it is appropriate for
this particular motion, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, that is a 5-0. Thank you.
Okay, looks like we're finished. It's 11 :49. The next one up
on-board is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I could say one thing. We're
over a half an hour on this presentation. And I think your total budget
is 77 million?
MS. PRICE: I think his position will help take care of the, the 15
Page 67
June 29, 2004
percent.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think Mr. Carnell is going to
come back later on today and see how we can -- we were going to talk
about that one position.
MS. PRICE: The negotiating position, yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I would make a suggestion that if
there's any public speakers, that instead of having them sit all the way
through this afternoon, if they're here right now to speak, we've got 10
to 15 minutes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a great idea, then we'll go to lunch
and then come back. I didn't want to attempt transportation before
lunch. I figured that that just -- we didn't want to cut them short, and
so.
Okay, do you have any speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Madam Chairman, we have two speakers.
Patricia Huff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That was a great suggestion.
MS. FILSON: She will be followed by Claudia Davenport.
MS. HUFF: Good morning. Thank you. My name is Patty Huff
and I'm a resident of Everglades City. I come before you, as I have
the last two years, requesting your support of the Collier County
museums and their budget proposal.
I've been president of the Friends of the Museum of the
Everglades for the past two years and we now have over 130
dedicated members, some as far as away as England and Canada.
Our whole Southwest area is embedded with history, and what
better way to communicate this than through our county museums.
We have a legacy. We have an obligation to the early pioneers and
the early settlers, including Barron Collier, to educate the public and
our children on the history of Collier County. To give you an idea of
how we've increased tourist visits at our museum in the Everglades,
we welcomed over 7,500 visitors from January through May of this
Page 68
June 29, 2004
year. They've come (sic) as far away as the Philippines, Australia,
China and South Africa.
To date, in the month of June alone, which is considered a slow
month in the Everglades, our register shows tourists visiting from 14
foreign countries. That's double the number from last year at this
same time. Twenty-seven states outside of Florida, that's an 80
percent increase over last June, and from 22 cities around the state. I
continue to see the same people from Naples and Marco who come
back each year to bring their families and friends. Last year we had
over 400,000 hits on our museum website.
Yesterday, the TDC approved of the museum's proposed budget.
It is my understanding that you have a list of unfinanced items, and
I'd like to address one of these. This year we have a unique
opportunity of purchasing one of Florida's most outstanding treasures,
the Rob Storter collection. To continue attracting visitors we need
new exhibits. If you visited our museum several years ago, you would
have seen just a sampling of how this incredible particular collection
is. From years 2000 to 2002, we were honored to exhibit just a small
portion of the Storter collection. Rob Storter was a member of the
founding family of Everglades, Florida. His granddaughter Betty
Briggs has compiled her grandfather's collection, which was the basis
of the highly successful book, Crackers in the Glade.
Peter Matthiessen, author of The Killing of Mr. Watson, who met
with Rob's daughter before he died and wrote the forward in this book,
said that Rob, and I quote, meant to see to it that his faithful record of
life in Southwest Florida in pioneer days was not lost to future
generations, and thanks in part to Betty Briggs' devotion to this
project, it will not be. End quotes.
He also said that Storter described his coastal world so that what
he has left to us is not merely quaint or picturesque but a true
historical documentation in word and image.
This collection comprises 284 items, including not only the
Page 69
June 29, 2004
photographs depicted in this book, but also Rob Storter's hand
carvings and paintings, his famous fish boxes, his original journals,
and photographs belonging to his uncle, George W. Storter, who sold
the Rod and Gun Club to Barron Collier and who also bought the
Town of Everglades for $800.
Also included is the 1983 oral history video of Rob Storter telling
stories and showing his artwork.
This is a one of a kind and should be kept together. It belongs
here, in a museum in Southwest Florida. It is an outstanding example
of early Southwest Florida pioneer history. I strongly request that you
consider funding this unique collection for the benefit of Collier
County and future generations. We appreciate your continued
support, and I thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Claudia Davenport.
MS. DAVENPORT: For the record, I'm Claudia Davenport, and
I just wanted to point out, yes, it's a book, but it's also an example
visually for you to look at of the items -- a lot of the items inventoried
on the list that's in the front of it. If you don't feel comfortable
keeping this, you can certainly return it. And we appreciate your time.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And if we wanted to, we could make a
donation, right, to the museum, right? Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is the donation for the book?
How much is the donation for the book?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Anything you want. 150 bucks,
whatever.
MS. HUFF: 150,000.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That was a loaded question, wasn't
it?
MR.OCHS: Had to ask.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, it was. And we took advantage of it.
How much do you sell these books for?
Page 70
June 29, 2004
MS. HUFF: Thirty-five dollars. Unless you're a member of the
museum, it's less, 25. It's 32, I'm sorry, 32, or 25 if you're a member of
the museum.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. No further
speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am. That was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Clinton's memoirs are cheaper
than that.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I recommend that we take a lunch
break and we start this back up again at 1 :00 p.m.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll take your recommendation, sir. Thank
you. We'll be back at one.
(Recess was taken.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Halas, are you
going to conduct this meeting till the chair gets here?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I would say since you had the
experience, we'll let you do that charge.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Reconvening of the
workshop.
Our next item, County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Henning, Commissioner Coletta,
are you here?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm there.
MR. MUDD: Okay. We have three Commissioners.
Commissioner, I'd like to come off the agenda just a second. Mr.
Ward said that he had to go and asked me if I could get him -- do other
business to get him on front.
His particular item is Pelican Bay, and it starts on MO-32. It's
Page 71
June 29, 2004
behind management offices. That's the MO piece.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Go ahead.
MR. WARD: Thank you, Commissioners. Pelican Bay Services
Division budget is funded simply by non-ad valorem assessments, so
solely within the Pelican Bay Services Division or ad valorem taxes
that are also levied solely within the Pelican Bay Services Division.
You will see this budget in the form of public hearing to levy
those non-ad valorem assessments in September of this year, at which
time you'll hear any other community input that we have not already
heard during the ensuing few months, during the preparation of this
budget.
It anticipates an ad -- excuse me -- a non-ad valorem assessment
rate of$475.43 per equivalent residential unit per year in Pelican Bay
for next year. That's up from the current amount, which is 325.38. It's
due to two primary factors.
One is funds that have been included in the budget for beach
renourishment, assuming that happens in the current year, and some
cash reserves for funding our operations during the first three months
of the fiscal year. That's the primary change in it.
You're -- the ad valorem assessments rate is proposed, we think
slightly -- actually about the same as what it was in the prior year. It's
for the 24-hour, 365-day patrol we have with the Collier County
Sheriffs Office and for some streetlighting activities within the
community itself.
It has been through a pretty rigorous review by the Pelican Bay
Services Division Board since we started this actually in November of
last year. So it's been through a pretty rigorous review.
If you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer them for you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Halas, do you
have any questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What did you say the -- what --
what is the amount that you're requesting?
Page 72
June 29, 2004
MR. WARD: In terms of the total funded budget?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. WARD: It's $4,453,000.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Does this include also the portion
in regards to removing the cattails?
MR. WARD: Of the amount that I referenced, that amount has
been excluded from that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Commissioner, when -- he has no
expanded positions on this particular case, and much to his credit,
there was a reduction of three people on his workforce, and came in
with -- used to be around 17, down to 14, I believe, at this juncture.
The $1.9 million, or thereabouts, for cattail removal far exceeded
what we had allocated for him based on our five -- what your guidance
was as far as allocations from last year.
And I basically put the remainder that was over what that
allocation was based on your guide -- the board's guidance, and put
that on a UFR, and I think there's $1.7 million on a UFR list for cattail
removal on Clam Pass, or is it Clam Bay?
MR. WARD: Clam Pass.
MR. MUDD: Clam Bay -- Clam Pass.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have any dissensions
from your board members?
MR. WARD: That's hard to say, but at the moment, no, they
seem to be in unison on this budget. We'll see what the community
indicates to you at the -- at their public hearing, because the
assessment rate has changed significantly over what it currently is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the -- the MSTBU advisory
board met, reviewed the budget, and actually put together the budget?
MR. WARD: Yes, sir. We met -- they established a budget
committee, which met beginning in November and ended about a
month ago. So it has been before -- and they met essentially every two
Page 73
June 29, 2004
weeks. So it has been through a rather rigorous review at the budget
subcommittee level plus at the division board level.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And there was no concerns -- or
dissension from the advisory board?
MR. WARD: I think we have a majority support, shall I say.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What was the concern --
MR. WARD: I'm not sure if it's unanimous, but there is a
majority, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What was the concern of the
person that had the problem with the budget?
MR. WARD: I think just the fact that the assessment level is up
roughly $150 per unit over what it was in the current year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Was there any recommendation
by anybody on the advisory board to cut that, and if so, what was
those recommendations?
MR. W ARD: I can tell you at their last meeting, which they did
approve this budget, and asked for it to be submitted to the Board of
County Commissioners, this particular budget had majority support. I
believe there was one individual who, if my memory serves me
correctly, indicated that he was not in support of it, but that related
solely to the amount, not the specific programs within it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Thank you for asking.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Any further questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The $150, is that a year or is that a
quarterly assessment increase?
MR. WARD: It's a year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Year.
MR. WARD: Just one year, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that would just be the actual
increase in just cost of doing business, really.
Page 74
June 29, 2004
MR. WARD: Well, in this particular one, it actually is related to
the fact that we included $700,000 in this budget for our portion of
beach renourishment that you-all are doing countywide for the Pelican
Bay Beach.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We'd be glad to do that, as long
as I get access to it.
MR. WARD: I'm sure. But without addressing that particular
issue, we do have that amount of money in this budget in case your
permits come through.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Any further questions?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you very much.
MR. WARD: Thank you, Commissioners.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, Mr. Ward.
MR. WARD: Thank you.
P.llB.LIC..S.ER,S
MR. MUDD: The next on -- next on the agenda is public
services. If I can get them to the table, please.
Public services, the interim administrator is Ms. Marla Ramsey,
and she will start off the discussion.
(Commissioner Fiala entered the hearing room.)
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, we just finished Pelican Bay
Services, okay?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great, thank you.
MR. MUDD: There was basically a conversation that they're
going to have to increase their assessment of about $150 per unit per
annum. The basic reason for that is around a $700,000 cost to
renourish their beach, part of the Naples --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: -- major renourishment that we're trying to get
Page 75
June 29, 2004
permitted to start in November, okay?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: And that was pretty much the discussion. And we
did talk about cattail removal and the $1.7 million that's on the
unfinanced requirement list, because it far exceeded their allocation
based on board guidance as far as the allocation from the pie as far as
how much people would be allocated moneys based on last year, as
far as new moneys was concerned. So we took a part of that and put it
in their budget so we could --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Could we set the timer?
MR. MUDD: -- fund the entire park.
Ms. Ramsey?
MS. FILSON: What would you like it set for, 15 minutes?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifteen.
MS. RAMSEY: Good afternoon, Commissioners, interim
administrator for public services.
We're bringing to you this afternoon a budget that has met your
budget guidelines in all the areas that we were able to control the
costs.
Just as a reminder of what we are, we are your customer service
division. We touch more people personally in this division than in any
other division that you have. As a matter of fact, we've touched over a
million people on a one-to one basis through this department of all of
the directors sitting here, recognizing we have about 540 employees
throughout the county.
I don't have a lot of information that I would like to provide to
you at this point in time. I do want to let you know that there is going
to be some people at the table that you may not be recognizing or that
may be sitting in a position that is different than they normally do.
And so to start us off, I have Murdo Smith sitting next to me,
who is the interim director for parks and recreation who will give the
expanded and the unfunded requests that we have in that department,
Page 76
June 29, 2004
and then ask for any questions.
Murdo?
MR. SMITH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Murdo Smith,
for the record, interim parks and recreations director. Like Marla had
mentioned, the Parks and Recreation Department came in within the
budget guidelines; however, we do have some expanded requests.
And what I'd like to do is go through the expanded requests with you.
In the general fund we're requesting two part-time tollbooth
attendants for various booths like at Clam Pass, Barefoot, during the
months of January and April--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What page are you on?
MR. SMITH: -- and that should cost us $24,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Murdo--
MR. SMITH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- could you tell me what page so we
don't keep shuffling papers on you?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: PS--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Public health, Golden Gate, beach and
water parks. There we go.
MS. RAMSEY: Fifty-three.
MR. SMITH: Page 53.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He has that 52, 53. No, no.
MR. SMITH: Fifty-three.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Fifty-three, PS-53, okay.
MR. SMITH: Okay. I'll repeat that. We have two part-time
tollbooth attendants we're requesting as expanded service for
tollbooths at Barefoot and at Clam Pass and Vanderbilt for January
through April of next year.
And in the MSTD 111 fund, we have one maintenance worker
for Conner Park and Pelican Bay Park at a cost of $36,700. And
athletic programs, we have a temporary employee for summer sports
camp at $2,900.
Page 77
June 29, 2004
We have another request for three instructors for baseball, tennis,
and golf camps. We have a request for artificial turf for league play at
our East Naples hockey rink.
We have a request for a ski surface for Snow Fest at a cost of
$10,000. And for sailing, we have an increase of approximately 20
hours a week of salaried -- not salaried, but part-time people for
increased programs at a cost $9,200, and that will include an increase
in the regular summer program, plus special needs camps. We also
have combined two part-time employees into one full-time employee
at Veterans Community Park.
And we also have two unfunded requests that we would like to
present to the board. One is the Pelican Bay tennis facility . We
would like to operate that with county staff. We had a contractor up
there who walked out of his contract, and we've been running it for a
few months, and we're anticipating approximately about a 15- to
$16,000 increase in revenue there. We figure we'll bring in $94,000 a
year In revenue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So that should more than pay for itself?
MR. SMITH: Yes, ma'am.
And the other request is, we would like to operate the Caxambas
Boat Park down on Marco Island in-house. We're anticipating that we
would bring in about $466,000 worth of revenue, and the operating
costs would be about $399,000, so we're bringing in $66,000 in
revenue.
Last year we received approximately $30,000 from the vendor
who was there. We've had a vendor there for the past 20 years. But
we feel that we can do a better service to the public and receive less
complaints and so forth.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that position would pay for itself as
well ?
MR. SMITH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Page 78
June 29, 2004
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The anticipated revenue from
Caxambas Pass --
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- is that with the present-day
fees?
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I'm in favor of that
one and the Pelican Bay position. But I would hope next year, during
the budget process, that you can justify what you just told the
commISSIoners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You stated earlier on that you were
also contemplating putting somebody at the Vanderbilt parking
garage; is that correct?
MR. SMITH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what was -- in regards to
what, picking up parking fees or --
MR. SMITH: Yes, that would be a tollbooth attendant to collect
fees for the public going in there. We've found out in the past couple
years we've been adding some part-time people at these booths during
the season, and it's become very advantageous for us, because we have
a lot of people trying to park, and this way we can control the parking
lots and we can offer information and all that to the public, and it's
very -- customer service.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So what you're telling me then,
there's an awful lot of people that use that facilities (sic) that do not
have beach parking stickers; is that correct?
MR. SMITH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm curious to why we
Page 79
June 29, 2004
have the two positions that are going to actually net the county money
put down in unfunded. That doesn't make any sense.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That was our guidance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, of course. I mean, the
guidance would -- it just stands to reason, we're not going to pass up
an opportunity to be able to cut costs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm a little lost on that, but by all
means, I endorse it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: They should probably -- you know, good
point. They should probably be under a heading saying self-funded,
right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, something like that. I
mean, this is a no-brainer.
MR. MUDD: Well, Commissioner -- Commissioner, what we've
done is, you've basically told us to hold head count down. We tried to
do that and stay within your guidance. If there's particular items
where there's self-funding, that's fine.
If a future board decides not to collect fees at Pelican Bay at the
tennis court, then you have -- then you have a cost to run that
particular facility. Don't know what agreements we'll have with
Pelican Bay in the future, depending on what starts to transpire in the
fall. But you need to know that, yes, it is a cost, and as long as there's
a fee attributed to using that particular facility, it should pay for itself.
But still that's the -- there is a -- there is a cost. You're putting
people on your payroll. And so -- and a board in the future could
change a fee structure, whatever, that would not necessarily have that
a break-even or even a profit making. That could -- that could turn in
to be a detriment to the county budget.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And the short of it is, is
that I'm in favor of both of them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great, okay.
Page 80
June 29, 2004
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Murdo, can we go to -- if you're
done with your UFR list, and -- the revenue. Is there any anticipated
new revenues, new fees? Is there any anticipated new fees that you
put in the budget? Not fee increase or anything like that.
MR. SMITH: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Capital requests?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You've got the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is your capital request?
MS. RAMSEY: The -- for the record, Marla Ramsey. The
capital requests for parks and recreation is on PS-83, and under that
particular item, we have the North Naples Regional Park, we have the
Sharon property, Margood Resort land purchase in Goodland Island,
the East Naples community centers -- Senior Center, which is -- has a
HUD grant up against that, and the other new funding is the East
Naples new soccer facility, and the Manatee Dog Park, are the dollar
requests in the impact fee related items.
And then on the ad valorem, I can run through them or you can
ask me a specific question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Those were approved by the
county manager?
MS. RAMSEY: Yes. They are on the list, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Madam Chair, I, if it's
appropriate, move to approve the parks and rec.'s budget, including the
Caxambas Pass taking over that operation and the position for the
Pelican Bay tennis court.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll second that.
And Commissioner Halas, do you have anything further?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. On the items in regards to
Caxambas Pass and the Vanderbilt parking garage or parking lot as it
is today, I assume that you really don't know what kind of revenues
you're really going to generate from that because of the fact that it's a
Page 81
June 29, 2004
projected cost, and you also have a -- basically a projected revenue.
Am I correct in my assumption there?
MS. RAMSEY: We've done a business study. The operations
manager that I have on my site has done a thorough evaluation of both
those locations. We feel comfortable with the numbers that are in the
packet today. Could we surpass those? Yes, we could.
We're looking at the operation as it exists today, not at what other
opportunities there might be at those locations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we're hoping that next year
when we have a budget, that we won't end up with a deficit there?
MS. RAMSEY: That we will not have a deficit there, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great. That's what we -- thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor and
a second to approve the budget as presented to us for parks and rec.
Any further discussions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: With amendment, the
amendment to --
MR. MUDD: With those two unfinanced --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two unfunded.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, thank you. Including the two
unfunded positions.
MR. MUDD: Pelican Bay tennis and Caxambas Pass.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. And that's included in my
second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Page 82
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0 (sic), thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Did that also include the parking
attendant at Vanderbilt then?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep.
MS. RAMSEY: Yes, sir.
Next we have the library. We have Marilyn Matthes, who is the
interim director.
MS. MATTHES: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Marilyn
Matthes, interim library director.
Every day 4,600 residents visit a public library in Collier County.
Our circulation is up this year 12 percent. Our children's programs
are up 16 percent, and Internet use is up over 18 percent.
Our request for expanded services will help address these
increases in use. Our half-time reference librarian request will help us
out, especially on the Sundays that our Orange Blossom library is
open, and also provide a second reference person off and on Saturdays
at either our headquarters branch or our Naples branch. We're finding
increased usage on both days.
And they'll also help in teaching classes and using the
commercial data bases to the public and helping the public use --
make the best use of our public Internet access.
Our second expanded request is for a children's outreach
specialist. Over the past several years we've requested a children's
person to provide programming every year or so. Weare trying to put
a children's programming specialist in each of our libraries.
This person will help increase that 16 percent increase and
expand on that for next year in our children's program area and also
will provide some support to the branches in our eastern -- the eastern
part of the county, and, perhaps, relieve some of the workload for
especially our Estates branch and our East Naples branch library.
Our unfunded requests are for two part-time library clerks and a
full-time library clerk for the East Naples branch and the Estates
Page 83
June 29, 2004
branch. And at this point, we feel with the budget guidance, that we
need to wait until next year to ask for these positions again and let
funding go to other county departments that need personnel.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not from me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: None from me.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No questions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, may I?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
(Commissioner Coyle entered the hearing
room.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just -- I wanted to
question, if I may, the two part-time positions. I have been to the
library a number of times for meetings, and I've seen times that there
seems to be a tremendous demand of the -- on the librarian that's in
charge of the front there, to be able to take care of, oh, my gosh, it
seems like it's a tremendous amount of customers.
I was just wondering, what is your honest appraisal of this? Is
there a tremendous wait time at this point in time at the East Naples
and the Golden Gate library?
MS. MATTHES: It depends on the time of day that you go
there. If you're there just before closing time or when school lets out,
especially Golden Gate, with all the schools within walking distance
of the library. The after-school hours are very busy for us, and the
hours just prior to closing when people realize that the library's about
to close, they didn't get that video or they needed to return that book
before closing so they don't have to pay the overdue charge.
So we're very -- we do try to schedule people for the busiest
hours possible, but still provide a reasonable schedule so that we can
Page 84
June 29, 2004
still keep our employees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let me rephrase that question, if
I may. Has there been any complaints about the lack of service?
MS. MATTHES: I've had none.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then I'm fine with the
way it is for now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
Any further questions?
It seems like it's in order and looks like you've got a bunch of
nods from up here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A nod here.
MS. RAMSEY: Okay. Ron?
MR. JARMO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Ron Jarmo,
your museum director. The museum's budget request for '05 is very
similar to last year's. It concentrates primarily on providing essential
services and funding to maintain our commitment to public education
and historic preservation at all three of the county's museums.
We have one expanded service request, and that is to convert an
existing part-time museum assistant position at the Museum of the
Everglades into a full-time position and to give us some staffbackup
at our Immokalee facility as well. Those are one-person operations
supplemented by volunteers. The cost of that is $26,200.
We have a rather lengthy list of unfunded requests. That is on
page PS-52, one of which you have already heard about this morning.
Number two, from the Museum of the Everglades' request to purchase
a very unique and nonrenewable resource, historic resource. That's
the Rob Storter collection.
There are others, of course, and we have -- we have a lot of
things still to do at the museum. As you can see by the list, we've sort
of ganged these projects by facility, give you an idea of what our
future needs and goals are. And the price tag on that is over $3
million.
Page 85
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What do you anticipate as far as
what percentage of the TDC funds are you anticipating getting this
year?
MR. JARMO: Oh, I should have added, yesterday we did get a
unanimous vote from the TDC on our budget request, which was --
which was heartening. And we're expecting, you know, 1,276,900 in
the way of TDC funding this year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And how much of an increase is
that over last year's funding?
MR. JARMO: I'd have to defer that to the budget people, budget
department person.
Gary?
MR. VINCENT: For the record, Gary Vincent, Office of
Management and Budget. That would be an increase of28.3 percent.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And how does that help you as far
as your shortfalls in regards to addressing some of the issues that need
to be taken care of in the museum?
MR. JARMO: Well, that -- that is operating three museums at a
fairly good service level, but cannot -- cannot ever -- or thus in the
foreseeable future, help us to begin chiseling away at this list of
projects. So -- in fact, this year we will need some general fund
support as well from the commission to make ends meet.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, on page -- you can see his
summary on PS-49, under public services tab, page 49, gets to those
percentages and how much money he gets out of TDC versus how
much money he gets out of the general fund.
Last year the board made a -- off the UFR list, basically pulled
300,000 -- $300,000 into the libraries because we weren't getting the
TDC dollars. We had a downfall, and this year it's just started to turn
around as far as tourism is concerned, and that basically got him up on
the bare-bones funding where he could keep the facilities open, but it
Page 86
June 29, 2004
didn't really let him get at any kind of major renovation or any kind of
capital investment, as you see on the UFR list of that $3 million.
What I did is, I made him itemize those particular items so that you
could see those.
And that's all I have. That kind of brings you up to speed.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: County Manager, can you tell me
how long the library (sic) system has been basically working at a
bare-bone situation.
MR. MUDD: Library or museum, sir?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Museum, excuse me, museum.
How many years?
MR. MUDD: I don't think -- I don't think the museum's ever
been fat.
MR. JARMO: First day. It's been since 1978.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That you've been basically running
on a shoestring operation is what you're saying?
MR. JARMO: Yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: Now that budget, Commissioner, doesn't have
anything for the Naples Depot in it that you see right here. That's
something that's going to be presented to you, I believe, Marla on the
27th of July for the board's consideration. So that's not included in this
particular budget.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, it seems to me, why should
we take on more liabilities if we can't even take care of what we've got
at the present time? There's something here that's not -- that doesn't
seem to jive right, that we ought to take care of county museums prior
to taking on any other responsibilities.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I'm not sure the
museum is bare-bones -- it has been operating bare-bones. I'm not
saying that it's fat. I'm not saying that it's lean.
It's an added value to the citizens in Collier County. It's not
Page 87
June 29, 2004
something like roads or water or sewer. It's just an added value for
services. The -- and we try to provide for what the residents want.
My concern is, is the never-ending dipping into TDC, the
increases into the Tourist Development Council. Did you have a 28
percent increase in tourism at the museums?
MR. JARMO: I -- we don't keep that kind of statistic. I can tell
you that we have about a 70/30 split where 70 percent are
out-of-county visitors, and we're now collecting data on zip codes and
that sort of information.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have a 70/30 split. Do you
keep count of how many people come through your door?
MR. JARMO: Yes, we do, as best we can. A lot of people won't
sign guest books. They feel -- they won't give a lot of personal
information.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So what was the increase from
the previous year?
MR. JARMO: We're holding pretty steady at the moment with
tourism. It's maybe 1,000, 2,000 people greater than last year, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So what was the overall --
MR. JARMO: Part and parcel of -- well, attendance for the
museum is about fifty-six five at the moment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifty-six thousand?
MR. JARMO: Uh-huh. Now, one of the -- one of the ways to
increase that visitation both locally and with tourists, of course, is to
mount the kind of special exhibitions that will really, you know,
appeal to visitors and bring the big numbers in. We don't have the
funds to mount those kinds of exhibitions. They're very expensive.
One we're trying now is to upgrade our exhibits, our permit
exhibits. Hopefully that will get some more -- some more value for
us. But -- promotion, of course, we've tried a lot of free promotion,
and I think you got some press books from us earlier in the year about
that matter, and we're, you know, capitalizing on those opportunities
Page 88
June 29, 2004
as well.
So it's really -- to get the attendance up, it's a combination of
factors; promotion, good exhibits, you know, hours that are
convenient for people, and then -- and then the big national exhibits,
the big block busters that are really being -- you know, the revenues
and the tourists.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. With a -- the attendance
of -- 65,000?
MR. JARMO: Fifty-six.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifty-six thousand. Okay. With
the additional thousand visitors, that's less than 10 percent of increase
of outside county residents, and the only point is, is -- I mean, we're
constantly going after the easy source, the TDC funds, and I just have
a concern about that.
And maybe the proper thing to do is, the general fund instead of
TDC funds. But I'm not going to fight it. I don't believe I'll have a
majority on the board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Thank you for giving me
this moment. If I may, Mr. Jarmo?
MR. JARMO: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Roberts Ranch. I see the last
time we did any funding for that was back in financial year '02/'03.
Weren't we still coasting on those funds from back then, or we're way
behind schedule on it, at least from what we originally promised the
original owners of this ranch what we're going to be doing? Where
are we with this?
MR. JARMO: Yes, Commissioner. We're fairly well behind
schedule on that for two reasons. We're still in the process of getting
permits. The SDP has taken some time to get approved, and also, as
you can see, under the Roberts Ranch Pioneer Museum segment here,
these are pretty big ticket items now, visitors center and the parking
Page 89
June 29, 2004
lots and the kinds of improvements we're going to have to put into that
site to make it visitor friendly.
So right now it's just on a maintenance budget, and we're just --
we're holding our own there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do the Roberts family, are they
just losing -- giving their gift of that ranch to the county, or haven't
you heard anything recently?
MR. JARMO: I really haven't heard anything specific, but I
sense there's some disappointment that we haven't moved quite as
quickly as we'd hoped.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And right now you still
have funds available that you haven't been able to spend because of
the permitting situation?
MR. JARMO: No, no. Unfortunately, we'll probably get to the
position now we have the permits in hand and no funds to effect any
of those improvements.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the 284,000 back in
financial year '02/'03, that money's been expended for improvements
already?
MR. JARMO: Yeah. That was against a matching grant from
the state. And the good news is, the historic restoration portion of the
proj ect is complete. The buildings are done, and that -- we have
fulfilled our obligations to the state and to the community in that
regard.
What we're looking at now is the improvements that are required,
many times by the county, to bring visitors on site.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But what you need to be able to
do that is 296,000. Would you actually be able to use that money in
one year, or would it be something that would take quite a few years
to do? And if you did get that money and you were able to make the
improvements that you're anticipating, what exactly will we have for
our money as far as the public goes?
Page 90
June 29, 2004
MR. JARMO: You're referring to number one there, the--
renovating the church?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'm sorry. Well, that's down
here, priority number one, Roberts Ranch, Immokalee, Pioneer
Museum.
MR. JARMO: But there's actually three ranch elements here.
The first one being the church, and it's kind of a stopgap measure as a
temporary visitors center to complete the restoration of that building,
that's sort of half done, to buy us some time to get to the others.
But the real -- the nub of it is, it says number three on mine, but I
think it should be number four, and the total price tag of $1,081,000,
and that is the visitors center and the parking, the driveways, the
informational pieces that would be required for a full-fledged museum
there.
And in many ways, and this maybe begins to answer some of
Commissioner Henning's concerns as well, I'm not sure we've ever
fairly tested the museum as a tourist attraction because it's never been
finished.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We need to let it grow first
before we can test it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, going back to
Commissioner Halas's comments earlier, that, you know, we put
money into everything else, and we've let our museums flounder. I
kind of question the logic of supporting every outside function that's
out there and every non-museum thing at the expense of these -- of
these needed repairs.
We took on an obligation some years ago when the Roberts
family turned that over to us, and we seem to be falling behind on it.
Well, we -- not seeming, we are falling behind in what we said we
would do. And right now I believe you've got one person there that's
on a part-time basis?
MR. JARMO: We have -- no, one full-time person at the ranch.
Page 91
June 29, 2004
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So it's open eight hours a
day, five days a week?
MR. JARMO: It's open by appointment now, but the schools are
keeping us pretty busy out there. So we're thinking when the
restrooms are completed this summer, we'll be in a position to go to a
full-time situation there with normal operating hours.
Still, that's a 15-acre facility with one employee bouncing around
on it. It's going to be kind of hard for him to make ends meet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you were also looking for a
part-time position for that?
MR. JARMO: We would -- we have a part-time position in
Everglades City, which we could increase to a full-time and share the
position as was needed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, going back to your
priorities. I mean, obviously there's not going to be a lot of money to
be able to work with. What would be more important to be able to fill
the needs of the public? Would it be a one-time position or something
towards the improvement of Roberts Ranch or the museum in the
Everglades, or the Collier County Museum? Which one would the
public see the greatest benefit for at this point in time?
MR. JARMO: Oh, that's a tough one. That's -- that's hard to
choose. I'm not sure I could.
I think I'd have to lean towards greater staffing of the museum.
I'm getting concerned now that we have some security problems both
for employees who are there and also the collections. You've got one
or two people on duty. That's just not enough to watch eight buildings
or 15 buildings.
By the same token, you know, we're so far into the ranch project
now that we risk losing our investment if we wait too much longer
because we've got buildings that are -- the church building -- that is,
you know, half completed and boarded up. That needs to be finished
and weatherproofed.
Page 92
June 29, 2004
So I'm not sure I could make a clear choice for you,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, I, for one, would
like to see us be able to come up with a position to try to cover the gap
that you have in personnel to try to better meet the public's needs, and
I don't know how the rest of the commission feels. But when we get
to the unfunded parts later in the next day, maybe we can discuss it a
little deeper with some of the other items on here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Is that all Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's all for now. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have two speakers.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Madam Chairman. The first is Albert
Stickles. He will be followed by Don Craig.
MR. STICKLES: Madam Chairman, members of -- the
commissioners (sic), ladies and gentlemen, for the record, I'm Albert
Stickles, Marco Island. I'm a former board member of the Collier
County Museum.
I won't belabor the point that Mr. Jarmo has made, but I would
like to urge you to fund that ceiling point for half a man. The reason
being, there is a security issue.
The staff, as thin as it is, and the artifacts which are contained
within the county facilities, which might be lost, these are
irreplaceable parts of our history. And without additional staffing to
protect them, it's going to be very difficult not only to expand the
museum, but to protect the county facilities which house them.
This also would make it difficult for us to obtain additional major
exhibits. If we have a security risk because of lack of personnel to
watch the store, so to speak, it's going to be difficult for us to upgrade
anything. The idea then would be to have that additional person in
place to make sure that there is coverage and that the customer does
not go away dissatisfied.
We have, for example, right now, a Website which hosted over
Page 93
June 29, 2004
400 virtual visitors to this county through the museum system. And,
of course, that is a great incentive for people to come and take a look
closely at the county.
And I would like to add to that only that I had the pleasure of
going before the TDC yesterday, and I couldn't be more delighted with
the progress they've made. And I'd like to go on the record as saying,
I'm very impressed by the efforts they're making to attract people to
Collier County.
I believe the museum is an important part of that, and I strongly
urge you to fund that half a man so that we don't have a security
shortfall for facilities, artifacts and other contents of that building.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Don Craig. I don't believe Mr. --
MR.OCHS: I think he had to leave.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Craig had to leave. That's your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing further.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have some questions. I'm not sure
you can give me the answers today, but it'd be interesting to know
what the percentage is. Of the 56,000 people that visit the museum,
how many -- what's the percentage that would be school-aged
children?
MR. JARMO: At the moment we have about 12- to 13,000
school children here a year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wow. I look at a lib -- or I look at
museums just like I would a library. It's a source of learning,
especially the culture of Southwest Florida and the history of
Southwest Florida. And I think it's very important that we do
whatever we can to find the sources of income so that we can upgrade
Page 94
June 29, 2004
the buildings or do whatever we need to do and see what we can do
about in the future, about bringing some of these top-notch displays in
here.
And I think we have an awful lot of culture and an awful lot of
history that needs to be brought forth so that people can realize what
we have here in Collier County.
I'm very much impressed of the times that I go to the library -- or
excuse me, the museum -- I say library because it is a library, it's a
source of -- it's an area where you learn of what's going on. And
anything that I can do to help you, I sure will help you.
MR. JARMO: Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And before we finish this subject, I want
to just say I wholeheartedly feel we -- it's about time we finished up
the museum system and brought it up to where we've been wanting it
to be for so long.
You know, I've just been going on a couple little trips, and in
Amish country they have a museum, and in Idaho, I went to three mus
-- every place I go to a -- I go to a museum anyway. That's a tourist
thing for me.
One of them was in a town of 100 people, and they had a
wonderful museum telling about all their past and I found -- it told me
more about that area than anything else could. So I, too, am solidly
behind this museum system and their funding.
Anything further, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may. Are we going to be
able to come back and revisit the possibility of some additional
funding for the museum, or is this the final shot at it?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, there's more -- there's more coming.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what I plan to do tomorrow, just so
you know as a point, around 11 o'clock, I believe you'll be finished
tomorrow morning with constitutionals. Maybe not.
But at 11 o'clock I'll have the administrators here, okay, so we
Page 95
June 29, 2004
can sit at this table with you and go over the UFR list, or whatever
you'd like to at this particular juncture. And so, yeah, we're going to
come back to it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Next?
MR. PAGE: For the record, I'm Jeff Page. I'm your EMS
director. We have no expanded or unfunded services in our budget,
and we've actually reduced our number of full-time positions by one
from last year, and we have no UFRs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So you're pretty easy, right.
MR. MUDD: Good job.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Jeff, you are planning to raise fees though,
just --
MR. PAGE: Yes.
MS. SMYKOWSKI: Just for purposes of the record, just
obviously to keep the ad valorem support of EMS as minimum as
possible and to maximize user fee revenues, there is -- they review
fees on an annual basis. And there is a fee increase proposal included
as part of the budget.
MR. PAGE: That should be coming before the board in your
July meeting, and it's referenced there on PS-19.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any questions, Commissioners?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Moving on.
MS. WALSH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Beth Walsh,
the interim domestic animal services director.
Our $28,000 worth of expanded service requests include a
request to build an office for the shelter operations manager, a
mezzanine for storage of emergency supplies, and $8,000 for two laser
printers. That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
(N 0 response.)
Page 96
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No questions.
MS. RAMSEY: We'll come back up here to Barry.
MR. WILLIAMS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Barry
Williams, your human services director.
If I could draw your attention to PS-26. Before I talk about
expanded services, I just wanted to point out a couple of highlights
from the past year. We are bringing a budget that's within your
guidance. It shows a 6.7 percent decrease overall; however, we are
asking for some expansion in three areas and wanted to talk to you
about that.
The reduction that we saw has come from the upper -- our
participation in the upper payment limit program, and we are
anticipating participating this next year. We are also taking existing
funds and participating in another element of the upper payment limit
program to fund the horizon's primary care clinic. So those are two
highlights I wanted to point out.
As far as our expanded services, we're looking at -- the first one
is to increase our existing social services case management supervisor.
Currently she works four days a week. We'd like to expand that to
five days a week. So we're asking for, not increasing a position, but
just adding an additional .20 to pay for her salary for being full time.
We also are looking at a grants supervisor that we have that
operates in our department that is overseeing currently the grant
programs that we -- that come through us, as well as our participation
in the upper payment limit program. She's been very helpful in
navigating that program for us.
So we're looking to increase -- shifting half of her salary into
general fund to pay for her role in -- in carrying out the physical
activities of the Human Services Department.
And finally we have a position we are asking for, an additional
FTE. It's a position that we're seeking to hire and work in Immokalee.
And currently we have a staff member from our Naples office that
Page 97
June 29, 2004
travels two days a week to Immokalee. She has four hours downtime
each week just in travel time alone.
So what we are proposing is to hire a full-time FTE. And we
have gained a commitment for half of her salary to be paid for from
Community Development Block Grant funds. So it's a full-time FTE
that half of it's paid for through this grant source.
We also anticipate using this position, not only to support the
activities of the Human Services Department in what we're doing out
in Immokalee, but also activities related to the finance and housing
administration and the HUD dollars that they get, the administering of
those dollars in Immokalee.
So we think that it's going to be a nice marriage between the two
departments in working together in carrying out some of the activities
in Immokalee.
So I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just wanted to
compliment you, Barry, for doing an excellent job of leveraging small
amount of county funds to be able to bring in state and federal money
to be able to meet the needs of our citizens. I'm very pleased with
what I see here.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Looks like we're all happy.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you.
DR. COLFER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
I'm Betra Joan Colfer, I'm your Collier County Health Department
director.
We also are living within your budget guidelines and are
participating in the UPL program which helps to decrease the county
Page 98
June 29, 2004
contribution to the health department.
I would point out that our overall budget is on -- let's see -- it
starts on PS-69 and goes to 72.
In total, our budget is a little bit over 11 million. And you all
provide about 11 and a half percent of our budget.
So in addition to the UPL, I feel like the health department does
-- does bring you significant other state dollars.
As part of our budget request, we do have an expanded services
request for one position for our tobacco coordinator. This is a major
initiative for us addressing tobacco smoking, particularly in our young
people.
The tobacco coordinator position is -- it's a one-person job, and it
organizes the SWAT clubs throughout the county . SWAT stands for
Students Working Against Tobacco. The program has grown from
eight students in 1998 to over 1,000 students now in 16 middle and
high schools in the county . We also have SWAT clubs at the Marco
Island "Y", David Lawrence Center, and the Boys and Girls Clubs.
Some of you may remember the SWAT children that came
before you a couple of years ago with a piece of legislation to move
tobacco products back behind the counters in convenience stores.
They told stories of young children starting to smoke really by just
shoplifting cigarettes from these places, and I hope you remember
those children.
The SWAT program also provides a court diversion program and
alternative to fines for youth who violate state and local laws on the
purchase and use of tobacco.
The coordinator participates in our smoking cessation programs.
There's a behavioral risk factor survey that's done by the state each
year, and it shows that smoking has been reduced in our high school
students by 39 percent, and in our middle school students by 56
percent. We're requesting salary, fringe, and just travel dollars to
cover her travel to the schools.
Page 99
June 29, 2004
The only other item that is not really in my budget but is really in
Skip Camp's budget is the renovations to Building H. And I would
like to just take a moment to remind you that our staff provides over a
quarter of a million services to Collier County residents.
In the 14 years that we've been in the building, we've added
positions. We've added programs. We added the dental program.
We've got a prenatal care program there we do with the contractor.
When the -- when the building was built 14 years ago, which
long precedes me, there actually was some planned expansion space,
but I think the county grew a little bit faster than the health department
did, and that space was reallocated over to the IT folks.
So when Skip said this morning that, you know, it's not a request
for additional space, he was actually wrong. I mean, I'll take any
space I can get any place I can get it.
And some of the things that we would do with some -- with some
funding this year is that Skip has found us some space in the City of
Naples in an EMS facility. They're using half of it, and we would get
a portion of it.
We would use those funds to do some renovations in that room.
It would allow us to move about five people out of our building that
can operate pretty independently. That's the school health program.
We'd move some clinic staff upstairs to the third floor, and this would
allow us to annex the downstairs space to our immunization clinic.
We get 40,000 immunizations a year. I mean, some of you will
remember what our flu clinic was like this year. We had 700 people
there at 7: 30 in the morning, and we weren't even open. So we -- you
know, we put a lot of people through that -- that clinic in particular.
The AIDS physician reminded me the other day that when she
started out in that building, she was providing services to 75 people.
She's now treating 350 AIDS patients. By medical protocol, she's
seeing those people at least once a quarter.
The OB program started out seeing 600 people. They have
Page 100
June 29, 2004
doubled their numbers. Pregnant women -- we try and get nine and 10
visits per pregnancy out of those people.
The WIC program sees 20,000 people in Building H alone. The
dental program's serving 4,500 people.
Weare jam-packed in there. We're doing the best we can. We're
just simply trying to move a few things around and try and get to a
point in time when we think there'll be more space on the upper floor.
As the EMS building is built and people get jockeyed around, we
think there'll be some more space upstairs, but that's probably going to
be three years down the road. So I'm just trying to live within what
I've got and what can be made available to me.
I'll be happy to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've talked about a number of
health care provider systems today already.
DR. COLFER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Certainly the public health
department is a component of that. We've talked about the horizon
system. We'll probably talk somewhere about the community health
program. We're talking about setting up a primary care facility for our
own employees.
It's -- I just wonder if there is not some way that we can combine
our resources here and achieve some economies of scale. Is it
necessary that we set up health care facilities for so many different
segments of our community rather than consolidating this and doing it
together? Is there any opportunity for synergy here?
DR. COLFER: Well, we do have a health care consortium that
Barry and I are working with that includes all the hospitals. Actually
HMA is a -- also a participant of that. And we're looking at a -- at a
system that would include a computerized data base and a way to
channel people throughout the different systems that we have here in
the county.
Page 101
June 29, 2004
I mean, its infancy. We've been meeting for maybe seven
months. A couple of us went up to Bunkham (sic) County and looked
at their model, and that's what we're looking at replicating.
So I think that we can do some of this better, but it's going to take
us some time. We're lucky that we're still small. It's been nice to have
two hospitals to work with, and we've got everybody at the table,
including HMA.
I think we can get there. I can't do it this year, but we're going to
keep everybody at the table. We did everything but blackmail them to
get them to be there. We go to their place to make them come to the
meetings, and it's a good effort, and I think we'll get there within our
work lives here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe yours, but not mine. Okay.
Thank you.
DR. COLFER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, do you have any
questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do, as a matter of fact.
Joan, could you give me a little more details on your space needs
for this year? And where would that space be if it's available at all?
DR. COLFER: The space that I know is available right now is
where the EMS building is. I think it's on 8th Avenue and 8th Street.
It's around Cambier Park. It's where the EMS facility is. And they're
only using part of it.
I believe some utilities staff is going to go in there immediately.
It wouldn't be available to me -- while they do some renovations on
the third floor, it wouldn't be available to me until December or
January.
So I would move -- change some things around in that building to
accommodate the school health staff. But probably the major costs
would be downstairs in our building, changing -- I've got five people
in two tiny offices, and I'd move those folks up to the vacated space
Page 102
June 29, 2004
from the school health staff, and that's where I can increase my
immunization area so I can accommodate larger numbers of people in
the immunization program. That would be my first effort.
I'd like to do -- also do some things upstairs on the second floor
that would create space for one more IT person in the future. Right
now it would just provide some more working space for people that
are constructing and tearing down computers. Right now they just do
that on their desk and the place is jumbled mess.
So it would do that, and it allows us to do some consolidation of
our billing staff upstairs on the second floor. We make about 25
percent of our budget in collected fees.
The state has a Q I team that came down this year and looked at
our whole program. They thought we could probably do a better job
in collections if we could consolidate the bill paying and collecting
part of our operation all together in one place. Right now it's
separated. It's in a lot of different places.
So some things we're trying to do to become more efficient.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let me ask you, Joan. Skip
Camp, did he say this is possible, or is this something that conflicts
with something else that's taking place?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this is Jim Mudd, for the record.
Our plan for Building H is some day that will be totally Department of
Health related. Utilities will be out of there, IT will be out of there.
See what happens when you don't pay your bills?
The IT -- hello, you back? Okay.
Commissioner, we just had a little bit of a blackout. I don't know
if that was a thunder shower, a lightning bolt strike or Skip Camp's
playing with it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I want you to know I had
nothing to do with it. I think it was Commissioner Coy Ie.
MR. MUDD: Our long-range plans are, that building, will be five
stories instead of three. It won't be six. I've already talked to Mr.
Page 103
June 29, 2004
Eigelstein about that and some of the community wishes as far as the
height of that particular building. And that will pretty much be our
health building overall.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well -- and that's wonderful.
The question is, in the short run, is there anything we can do to try to
bring this back to an even keel as far as --
MR. MUDD: There's $300,000 on the unfinanced requirement
list for this makeover and this efficiency as far as in the short-term for
Dr. Colfer, and that's what she's trying to get at.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And that's for -- to redo
the building itself to be able to fit into what they need?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and that--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's going to be set for
tomorrow also, right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And what we'll do at that
time, I'm going to remind everybody about the health, safety, and
welfare needs.
Is there a ring in the phone?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I apologize for that. Must be
talking too loud.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, just too much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's got to be Coyle.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
Okay. Any other questions?
MR. MUDD: Keep going, Marla.
MS. RAMSEY: Just to let you know, that we have Bonnie Fauls
here with the extension services to address their budget.
MS. FA ULS: Good afternoon. Again, Bonnie F auls for the
record, representing university extension department. And we had
some expanded service --
Page 104
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me ask you --
MS. FAULS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you know what page you're on here,
per chance?
MS. FAULS: Yes, seven.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Seven? Plain old seven, okay. Thank
you.
MS. F AULS: We have an expanded service request of $3,800,
which reflects additional funding in the job bank category where we
have one of our professional horticulturalists who was working 12
hours a week and now working 15 so we can utilize her professional
expertise in the development of our gardens. And that's all the
expanded service we have.
And an unfunded request is for a marine science agent from the
Florida Sea Grant Program, which is part of University of Florida, and
this would help people with best management practices for marinas,
boat yards and marine retailers, focusing on protecting Florida's water
quality .
We have letters of support from the Department of
Environmental Protection, Gary Litten at Rookery Bay, Florida Gulf
Coast University, talked with Bill Lorenz, our environmental
resources division administrator, department head, and he says that
this certainly supports everything that -- it complements what they do
by adding an educational component to work with both the industry
and local youth and adults to help protect our water quality.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta, do you have anything?
Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, I guess he doesn't.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This marine agent, this is
Page 105
June 29, 2004
something that's been needed for quite a while here in Collier County,
I think. I know other coastal communities or counties already have
this established.
MS. FAULS: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I think it benefits them
because they were able to get a lot of grant money also; isn't that true?
MS. FAULS: I believe so.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. We'll be able to bring more
grant money into -- in regards to our coastal management of the
waterways.
MS. FAULS: Right. And the University of Florida will fund
this, and its 60/40 match with the salary will provide -- ask Collier
County to provide the overhead for that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions? Great. That was
easy, Bonnie.
MS. RAMSEY: There's two other areas that haven't been
addressed today. Just to remind you that we have -- the veterans
services director was out today, and the David Lawrence Center.
I don't know if you have questions of either of them, but they
both came in with a budget that was equal to or less than last time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Looks good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm concerned with the -- some of
the budget cuts in David Lawrence. Is that going to suffice for the
requirements as our population here increases in Collier County as far
as people that have mental problems?
MR. WILLIAMS: Barry Williams, human services director. In
talking to Dave Schimmels, I think that is a concern that he has. The
biggest one is in behavior health with Medicaid and how those funds
are being block granted.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They're being shifted.
Page 106
June 29, 2004
MR. WILLIAMS: They're being -- they typically were on a
fee-for-service basis. Now they're going to just give a lump of money,
like a capitated HMO. So they do have a concern.
As far as the amount of money that we're -- that you're
authorizing to provide, that hasn't changed. They haven't increased
their request from last year, so -- they do also a very good job,
however, in donations, and they have a component in their operation
where they're able to get private sector funding through a benefactor,
so I think that's a major part of their strategy.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So hopefully the areas that we're
cutting on their budget, that they'll be able to make up those
deficiencies by the public getting involved and hopefully assisting in
that area.
MR. WILLIAMS: I think they have that opportunity. I think
they certainly are concerned though given this shifting in the
environment. I don't think they know quite what that's going to mean
for them in terms of going to this capitated system.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. VINCENT: Commissioners, Gary Vincent from the Office
of Management and Budget. We're not actually cutting their budget.
They're receiving, based upon what we are giving them, the same
amount of money they got last year. The difference is being made up
through the UPO program that Barry talked about earlier.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great. But the end result is that,
the bottom line it isn't going to be as great as it was in the past?
MR. VINCENT: The bottom line is the same as it was last year,
exactly the same, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But are we putting any kind
of a factor in for the increase in population?
MR. VINCENT: We have not increased their budget, but we
gave them funding based upon their request.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
Page 107
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much for the
clarification.
MR. VINCENT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions?
MR. MUDD: Now, Commissioner, we all understand the upper
payment limit. It's dollars that we weren't getting for max fees that
basically NCH helps us with in order to broker those dollars in those
different programs.
Mr. Dunnuck brought that before the board here this last year,
and it's bringing in about a half a million dollars, okay, and that's
offsetting ad valorem dollars that we have to put in that particular
fund, so you've got additional dollars that are coming off.
So whatever way we can come up with that -- as a new initiative
or whatever in order to broker those dollars, we're going to go do that,
and the upper payment limit was one of those particular things, and it's
doing just exactly what we thought it would. It's helped pay for some
of those programs that were all ad valorem based in previous years, so
it's helping us with that process.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Is that it?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Looks like we'll move on to the next
section.
MR. MUDD: Transportation services is next.
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, for the record, Norman Feder,
transportation administrator.
Again, we sought to work with the budget guidance. As you can
see by our work program, a budget request, as Jim pointed out, there is
Page 108
June 29, 2004
about 5 million over budget on the carryforward, and essentially the
major part of that represents about 3.3 million increase in alternative
transportation modes, and about another 2.5 in maintenance, and those
increases, in general terms, reflect, in the case of alternative
transportation modes, about 1.1 million increase in MSTU s, where
predominantly, as I know Diane will point out to you, the committees
establish their new budget based on the projects and issues they want
to accomplish.
In landscaping, about 1.3 million increase to reflect the
maintenance as we're moving forward on the capital proj ects and
landscaping, and then also in the CAT system, about 800,000.
In the maintenance, that -- approximately 2.5, which represents
the balance of that 5 million plus. One point one million of that, as I
know John Vliet, as interim director over maintenance, will review
with you, is to bring our paving program more in line with the life
cycle expectancy for pavement, that's 1.1 million. That is an
enhancement item that he'll cover with you.
As well, we had two years where we didn't replace equipment,
even though it came up at least on fleets provisions for possible
replacement. Now we're looking at it in the cost for repairs and
downtime. I indicate the need for that equipment to, in fact, be
replaced, and that's being brought to you now. So essentially we have
two areas. We'll hit those in more detail, but we'll cover all.
Last thing I'll bring to your attention, you see some large pluses
and minuses on page T -1 in the overall budget, and that reflects as we
continue to try and work with the relatively small staff relative to the
aggressive work program that we have in both transportation now and
alternative modes, as well as in stormwater.
We had the opportunity, put it that way -- obviously I hate to see
a long-term employee leave -- but with Ed Kant's leaving, we did
realign a lot of those duties he was working with, he had positions that
were in transportation, operations administration. He also had them in
Page 109
June 29,2004
concurrency management, as well as in right-of-way permitting.
His positions in development review went to transportation
planning. Now that we're under concurrency management, it made
perfect sense to get all of those positions aligned together to reinforce
our efforts and our consistency and our review projects. But not all
those positions needed to go.
With an economy scale, we're able to pull one of them into
landscaping for alternative transportation modes and one of them in
the stormwater, and the other three, as you'll hear, into planning.
In his operations administration, we took one of the positions to
engineering construction management design and one to records
management and maintenance.
With his position and the administrative support, being recruited
right now for a department that is traffic operations, where we're going
to put a major focus on transportation operations consistent with
customer expectations and demands in that area.
So you'll see some of those pluses and minuses. Net result, as
you'll see and you'll hear from folks on the specifics, is a request --
after last year none and I'm told the year before none -- request for
three positions expanded, one of them in traffic operations, one in
right-of-way, it's over in the capital program for stormwater, and then
one in MSTUs to be funded by MSTUs.
That gives you a quick overview, and I'll hand it over to Don
Scott to cover transportation planning.
MR. SCOTT: Good afternoon. Don Scott, transportation
planning. I essentially am covering development review,
transportation planning, concurrency management, and the MPO.
We have no request for expanded service or unfunded, and we
have some productions due to transfer of some positions in
concurrency development review together, as Norman had mentioned
as -- other than that, we don't have any expanded service.
If you have any questions --
Page 110
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions? Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got the wrong button.
Don, under transportation planning, can you kind of enlighten me
a little bit in regards to transportation planning. You've got a cut there
of 26 percent, and also on MPO long-range planning, you've got a cut
there of 53 percent.
MR. SCHNEIDER: In transportation planning, that's essentially
-- one position went to road construction and one position went to
traffic ops. The traffic ops position is related to traffic calming, but
also data collection that we use within planning, and that's a reduction
there.
The MPO, the major production is what we're going to do with
the updated long-range plan. The money has to be saved over several
years, and this is the year where we'll be expending that on the
updated long-range plan.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So that's not going to have a
severe effect on the additional population that's going to be upon us in
the next few years here in Collier County?
MR. SCHNEIDER: No. In the sense that there are -- you know,
previously we had some -- we are full staffed in the MPO now, and I
hope we stay that way. There was -- that had some extra money in
place, too.
But when we are doing like the update of the long-range plan, it
takes two to three years of funding. Their certain budget covers the
positions that are there. But when you're talking being major projects,
it does take several years of PL funds to acquire that to be able to have
that in the year that you spend it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're doing such a great job, I just
don't want to see us get back in the hole again.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I think if you take a look at the
MPO, what Don's basically saying is, if you look at that chart on T-19,
the bottom line, MPO long-range planning, it's got, forecast $1.1
Page 111
June 29, 2004
million.
If you look at what it was in '02/'03, which is $325,000, and you
look at it now at 431, it pretty much says, you know, we're keeping
that even keel as far as staffing and doing that stuff, and the spike was
that MPO long-term plan that's basically got expenditures. So even
though it looks like a 53 percent reduction, it really isn't because
you're paying for a plan effort at that particular juncture. It equates to
about $600,000.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think there's a lot of concern out
there by that CBIA. They were concerned about the road construction
and how we were going to address the future growth. So when you
see something this glaring, you want to make sure that the clarification
is clear that it's not in regards to cutting road building or anything else.
This is just basically, we're -- we've done the study. We know where
we stand.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. At the last board meeting -- just to
interrupt, on 22 June, you had two items before you on a long-range
plan. One--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 260,000.
MR. MUDD: -- was the long-range plan, and one was the PR
process, and you had a lot of questions about the PR process. And
Johnny Limbaugh is going to come -- is going to come back at the
next meeting and break that out in excruciating detail for you. And
that equated to about $700,000, and that's the difference here that
we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. STRAKALUSE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Gregg
Strakaluse, director of engineering construction management.
The bulk of our resources in our work effort is with the capital
improvement program; however, there is a section within the
department that does respond to some of the in-house design needs for
Page 112
June 29, 2004
this department and other departments.
The -- there are no serv -- expanded service requests for this
particular design team. Ther~'s a 19.5 percent budget change which
reflects a transfer of a position from Ed Kant's old department into this
section.
And this section, its focus is the quick relief of some of the
congestion problems and addressing some of the design issues,
particularly in regards to safety, public inquiries. And we do provide
technical support to the other departments within the division,
particularly the pathways.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm fine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FLAGG: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Diane Flagg,
director of traffic operations and alternative transportation modes.
Under the alternative transportation modes section, you see an
increase to the Collier Area Transit with the funding coming from
grants so the increase is covered by the increase in grant dollars
received.
In addition, you see landscape maintenance and the landscape
program consistent with the landscape master plan. The additional
expanded position in the alternative transportation modes will be
primarily funded by the -- it's for an MSTU coordinator to be
primarily funded by the MSTUs.
In the traffic operations section, this area's responsible for the
traffic signal system, streetlighting, street signs. This position also has
one expanded position as we move into implementation of phase II of
the traffic signal system, and will serve as a network engineer to work
with managing that traffic, the advanced traffic management system.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This expanded position, traffic
Page 113
June 29, 2004
system network engineer --
MS. FLAGG: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- can you explain to me what
that person, when he arrives at the transportation, what -- exactly what
that person is going to do?
MS. FLAGG: This person will be assigned to the traffic control
center where the signals -- right now we have phase I completed,
which means we have signals that are connected to the traffic control
center. This person will be assigned to that center.
We'll be working with implementing the phase II system with the
contracts. We'll also be monitoring those signals from the center.
We'll be changing timings based upon what they see happening in the
field. We'll also be working with the traffic analysis folks to retime
and rephase signals.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So this person is going to sit
there, watch the traffic, push buttons?
MS. FLAGG: This person will be managing the system by
computer, yes, sir, in addition with working with the folks in the field.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you need an engineer
degree for somebody to push the buttons?
MS. FLAGG: This position actually doesn't require an
engineering degree. That's just the job title that's identified for this
position, but it's not an actual professional engineer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that person going to need a
vehicle?
MS. FLAGG: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the $63,000 allocated is for
health insurance and his actual -- have you --
MS. FLAGG: Position cost.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- done a study and found out
what the salary base is?
MS. FLAGG: Yes, sir. That's an existing position within our
Page 114
June 29, 2004
current pay plan adopted by the board.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any further questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We'll move on.
MR. VLIET: John Vliet, interim maintenance road director. I'll
go over maintenance administration of road and bridge, state road
maintenance, maintenance aquatic plant, right-of-way permitting,
transportation maintenance, stormwater, and maintenance operations
111, which is our resurfacing.
We have a forty -- we're showing a 43.2 percent increase in road
maintenance administration, and that is due to an internal position
transfer for Mr. Kant's group, plus the rising cost of health insurance
and salary increases.
Under road and bridge maintenance, again, we have the salary
and health increases that are affecting us. Primarily we have some
real increases due to the replacing of equipment.
We're looking at roughly $851,000 in replacement equipment
under road maintenance, and this is due to the fact that the past two
years, we have not brought that forward and asked for replacements.
We've held on to it. And now the cost is getting quite high to maintain
them.
State road maintenance section. We have some salary adjustment
increases, health insurance, and the cost of fuel, which I left off the
others, which is also a big problem now with the rising cost in fuel.
That's also affecting us.
We also have an expanded equipment under the state road
maintenance for a new message board to better inform the public of
some road work ahead, the public meetings, et cetera.
The maintenance aquatic plant division. Again, salary increases,
Page 115
June 29, 2004
health insurance, fleet charges, fuel costs, and replacement of
equipment. We've got an all-terrain excavator, and that is a large piece
of equipment that actually cleans canals, gets in them, crawls through
them, digs them out, redredges them. The one we have is past due for
replacement, and we're looking at a $240,000 price tag for that
equipment.
Right-of-way programming is self-supporting with revenues that
support their expenditures, so they are within budget guidelines.
Stormwater shows an 11.5 percent increase. That's due to the
addition of two positions that were approved back on February 24th
by the board. They're actually funded through grant money and Big
Cypress Basin. Even though it shows an increase in our salary, we're
reimbursed for that.
Those positions. There's two positions that actually work the
BCB, but they do work on stormwater issues and projects here in
Collier County.
The resurfacing, 111, shows a 33.6 percent increase. With
present day funding, all of our paved road system, it takes us
approximately 21 years to get around to resurfacing it. The life
expectancy on a paved road is roughly 15 years.
They start deteriorating at 11 years on. By the 15th year, it's got
to be resurfaced. You go any further than that, the deterioration is
rapid, and then you're looking at rebuilding the entire roadway.
We'd like to reduce that by getting the 1.1 million, and that way
we protect our investment and reduce that to a IS-year cycle and get
those streets repaved.
Any questions?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, when he said that -- Jim Mudd, for
the record, county manager. I'll bring up that little slide again that I
showed you early on about how you're going to fund that particular
deficiency out in the out years, and it has everything to do with that
column right here and that $26 million that you're putting up there.
Page 116
June 29, 2004
It starts to come off of the payments and it starts to get less than
$26 million around 2011, and then you start -- if you keep those
dollars there, you start getting at resurfacing issues with the roads and
at the same time you get that $17 million worth of UFR out there for
lime rock resurfacing that's sitting there for all the dirt roads in Collier
County .
So you actually get at it. There is a plan out there. John's giving
you what he needs now kind of as a Band-Aid. But your full term
press right here is sitting right on that column. And I didn't pay John
to say that.
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, if there are not any other
questions on the operating, what I'd like to do is call your attention to
T -68, which is the capital for transportation.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Questions, stormwater?
MR. FEDER: Yes. On anything you want, Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I think that's part of it.
It's part of the capital, right?
MR. FEDER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. FEDER: What I was going to do in pointing out in the
capital, unless --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait.
MR. FEDER: -- you'd like to go to the question now, is just to
point out, we mentioned to you only one position as far as expanded
here, that is in transportation engineering construction management. It
is for the stormwater for a right-of-way acquisition person. Beyond
that on the capital, we go through, and you also have the stormwater
as part of your overall capital in transportation.
With that, I'll open up to any questions, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When you -- County Manager,
when are we coming back with that new tax, stormwater utility?
MR. MUDD: When are we going to come back with what, sir?
Page 11 7
June 29, 2004
A new tax, sir? There is no new tax --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For the increase of 1.3 --
MR. MUDD: -- unless you -- unless the board directs me to
come back with a utility tax. I think the board directed me at the last
board meeting to find stormwater out of existing ad valorem taxes to
the tune of about .15 mills, and do that over the next couple of years in
order to bring that on.
MR. FEDER: And the stormwater budget requires --
MR. MUDD: Now, sir, did I -- did I answer your question? I
don't remember the board directing me to come back with a utility tax.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There was an ordinance change
to increase the stormwater utility MSTU, I think it was.
MR. FEDER: What it was was, it was an earmarking of .15 mills
of dedicated earmark from existing general revenue such that we had a
definite funding source for stormwater, allowing us to then go after
heretofore not available grants. Although we know that they're out
there, you have to show that you have a funding and dedicated
funding sources match. That gives us the opportunity -- and of course,
we're going to come back to you with modifications to ordinance as
well as further discussion on issues that were brought up at the
meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The ordinance change, when is
that coming back?
MR. FEDER: That is hopefully coming back the 27th, although
it may be for your first meeting in September. We're trying to shoot
for the 27th. You've got such an aggressive agenda then -- I see one
shake telling me I'm probably the beginning of September both on
staff and up at the board.
So what I will tell you is probably the first meeting in September,
unless we can convince everybody that there's just nothing to do on
the 27th of July.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The -- now, we're going
Page 118
June 29, 2004
to pay this with existing ad valorem dollars, which is going to be
increased -- assessed values that come in?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No.
MR. FEDER: No. This is within the millage rate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's within the millage rate
with the assessed values raising in Collier County --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. You're going to do this within your
existing millage neutral policy, and it's new moneys that come in with
increasing assessed values that you're going to be able to cover this
cost this year and in subsequent years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's countywide, basically
that's where that money's going to be coming from, countywide
assessed values as they increase --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- where --
MR. MUDD: Because the stormwater -- the stormwater issues
benefit everybody, not only the people our in the unincorporated, but
in the incorporated, because it drains someplace, and it drains to the
coastal areas, and if it drains poorly, it screws up the estuary system
and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's the secondary
system. There's many different systems I think you're referring to.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- so with that said, in the
CRAs, the increased assessed value stays within that CRA. There's a
request for funding, and a continuing request for -- within the CRA,
not only think (sic), I think -- that using everybody's money for
neighborhood benefits is wrong, I think it's a crime that we are using
everybody else's assessed -- increased assessed values except for the
CRAs and spending that moneys within the CRAs. I'm talking about
what is on the -- this year's budget is the Gateway Triangle
improvements and the Kelly -- Lake Kelly structure replacement.
Page 119
June 29, 2004
MR. FEDER: Weare working on the Gateway and the eventual
project there, with the Big Cypress Basin as well as where the
Gateway and the CRA, to try and secure funding for that project.
We've got some issues, as you're well aware, that we tried to
address initially to start purchasing some of the land needed in that
area. That's far from the overall project as we get that further
designed, and we're looking for the CRA to be a contributor as well as
this source of funding, as well as Big Cypress Basin and any grant
funding that we can get.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, why am I the only
one up here that has a problem with those assessed values? And I
know that two of the commissioners have CRAs in their district to
finance the benefit, but the majority of us should be very much
opposed to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not at all opposed to it. I think
it's one of the greatest things they probably did here in Collier County,
is address the stormwater issue, and that's a countywide issue. It's not
just in certain areas that are CRAs or certain areas that are urban. It's
even in the areas that are rural. And I think this is something that has
been long needed, and I think we did the right thing by addressing
this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. I do, too.
Commissioner Coyle?
I couldn't have said it better.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: First of all, I think we've got to
clarify this program a little bit. I think the way we've identified it is
confusing. It's not coming out of increased values. When you said that
you're going to take it out of ad valorem property tax revenue, you're
taking it out of property tax revenue whether there's an increase or not;
is that not true?
MR. FEDER: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we've got to be very
Page 120
June 29, 2004
clear about what this does. And it doesn't change Commissioner
Henning's point about the CRAs and the use of that fund, those funds.
But I'd like to make sure that we understand this it's not a new
tax. You've merely earmarked a certain amount of existing ad
valorem funds, and it's not dependent upon future increases in ad
valorem valuations. Okay.
Am I saying this right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're correct.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I would say to you that this year I
was able to get part of that .15 mills, okay? And you saw that in the
original chart where I had capital projects at .33 and we came in at .4,
so I got about .08 mills out of this year's budget, out of the ad valorem
taxes that we have.
Next year I'm going to try to increase that to get to .15 mills. The
only way that I'll be able to do that next year is if there's additional
dollars that come in to -- if we come back next year and we have no
percent increase in assessed values or no new construction, which I
believe will not happen -- I pretty much guarantee that that won't
happen -- then what I would say with that increased assessment next
year, I plan to sliver out a piece to get you up to where you want to be
at .15 mills, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But all I want to make sure
of is that we understand that this just isn't dependent upon increases in
property tax --
MR. MUDD: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- valuations.
MR. MUDD: The board's making a dedicated effort this year to
get at least half of that mill rate for stormwater. Some $7.5 million in
this year's budget is going to stormwater.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, let me address the
other one that Commissioner Henning is concerned that he's the only
one who's objecting to the use of these funds in this way. And as I
Page 121
June 29, 2004
understand it, the primary concern is that some of the districts have
CRAs, community redevelopment areas or districts, and they keep the
money for that in their district for improvements and yet we're also
having this allocation of ad valorem property taxes to help pay for
stormwater.
The fact of the matter is that in Commissioner Coletta's district,
he pays -- his constituents pay six percent of the taxes, but they get
almost 30 percent of the total money allocated by the county for that
district.
Commissioner Henning pays about 10 or 11 percent of the taxes
and he gets 16 percent of the money going back to him in the county.
So if what we're talking about is equitable distribution of tax
funding in Collier County by district, then I think we have to go back
and reassess where we're sending the money. And if I understand
that's the thrust of Commissioner Henning's concern, then I'd be happy
to go back and take a look at that allocation.
The point is that the districts that have redevelopment areas and
are holding back tax increment funds were designated as areas that
needed to be improved, and they are entitled to do that. And the use
of ad valorem funds or the solution of stormwater problems is a very
appropriate thing to do.
And if we do wish to take the position that we equalize the
expenditures and allocations of funds by district, then we do a great
disservice to the county as a whole. And I think it is quite sensible
and quite legal that we continue to do it the way we're doing it now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I would -- I would, too, like to just
respond to Commissioner Henning's concerns. And he was saying he
was wondering how we could actually go along with this when a CRA
collects dollars. Well, the CRA is established because the area is
blighted and needs improvement.
And I'll now refer to the triangle. That's in my district. The
triangle is, indeed, blighted. Actually, there's so much flooding in the
Page 122
June 29, 2004
area nobody would desire to move there or live there, and they can't
improve it and raise any CRA dollars until the stormwater is fixed.
That's just -- so it would be wonderful to have CRA dollars and have
them flowing in. They aren't.
But going on to the bigger picture, and Commissioner Halas
referred to this, and I'd like to emphasize, that we as a county are
working together for the betterment of the entire county. When we see
an airport in Immokalee, for instance, it doesn't affect any of us, but
we're happy to support that effort because it's part of the county.
When we see a library that's -- that needs expanding or a
community center, we're happy to do that because we're all affected
by that and we all benefit by that. Maybe I never go there, but I know
that other people's children will, and that's what we're here for is to
vote for the entire county.
And we don't say down in my end of town when the rain falls, as
it is storming out there right now, you keep the water in your district.
It can't go into your canals, it can't flow out your streets into the sewer
system and down on into my district, which is the way the water
flows. We just have to handle it. We're stuck with it. We're at the end
of the line, and we're stuck with it.
So Commissioner Henning, I think it's a -- you know, I'm going
to help you, and I expect you to help me. It's all of our water. It's all
of our rain. And we all have to handle the stormwater management of
it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Commissioner, I am sorry
that you took my comments the wrong way.
Going back to the decision at the board meeting on this item is,
there are certain capital improvements that benefit the secondary
system. Now, that benefits everybody. And the only point that I'm--
that I made there is, the neighborhood benefits of the older
communities were asking everybody to pay for neighborhood benefits,
and I think that's -- that that portion of it, I really have a problem with
Page 123
June 29, 2004
it.
The secondary and the primary system is the benefit to
everybody. Even though you have the Cocohatchee in one end and,
you know, the Golden Gate main in the other end that affects the
Naples Bay, that's a community benefit. Okay? You understand
where I'm coming from?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Not really. But--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- I guess we're going to have opposite
opinions on this matter.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The other thing, Commissioner
Coletta, in his district, during the breakdown of the improvements in
his district, you have things like water plants, okay? Those water
plants are -- that was in his district but it doesn't benefit his district.
So that's what you're referring to is the six percent that he pays and the
30 percent that he benefits -- that he's getting benefit from.
It's things like that that's in there. There's road improvements that
is done in the fringe of the urban area and in the rural area that benefit
everybody,eventhough--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- they're expended in there,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me move on, because now, we're
supposed to be discussing budget instead of who gets what. So let me
just say, we all -- we all benefit by different betterments that we
provide to this community no matter which department it comes from,
and I think we better get back on track, so let's move on.
MR. FEDER: Madam Chairman, I appreciate it. What I will tell
you --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me -- since that remark was
directed at something I said, let me -- let me clarify something.
Fifty percent of the funds that are allocated to my district are for
Page 124
June 29, 2004
an overpass. About 60,000 -- $62,000. So a large portion of the funds
allocated to my digit -- district are for an overpass that many of my
constituents argue they don't want either, so it doesn't serve their
benefit. It is of service to others. And I think that is a proper thing,
quite frankly.
And we have to build sewer plants, and we have to build roads,
and we have to make those decisions based, as I think this board has,
by majority vote on the basis of helping the greatest number of people.
And so I think Commissioner Henning's analysis is clearly
inaccurate and not consistent in that respect, and I think we just need
to agree that we're going to go where we're going to go.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, I think so, too.
MR. FEDER: Madam Chairman, what I'd like to do is just to tell
you that just as transportation is a network and we appreciate the
support to start bringing that system forward, we appreciate the
support from this board. There are different parts to the stormwater
system, but they're all a part of the full network, stormwater, and we're
looking forward to making sure that meets the needs of the full
community.
And with that, I'll ask if there's any further questions. If not,
we'll let you get on to your next opportunity. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'd like to direct your attention--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Norm, before you leave.
MR. MUDD: -- as Norman gets up. You guys can get up.
If you'd look at page 20 under the overview section, and it has
Collier County, Florida, property tax rates FY-'05 proposed, and I just
want to bring to your attention the Sable Bay -- or excuse me. The
Sable Palm Road MSTU.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What page are you on?
MR. MUDD: I'm on page 20.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Page 20. The last page in your overview --
Page 125
June 29, 2004
MR. MUDD: In your overview section, and it has your millage
rates for MSTUs and whatnot on that page.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's got $216.88 (sic).
MR. MUDD: $216.38. I just want to make sure that you
understand that that was a group that got together and voted on that.
We had -- we had all kinds of public comment, and it's one where they
wanted to establish that particular rate as a one-time cost so they could
get some maintenance done.
And Ms. Flagg is an expert on that particular item, I believe.
And so I wanted to bring it to your attention today so that it isn't new
for you when Mike gets up there in September and starts talking about
the different rates and whatnot, and then all of a sudden you see $216
and you're asking, what's that all about.
The next --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Before we go any further, let's give our
court reporter a little 10-minute break, okay?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: The next person on your agenda, Community
Development/Environmental Services. Mr. Joe Schmitt will present.
MR. SCHMITT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Joe Schmitt, administrator of Community
Development/Environmental Services.
I'm joined by my eight department directors. Actually, if you
count, you'll only see seven, but Bleu is actually -- I have Mr. Bleu
Wallace, who is my operations director, and also -- is it Bleu Perico at
Page 126
June 29, 2004
this time, for the building -- he's sitting in for, of course, the building
department.
But next slide, please. We're going to go through a quick slide
presentation and, frankly, just trying to highlight some of the changes
in the budget. You certainly can, at your leisure, stop us if you want
to ask anything, but my intent is to give a quick overview and then
provide an opportunity for you to ask any questions.
Noted are my eight departments on the slide that basically, we
cover all the aspects of the community development and
environmental services, principally land development, land review,
and other associated activities. Each of the directors will go through
their specific functions in regards to the budget.
Next slide. What I want to do is highlight basically our total
operating budget, and if you'd turn to page one, and then you flip
quick to page CDES-l, and if you look about a third of the page down,
you'll note that I'm coming in well within the guidance of the budget.
It's one-tenth of one percent, and that was well within -- in the budget
guidance.
Weare looking at coming in with the same FTE, actually be
going from -- it's actually 255 up to 258, and that includes two special
master positions, which we'll discuss. You approved those at the last
board meeting, and one expanded position in engineering, and Mr.
Kuck will go through that when he presents his budget.
Two capital improvements items we can discuss, but principally
one of them was the SRP, software replacement project, $2.1 million.
You've already approved that as part of the budget. That's Hanson
contract, and subsequent -- you have already approved as well the
bonding for the purchase of that contract, so that's already approved
and in the budget.
The other more -- most probably significant figure is the $19
million, almost -- $19.2 million approximately for Conservation
Collier, and Mr. Bill Lorenz will cover that as far as what's happening
Page 127
June 29, 2004
in regards to land acquisition.
I'll be coming back to you in regards to this budget for a couple
of issues, one is the -- well, as noted in the bottom of that slide, is the
PUD monitoring fee, and that is a fee that was once approved. The
board asked to remove that, but in a further meeting you discussed --
we discussed the mission for PUD monitoring. I'll be bringing that
back as a board item for you to address in a separate action.
I would note in your budget book, this budget was unanimously
approved by the Development Services Advisory Committee
subcommittee in a letter signed by Peter Van Arsdale. As they
described, probably one of the best budgets, best prepared budgets that
define the operation in CDES that they've seen.
Next slide, please. An overview of the budget, as I addressed the
first, is the engineering inspector position, and as I said, Mr. Tom
Kuck will address that. The figure shown there is $93,000 for that
position. The other one Mr. Stan Litsinger will address, and this is the
Collier County east of 951 study, which we'll discuss in a little more
detail.
Third bullet there is a code enforcement pilot laptop computer
program. What that is is a follow-on to the computer program process
that was implemented in our building department approximately two
years ago, and we're going to purchase four computers for code
enforcement, and Michelle Arnold will discuss that.
And the last bullet Mr. Baker will discuss, but it's principally the
Economic Development Council incentives associated with the QTI
and broadband initiatives in regards to the economic incentives that
was passed by the board.
(Commissioner Coyle entered the hearing
room. )
Next slide, please. Some of the issues for discussion, and this is
the unfunded requirement. We only have one. There were two noted
in your book, and now it's down to one. And this is associated with
Page 128
June 29, 2004
the property maintenance enforcement program. We'll be coming
back to you in August for your review of this. This is basically the
abandoned buildings issue in regard to abandoned buildings and
inspections of rental properties, and we're going to be coming back to
you as a board action in regards to this, but it's identified as an
unfunded requirement.
The other requirement that was removed was additional moneys
that were being asked by the EDC. Tammy Nemecek was looking for
additional funds, and she has since withdrawn that.
Next slide. Just to highlight where we are in regards to permits
and where we're going with the building permits, the slide shown
there. And this is just a highlight, we think, from a -- regards to
revenue. And as you know in -- each of the commissioners in regards
to our operation, the preponderance of my operation is fee driven.
We expect that permits and land use items will continue at the
pace that we'd been, I guess, if I could say it, enjoying in regards to
the pace of development.
Last year we had 28,000 -- little over 28,000 permitted activities.
And if you compare year to date where we were last year at this time
compared to this year, we're a little bit above that, so I anticipate we'll
be coming in probably around 28 to 2,900 (sic) permitted act --
permitted activities.
Next slide will give a snapshot of the residences that are built.
This is a -- just a snapshot in regards to units that are built in Collier
County, and I'm talking about a total of single-family, multi-family
dwelling units and condominiums. And last year we had almost 6,000
units built. You see this year to date we're just above where we were
last year. I would expect we're going to come in over 6,000 units.
So from a building department perspective, both in plans coming
in and demand for inspections, we are anticipating a sustained rate of
growth and development. Based on that, I see no need to raise fees to
support services in the building department.
Page 129
June 29, 2004
Next slide shows zoning department. And actually that's all the
activities associated with zoning and land development because of the
sequential activity of going through the various departments
associated with that.
Comprehensive planning, the zoning department, environmental
review services, and engineering services, we suspect -- or I
anticipate, again, a pretty sustained level of growth, almost where we
were last year at this time.
And as you can see, the graph clearly shows that the activities __
we anticipate the activities will be coming in the front door with the
amount of work to support the activities regarding zoning and land
development. And as a result, I see no need for fee increases there.
We're going to be coming back to you in September again __
actually, at end of July with a few tweaks to our fee schedule, but
nothing as -- significant as far as raising fees.
Subject to your questions in regards to the overview of our
budget, I'm going to turn this now over to Mr. Denny Baker, my
director of financial management and housing, where he'll review his
program.
Denny?
MR. BAKER: Thank you, Joe.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. Denny Baker, for the record.
My department, as you can see from my slide, I have 22 people
assigned to my department to achieve the following -- accomplish the
following responsibilities: In financial administration, I have four
individuals; in the SHIP and CDBG areas, I have a total of 10
individuals; impact fee administration, four employees; economic
development, there was one person there last year in this budget, but
we've relocated that position into impact fee administration, and those
responsibilities have been absorbed by myself and others.
In the cash receiving and management area, we have four
individuals managing that area. And if you look in the bottom
Page 130
June 29, 2004
right-hand corner of that slide, you'll see that we have $125 million
passing over the counter in this next fiscal year. So half of that money
is -- about $60 million of that 1.25 is impact fee collection.
The areas of notice next year that are going to require challenges
and accomplishments are to implement the five economic incentives
of the board that you passed last fall.
As you recall those are the tax stimulus package, the housing
impact fee deferral program, the fee payment assistance program, the
broadband program, and the job creation program.
We will continue to assist the private sector in the planning and
development of affordable housing throughout the county.
And finally, we would have a challenge to, in the impact fee area,
to implement five updates, to conduct two indexing and to work on
and to implement the -- and bring to you sometime in '05, hopefully
soon, law enforcement impact fee that's on the table for consideration.
My performance measurements of note is the increase in the
SHIP and the federal grant housing area for a total of six million --
$6.9 million this year, to seven and a half million dollars in '05.
And as I mentioned before, the cash crossing the counter in the
community development is a total of $125 million. Yes,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have a question Joe brought up
earlier, and that is software replacement. Didn't last year in your
budget, did you have a software replacement, and what was that
about?
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, that's the same one. We carried
it over. We had probably six months of negotiations with the Hanson
Company in regards to that delivery of that project, so it is the same
money, but it's carried over. And it had to do with basically contract
negotiations and waiting for version eight to come out. But that
contract was signed in -- Bleu, I guess, June, wasn't it?
MR. WALLACE: 11 May.
Page 131
June 29, 2004
MR. SCHMITT: 11 May, thank you. 11 May that contract was
signed, and we came back subsequent to that for the funding for that
project. But that is all development services fee funded, and those
fees will repay the commercial paper that is used to fund that project.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: When you said 11 May, was that
last year or this year?
MR. WALLACE: This year.
MR. SCHMITT: This past year, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
MR. SCHMITT: So it's basically the same -- same software
system that replaced the outdated CD Plus system that we currently
use. And, in fact, transportation and public utilities use that as well.
They've shared in part of the review process.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
MR. BAKER: And by the way, they do pay their share of that,
because it is 113 funds. When they do use it, they pay for it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Commissioner Coletta, any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The economic incentives, is
there a carryforward? I mean, I thought --
MR. BAKER: Yes, Commissioner, there is a carry forward,
because the programs that were budgeted for this year were not spent
as planned, and those funds do carry over to the '05 fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think I remember that the
direction was that, if it -- it's not spent, that it goes back in general
fund, or am I wrong about that?
MR. BAKER: No, I think you're wrong about that,
Commissioner. It goes back into the carryforward. One program
Page 132
June 29, 2004
sunsets in three years. Maybe, perhaps, that's what you're thinking of.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Move on.
MR. BAKER: Okay. I'll pass to Stan Litsinger.
MR. LITSINGER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Stan Litsinger, your comprehensive planning department
director.
I'd like to start by pointing out to you that in spite of your budget
direction of 2.1 percent increase, I'm able to report a .8 percent
reduction in our overall budget.
I have a staff of 14 folks, 12 professionals and technicals. And as
you can see from the outline in your budget document and also on the
screen, we conduct about 1 7 programs for you that vary from your
Growth Management Plan amendment, maintenance and
implementation, the implementation of your stewardship credit
program, and also your recently-adopted transfer of development
program.
We are in the process of implementing some very complex and
very innovative programs, as you're aware, here in Collier County that
we've been developing, over the last three years, everything from the
rural fringe in the eastern lands to your concurrency system.
I am happy to report that we also were able to reduce, from the
standpoint of the budget that we are presenting to you here today, a
reduction of one position from a 15 total that we had last year due to
the transfer of the one position to the Bayshore CRA.
I also would note that that .8 decrease in total budget
appropriation is on the assumption that you would approve the one
proposed expanded service that I have identified associated with what
we're going to call our east of County Road 951 services and
infrastructure study that we want to conduct in the new fiscal year,
Page 133
June 29, 2004
which will be based from my department with assistance in input from
your various other departments and divisions within the county,
looking at issues in, specifically, platted lands and lands east of 951
that are not currently covered by one of your recently-adopted
overlays or master plans such as we have in Immokalee.
As you know, you have a very large platted subdivision in
Golden Gate Estates which we have to look at division of services and
infrastructure for the next 20 to 25 years.
So the additional costs that I have noted would be associated with
conducting that study, which we will continue to flesh out with the
county manager prior to conducting, or commencing that study at the
first of the October.
If there are any questions, I'll be glad to answer them for you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions, Commissioner Coletta?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Move on.
MS. MURRAY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Susan
Murray, I'm the director of the Department of Zoning and Land
Development Review.
We currently have 30 FTE, including 20 professional staff and 10
technical and support staff, and we are not asking for any expanded
positions this year.
We're funded primarily as a fee- for-service organization, and we
have been charged with the following responsibilities: First we review
development plans and plats for compliance with the land
development code; we process and analyze land use applications,
applications for rezonings, PUDs, variances, and conditional uses; we
coordinate and process all revisions and amendments to the land
development code; we track and monitor development activities for
compliance with approved PUDs; we interpret, implement, and
maintain the land development code, and we also provide front
counter planning assistance at the zoning information desk for the
Page 134
June 29, 2004
general public.
Our projected performance measures -- or excuse me. Let me
skip to our special items that we'll be working on in the upcoming
fiscal year, is to implement the new permitting and land use software
system. We will playa key and pivotal role in that, and we are also
going to be working on continuing to improve our development
review processes in allowing for the most efficient review times that
we can.
Our protected performance measures for fiscal year '05, we
anticipate 18,500 transactions at the front counter zoning information
desk. We anticipate applications for approximately 472 site
development plans. As you know those are plans that we review and
approve administratively.
We will plan on processing 145 land use petitions. Those are the
items that customarily come before you for approval. And we're
planning for at least 100 amendments to our land development code
next year.
If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Susan, I don't recall that
many petitions coming before the Board of County Commissioners. Is
this based on an actual count over the past nine months or so?
MS. MURRAY: Yes, Commissioner. It would be based on the
count of applications we've received. Not all of them will be heard
during the fiscal year, but we count as the applications come in.
Obviously some get put on hold for various reasons, some never
materialize for various reasons, some change forms for various
reasons. So that's why your count per meeting may be different from
what we've got.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With respect to the other plans
reviewed, it appears that what's happening is we're seeing a reduction
in the number of land development actions requiring Board of County
Page 135
June 29, 2004
Commissioners' approval, and it looks like the number of other
reviews coming to the staff for decision are about the same over the
past several years. Is that a fair assessment for where we're going with
this?
MS. MURRAY: A fair assessment for at this time, yes, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Susan, if you could point out that each of our
principal planners have somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 to 25
projects at any given time sitting in their -- in their, basically the to-do
box and they're working those concurrently. So those numbers are
pretty solid numbers.
MS. MURRAY: Yeah. Typically the planners handle 15 active,
and they may have five to seven inactive, meaning kind of those
petitions that I described that for various reasons get put on hold or get
delayed.
They also have responsibility in specialty areas such as we have
specialists that deal with communications towers, we have a specialist
that helps EDC with their fast track projects. We have specialists that
deal with various aspects of the code that are -- that are -- need our
guidance and direction from other departments as well, so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just so I'll know how many
additional aides to put into my staff to accommodate this problem, can
you tell me how many of those 145 petitions actually wind up before
the Board of County Commissioners?
MS. MURRAY: Boy, I'd have to give you a percentage, and I'm
going to say about 95 percent.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Really? That many. Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Included in that, realize that the summary
agenda, there are -- we probably at any given meeting have at least six
to eight at every meeting that have gone through the public meeting
process.
MS. MURRAY : Yeah, about 10 a month.
Page 136
June 29, 2004
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you're talking about CDDs
amendments to PUDs and --
MS. MURRAY: Correct. You're talking about amendments to
PUDs, conditional uses, variances. You're always talking about things
that don't come before you but -- such as boat docks, those are
considered land use petitions. They do have a public hearing process.
We don't have a lot of those, but that is included.
MR. SCHMITT: Or interpretations or other type of things.
MS. MURRAY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now I understand. Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions? Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: He's out fishing.
MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Bill Lorenz, environmental services.
MR. LORENZ: Yes. Good afternoon, Commissioners. Bill
Lorenz, environmental services director. Weare -- the Environmental
Services Department is a fairly diverse department within the division.
We have a total number of 14 employees that are essentially grouped
around four cost center areas for budget purposes.
Where we -- of course, the administration conduct various
restoration projects such as exotics removal, some of our grants
projects, artificial reef program, Growth Management Plan
development and policies within the conservation and coastal
management element.
We also have a section that actually conducts the environmental
reviews, which were the reviews of the land use petitions or the site
development plans that we look at for the compliance with the
environmental codes.
We have our sea turtle monitoring group that supports the beach
renourishment permits that the county has, and also, of course, the
Conservation Collier program, which was the new program last year
Page 137
June 29, 2004
that we -- that we're -- as part of the one person for that, and it's for
our 14 FTEs.
The special issues -- special items for next year that we'll be
getting involved with -- of course, this year for Conservation Collier,
it was a year -- it was our first year to bring projects to the board for
direction to acquire. You have done that. We have approximately
100 acres of land that you have directed us to acquire.
Next year the special item for us in terms of working through the
program will be to develop those land management plans for those
acres that we acquired. And of course, obviously we will continue to
do the acquisition and bring you new projects for acquisition as well
for Conservation Collier.
Another item that we're working very much on, and we've had
staff working with, is securing grants for a variety of habitat
restoration projects. These have been fairly small projects that we
work through our grant funds, but we want to be able to work with
those because those will be very important as -- for supplemental
sources for the Conservation Collier land management activities.
We have two Growth Management Plan initiatives that we need
to be working on that are -- that are stemming from the Growth
Management Plan. One, of course, is the listed species work program
that we'd be working through the end of this year with the
stakeholders' group, and we'll be bringing back to the county
commission by the end of the year a proposal that has been worked
and vetted through this stakeholders' group.
Another item that's important for us is the -- is the North Belle
Meade environmental planning study. This is a study that was
required in the future land use element for the North Belle Meade
overlay, and we've had stakeholders' groups begin working on that
program as well. So that's a special item that we'd be bringing back to
you.
Just some selective performance measures. As I noted earlier,
Page 138
June 29, 2004
we'll have 100 acres of land in our inventory that we'll begin to
manage in the Conservation Collier program, so that's going to be a
new item for us. And also from our environmental review section, we
would have -- we expect to have approximately 900 plus types of
reviews that we will be reviewing a variety of different site
development plans or issuance of environmental permits.
With regard to the budget, we came in the budget within the
guidelines. We don't have any expanded requests or any UFRs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Easy.
MR. SCHMITT: Next will be Michelle Arnold, code
enforcement director.
MS. ARNOLD: Actually, BleuWallace.
MR. SCHMITT: I'm sorry, building review and permitting. I
apologize. Mr. Wallace.
MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace, interim director
of building review and permitting.
Building review and permitting has 79 FTEs. No change going
into '05, no expanded, no unfunded requirements are anticipated.
Fully funded by permitting fees, we will continue to review and
issue building permits and conduct those timely inspections and
quality inspections by our 36 inspectors.
Also, contractor licensing continues to investigate complaints
caused by unlicensed and unscrupulous contractors. And I might note
that in -- just so far this fiscal year, they've collected some $300,000 in
restitution and also another $60,000 in fines.
As far as our special items, of course, we're going to be key in
implementing the new permitting and land use software system. This
is going to take a lot of resources and time away from our basic
mission to implement, but it's going to be worth it in the long run.
Performance measures Joe's already covered. They're the
Page 139
June 29, 2004
residential permits. I do want to note that the annual inspections per
inspector expect to go up to about 5,000 per inspector next year.
We also expect the contractor license investigations to go up just
because of the increased growth and activity.
Any questions?
(No response.)
MR. WALLACE: If not, I'll turn it over to code enforcement,
Michelle Arnold.
MS. ARNOLD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Michelle
Arnold, code enforcement director.
I currently have 46.5 employees responsible for ensuring
compliance with all the land development codes and all the various
codes and ordinances for the county.
In addition to that, we administer a rental registration program
and a vehicle for hire program, which is the taxies and other charter
companies providing service to our citizens and visitors.
We also investigate complaints and obtain resolutions for the
various complaints that come into the department. An effort that we're
trying to make for next fiscal year to enhance our complaint
resolutions is the laptop program that's identified on the expanded
budget.
We are trying to get four laptops for field investigators. As Joe
indicated, it's an expansion of the building permitting and review field
program, and we expect that laptop program will give the investigators
on-hand information about property ownerships, building permitting
activities, and other proj ects in the field rather than having to wait to
come back to the office and gain that information before taking action.
Another effort that we are working diligently on is fostering a
community education program, and that's through interactions with the
various associations, involves volunteer programs, and we're also
developing various educational aides such as pamphlets and
brochures. One of the recent things that we've put together is our tree
Page 140
June 29, 2004
pruning brochure.
The special program -- programs that I'm going to be working on
for this coming fiscal years is the implementation of the special master
program. That's the program that you just implemented to try to
maintain funds here locally rather than transferring them out to
Tallahassee.
That's going to be a very complex program, and with that you-all
have given me two positions to assist the special master in that
program. That program will be cost neutral. We expect the funds that
we're going to be collecting for those fees will pay for the special
master and the two employees.
In addition to that, I'll be bringing to you in September the
adoption of a new property maintenance code, and that ordinance is
revising the existing minimum housing code ordinance that you have
as well as combining that with our dangerous buildings ordinance.
We're also going to be enhancing that ordinance by establishing,
for the first time, minimum criteria for commercial properties for
maintenance purposes, and then we're also introducing a new standard
for boarding buildings, and that's to limit the amount of time that a
building is boarded up before it's habitable, whether it's residential or
commercial.
MR. SCHMITT: And Commissioner, this will also deal with the
issue in regards to your concern, Commissioner Halas, in regards to
boat docks or boathouses as well, so this ordinance will be dealing
with many of the issues that you've addressed.
We've spent quite a bit of time putting this together, and I've been
working with Commissioner Henning on this as well. He's reviewed
the ordinance. So I think it's going to be an important program. It will
be -- should be revenue neutral as well, but we'll be bringing that back
to you for your review and approval, and we'll include two expanded
positions to support that.
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. As Joe mentioned, the program for the--
Page 141
June 29, 2004
will include two expanded positions, which will be cost neutral, and
that's for inspections of rental properties, to enhance the rental
registration program. And the inspections are going to be limited to
the properties that we've found violations at. It wouldn't be a
comprehensive inspection for all rental properties.
And the other items, just to show you, but is my performance
measures we're going to probably be maintaining. The one item that
I'd like to point out is the special master actions. We expect that to be
increased to our performance for the next coming year.
If you-all have any questions, I'll be happy to answer any of
those.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
MS. ARNOLD: I just need to clarify that the two expanded posi
-- or two positions for the performance measures is on the UFR list,
the unfinanced requirements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You started out by saying you had
46 and a half inspectors. What's that half inspector look like?
MS. ARNOLD: I actually have three half people that work on
the weekends. They're part-time personnel, so yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. ARNOLD: They look just like the rest of us though.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: About the two unfunded
requirements, Michelle. Those, according to your notes here, will
actually be covered by, I guess --
MS. ARNOLD: The fees.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- the code violations or fees
assessed.
MS. ARNOLD: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is our policy concerning
additions of that nature? It's really not an unfunded requirement if you
Page 142
June 29, 2004
have user revenues coming in to support it. So what do you do? Are
you just going to go ahead and do that; is that the policy, or must we
approve this?
MR. MUDD: No, Commissioner, you must approve it. You
kept my head count down, or I -- that was part of the policy, and that
means there's two additional bodies coming onboard. So as far as
unfunded, I didn't have the -- I didn't have the guidance in order to
grab those folks, and so I kept it to the order.
You know, I said, net was 20. But if you looked at new positions
expanded, it was 23.2, plus we had the two from the Big Cypress
board, that's 25.2, okay? So I was at cap. I wasn't going to go any
farther than that. I'm going to stay within your guidance.
So if you want to add those two bodies because they're funded,
then you have every right to do that, but I don't have the allocation to
add those from the county manager's side of the house.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: And if I could add, what I wanted to do was
prevent coming -- having you approve this budget and then
September, before we even implement the budget, come in and ask for
two more bodies.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Two more people. Yeah.
MR. SCHMITT: That would not be truth in lending.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's what I'm trying to deal
with here, and I've seen that in some of the other budgets that we
discussed earlier, I believe. I have a question before I give you an
opinion, at least my opinion.
Would these additional revenues be able to be gathered without
these two people?
MS. ARNOLD: No. This is actually a program that's not in
place. And as Joe mentioned, we're going to be bringing it to you in
September. So in the event you make some modifications in
September when the actual ordinance is being presented to you, the
Page 143
June 29, 2004
budget will reflect those modifications.
But it's an additional responsibility that we're adding with this --
with these two positions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I guess my opinion would be,
if you're covering the cost of the additional people by increasing
revenues to the county and there is no net cost to the taxpayers
resulting from this, I would be of an opinion that we should let you
proceed with it rather than having an additional meeting to do this.
But we need some way to track this process. You need to -- you need
to balance for us the revenues and expenses for these new unfunded
positions, because we must make sure that you are, in fact, covering
them entirely.
MR. MUDD: For instance, when you -- in September when they
come forward with this new program that probably has some land
development code changes to it, it talks about abandoned buildings --
and Commissioner Fiala -- and no plug, but it couldn't have been
better -- was in St. Louis, and there was a lot of boarded up buildings.
Well, what we want to do is make sure that those boarded up
buildings aren't unsightly to the rest of the people that live in Collier
County. And some of the changes that have transpired -- the corner of
Davis and Airport, you know, we used to have that junk building off --
and now we have something that just came in, a storage facility.
We've got some boarded up buildings still on East Trail. And so
as people leave and change and whatever -- and until you approve that
particular program along with the revenue stream, i.e., fines, a fee,
inspection, whatever, then it doesn't have a revenue stream yet, okay?
And that you haven't approved yet.
So there's two bodies with a potential to have a revenue stream
based on board approval when the program comes to see you in
September. Joe just has identified these people now for you so that
you can see them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if your preference is to get
Page 144
June 29, 2004
guidance from the board now on these so you don't have to bring it
back and discuss it at another point in time, I would suggest you ask
the board for guidance on this. But if you'd really rather bring it back,
then you can ignore my suggestions.
MR. MUDD: If you want us to put the two positions in the
budget and if the board decides not to approve the program in
September, we can take these two positions out. Joe is not going to
recruit for these positions until you give him the go ahead for the
program.
MR. SCHMITT: And I have to bring the ordinance back for
your review and approval, so the ordinance has to be a board --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then it won't make any -- it won't
solve anything to do it now?
MR. SCHMITT: No. I just did not want to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: -- playa shell game and say we, you know,
there was -- and then all of a sudden, September, even before the
budget was implemented, and we come back with two more bodies.
So we're just being up front with regards to this program.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's it?
MS. ARNOLD: That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, Commissioner Halas, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One other thing in regards to these
-- the increase in head count by two people. When you come back in
September -- obviously we're going to give you guidance to go ahead
with this, but I also would like to see information in regards to what is
the proj ected revenue that the -- this -- the head count --
MS. ARNOLD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- will generate and whether it is
revenue neutral, that's not really the case. I'd just like to get some
idea, if have you some idea, what this could be, and maybe you have
to go to other counties that have something similar to this so that gives
Page 145
June 29, 2004
you some kind of a guidance to -- so that we have that information
available.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We have -- I wrote a little note down
here. We owe you Caxambas Park, the revenues that come in versus
the expenditure for the people in the operational cost. I owe you
feedback on Veterans Park, okay, as that's going along. What I'd ask
you to do is let me give you a semi-annual update, so around the end
of March I'll give you a blip to let you know how they're coming on
those particular items. And based on this particular program, I can do
the same based on the board -- based on board approval in September
from what you see, if you'd like to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that would be great, because
that way we have an idea of what's happening.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. SCHMITT: Next will be Mr. Bleu Wallace. Again, CDES
operations.
MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace, director of
CDES operations. CDES operations are barely -- well, it's a highly
diverse organization; 22 FTEs.
Among the records room that employs the digital conversion
from hard copy to digital format, the addressing function that assigns
addresses and also enforces the addressing function, the graphics and
GIS technical support which updates all the maps and puts them on the
Website for all zoning changes, also investor-owned utility regulation.
There are four utilities left that the staff is -- continues to regulate,
and cable franchise administration.
Of those their special items are to implement the -- I'm sorry.
The new permitting and land use software system that touches the
records room and addressing also, the E-911 addressing enforcement,
increased site visits. It is really scary what we found in Immokalee,
that 75 percent of the residences there do not have house numbers on
Page 146
June 29, 2004
them.
And the law enforcement, EMS folks, were screaming, and now
we've been out there for about four months, and we've got them up to
about 60 percent addressed now . We are providing the numbers
through two grants that we were able to obtain.
And Orangetree utilities is in for a rate increase, and we'll be
going to public hearing before the Collier County Water and
Wastewater Authority within about 60 to 90 days.
The performance measures. The -- we just put down how many
records that we normally get on a fiscal year and what we're filing.
The utility rate adjustment actions are going down even though they're
up this year, because of all the utilities filed for price index
applications.
If you will turn to CDES page 59, there is one item I to need
bring attention to the board. When the Marco Is -- City of Marco
Island purchased the Florida Water Services Corporation's two
systems, Marco Shores and Marco Island, it left utility regulation
revenue with a shortfall.
We lost 75 percent of our revenues, and we have reduced our
staff from four to two over the last two fiscal years in anticipation of
that. However, we still have a shortfall.
The shortfall at the bottom of the page, if we do nothing, is
$90,000. Staffhas built into the budget this year an increase of the
regulator assessment fee which funds the staff from two percent, what
it is now, of gross revenues of each utility, to 3.75.
If we do that, the revenues will equal the proj ected expenses and
we will not be dipping into reserves to fund the staff initiative.
The 3.75 percent is still less than the 4.5 percent that's charged by
the Public Service Commission in Tallahassee to regulate utilities. So
we're still better off.
And the 5,800 private utility customers out there are still better
off because they will not be paying the higher regulatory fee charged
Page 147
June 29, 2004
by the Public Service Commission.
So with your concurrence, we would like to go ahead and
increase the fee 2 percent to 3.75 percent, effective 1 October. And if
the board so wishes, we'll bring that back on the 27th of July on
consent.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, just to add a point -- and I want to
make sure -- you know, it's getting -- it's getting around 3:30, and
we've been looking at numbers all day long, okay? I want to make
sure that you understand. These are -- these are Golden Gate, these
are Immokalee --
MR. WALLACE: No, Orangetree, sir.
MR. MUDD: Orangetree, excuse me. And we're looking at
those particular utilities, okay. So it's going to be if -- you're talking
about an increase in fee, and that's going to be given out to the
customers.
What Bleu's basically talking about, when Marco Island got
picked up by Florida -- when Florida Waters was purchased by Marco
Island, Bleu's revenues went down significantly because he lost a lot
of customers on that particular utility, and your water/sewer district
board basically regulates those utilities that are out there.
Now, are there going to be private utilities that are going to come
onboard in Collier County so that that rate goes down in the future?
Absolutely. Ave Maria, okay? Big Cypress stewardship special
district, they're talking about having anywhere from 10 to 11 village
structures. And you aren't going to do those village structures on
septic, I'll tell you that, and they're going to need some kind of water.
So I believe there'll be package plants out there too.
So there'll be increased customers that they'll have to regulate,
therefore, this particular percentage will go down in the future. It's
going up because we lost Florida -- Florida Waters, the Marco
account, and we're -- and Bleu's trying to make ends meet. He's
brought revenues down, and -- to try to hold the own (sic). And in the
Page 148
June 29, 2004
future, that percentage will go down again as those new utilities go
onboard.
MR. WALLACE: And we do review that fee every year during
budget time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it -- do we really need two
positions for the -- this part of the division?
MR. WALLACE: The ordinance requires one position as the
executive director of the authority. That's another one of my jobs.
And I have -- I have an administrative assistant that does other duties
within the department of operations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your salary, your full salary's
not covered by it, okay.
MR. SCHMITT: No. Mr. Wallace's salary is covered by several
different funds, one of which is that, along with his administrative
assistant. She also does all the HR work, and so 113 fund covers that.
Frankly, position -- Mr. Wallace cut two positions because of this
reduction as he noted, and we have one individual that pretty much
handles this and also is dealing with franchise issues as well.
In fact, Mr. Doug Essman probably -- certainly probably paid his
way in regards to the dealing with -- negotiating with the cable --
recent cable issue in regards to the 12 fibers that we were given.
So to answer your question, it's a joint funding for his position.
But in sum, it is two, two equivalent FTE funding positions for those
two functions, or for those functions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
MR. WALLACE: There's only one other item that I want to
bring to the board's attention, and that is the franchise administration
that does oversee the cable, that's a -- one FTE position, Mr. Doug
Essman. And I just wanted the board to be cognizant of the fact that
that does generate the largest non-property tax revenue source in
MSTD fund 111. It's projected at $3 million next year, and it's not
restricted in any way. That's why it just goes into -- it goes into the
Page 149
June 29, 2004
111 general fund.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That was interesting.
MR. WALLACE: If there's not any questions, I'll turn it over to
Tom Kuck.
MR. KUCK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Tom Kuck,
engineering director.
The engineering department is comprised of 24 full-time
employees. About half of those do the technic -- about half of those
are the engineers that do the technical review and approval of the
plans for all subdivisions, site development plans, and the site
improvement plans and do the utility conveyance.
We more or less follow what Susan went over. You know, she's
more in the planning stage, and then as the projects progress on and
they submit the plans, we do the technical reviews.
The other half my staff does the inspections in the field to make
sure we're getting quality results. And we also do well inspections
with that and inspections for blasting permits and excavation.
Weare asking for an additional full-time employee as an
expanded position, and that's for -- to be a field engineer. Over the
last year, we've encountered being very short-handed and -- on the
inspections of utilities primarily, so we're asking for an expanded
position, and that's a total cost $93,000 -- excuse me, and that includes
23- or $24,000 for a vehicle.
That pretty much covers it, and I'd be happy to answer any
questions you may have.
MR. SCHMITT: If I could note, that is a fee funded position
agaIn.
MR. KUCK: Yes.
MR. SCHMITT: That's part of the 131 fees of the land use and
review and permitting fees. Net cost.
MR. KUCK: Our projected revenues this year far exceed our
expenses, even with the expanded position. We're doing real well.
Page 150
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions, Commissioners?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, that concludes our briefing, if
you have any questions. I briefly highlighted the two capital projects.
The one being, of course, I've already addressed, was the Hanson
software project, and the other, which is being carried on your page 26
-- CDES-67, which is the Conservation Collier, 66 and 67, and Bill
covered those.
So subject to your questions, that concludes the briefing from
Community Development and Environmental Services.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- on page 7, you have the
reimbursement increase from 267 to 682.
MR. MUDD: Reimbursement on CDES-7, Joe, for the '03/'04
adopted budget was $267,000, your '03/'04 forecast is $2.6 million,
and then your '04/'05 current goes to $682,000. It says 155 percent
Increase.
MR. SCHMITT: No. That's under Denny's. That's under
financial management and housing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Reimbursements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just reimbursements it said.
MR. SCHMITT: Is that the 131 fees coming in?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just below it.
MR. SCHMITT: I know part of that is the fees that come in and
that pay for some of the work in financial management and housing.
The other reimbursements --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Maybe we can answer that at
the final --
MR. MUDD: That's a good question, Commissioner, and I will
get an answer for you before close of business.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I also want to fund the two extra
Page 151
June 29, 2004
positions for the proposed ordinance changes in code enforcement.
Do we need a motion?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we need a motion on that?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I need to get -- if you're -- if you're telling
me to add the code enforcement housing inspection initiative, two
bodies, then I need to at least get three nods to go do that. You don't
necessarily need a motion. I just need -- I have a --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. MUDD: I have Commissioner Henning saying yes, I have
Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Halas saying yes.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I nod my head.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You just said about 10 minutes ago
that you didn't need to make this decision now . You wanted to wait
till September.
MR. MUDD: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We need the guidance--
MR. MUDD: You want to add the two bodies, you add the two
bodies, and it will be conditional to your approval of the program in
September when you get the ordinance, sir.
MS. FILSON: He's talking, but we can't hear him.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hmm?
MS. FILSON: He's talking, but we can't hear him.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, that's good.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So--
MR. MUDD: I just put down as a conditional approval.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: No further questions for Mr. Schmitt?
Then he'll be followed by Mr. DeLony, public utilities
administration.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, I can answer that question on
Page 152
June 29, 2004
the fees, rather than belabor it. On CDES page 13, the numbers track
682,000. That's impact fee administration.
Mr. Baker, is that it? We'll get back to you on that. We'll check
it, because it's money that comes back in the paper for services that are
coming from other sources.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: We'll get back to you.
EllBLIC.l.II.ILS
MR. DeLONY: Well, good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, I'm Jim DeLony, public utilities administrator.
I'd like to overview a few things with you before we start, and
then each of these fine directors here to my left will provide their
overviews of their department budgets.
The mission of the public utilities division is to provide efficient,
responsive, reliable high-quality utility services that always exceed
expectations, and we approached that mission with four priorities.
First of all, we need to stay in compliance with all rules and
regulations associated with protecting public health.
Secondly, we need to meet the demand of our customers with
regard to quality and flow demands, and we need to meet that demand
with reliability.
Thirdly, we've got to stay customer-service oriented. We'll speak
to some of that today in terms of what we've asked you to do in
looking at some of our expanded and UFR positions.
Finally, we want to look at -- to be consistently providing the
highest value to both our customers in term of what we do and the
team that we bring to the job to do the job.
The division consists of seven departments. In front of you,
again, is all the directors; administration, financial operations,
water/wastewater, solid waste pollution control, and engineering.
Page 153
June 29, 2004
Engineering department's responsibilities also include county's
coastal and special project management activities.
The public utilities division operating budget, which is found on
page PU-l of your book, is $291.6 million. This budget was prepared
using a bottom to top needs-based approach integrating our division
goals, objectives, work plans, and the county manager's budget
guidelines.
It involves the management of 14 fund types, consisting of more
than 50 cost centers and over 400 object codes, all of which are
funded by enterprise user service charges and impact fees, with the
exception of the general revenue funding for pollution control and
prevention operations, and the tourist development tax funding for
coastal projects.
We've reviewed our budget and worked practice to continually
challenge our work flow and processes so we may optimize our
customer service and deliver our proj ects to what we call the proj ect
management business process environment.
We recognize the need to maintain a constant focus of
commodity delivery, commodity reliability, and the need to evaluate
the remodernization, replacement, and renewal of facilities
infrastructure.
This requires us to be right sized in our staffing levels to achieve
our optimum in compliance and the services that we provide;
therefore, we are focused on hiring and retaining the personnel that are
best of the market in their skills and their values. This effort is
fortified by the recognition within this year's budget process of
evaluating training resource needed to ensure we have at this -- this
right with regard to our staff.
If you will please turn to the public utility division summary
found on page PU -1, you'll see that the total operating expenditures
for all the departments in the division decreased by 1.3 percent, which
includes all requested expanded positions. This is comparing the
Page 154
June 29, 2004
budget year of last year to this year and is well within the county
manager's budget guidelines for FY-'05.
Again, I have all of my directors here with you today. They're
prepared to address each of their individual department budgets. They
will highlight their budgets with regard to their expanded service
requests, and are prepared to talk to any unfunded requests that you
may have questions about.
I want to assure you that we've looked very hard at this year at
several highlighted areas within the utilities business. Our energy use,
our chemical use, our vehicle optimization, our training needs, the
monitoring of sick time and overtime and compensatory time, and the
appropriate level of information technology costs, and they're ready,
prepared to talk to those today.
So if there's not any questions for me, I'd like to move this
directly on to Mr. Wides, who will talk to financial operations within
the department, or rather the division.
Tom?
MR. WIDES: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the record,
Tom Wides, operations director for public utilities.
In addressing the operations department, our FY-'05 budget in
our mission is to provide a sound fiscal assessment and guidance to
the public utilities operations and capital expenditures programs
pursuant to the development of impact and user fee studies,
administration of vendor payments, and payment of general overhead
costs associated with efficient, reliable, and compliant operations of
the Collier County Water/Sewer District.
This mission includes working with the county finance
committee to provide external financing to support the division's
growth program.
We have approximately 49 team members in our department that
have a customer-oriented responsibility for meter reading, billing,
mandatory trash -- and mandatory trash collection. It is aligned with
Page 155
June 29, 2004
the mission of the division and the county.
This afternoon I'll share the discussion of our department with
John Y onkowski, the director of utility billing and customer service, a
significant component in his area within the operations department.
Let me ask you to turn to page PU -8 just for a moment. The
proposed budget for FY-'05 is $9.7 million, and that's for the total
appropriations. This represents a 14 percent increase over FY-'04
adopted budget; however, this budget does cover the intent of the
county manager's budget guidance with the exception of the expanded
requests.
And to speak to those for a moment -- there's approximately
$565,000 worth of expanded requests. Five hundred thousand dollars
of that amount is to move to an inventory program to stock automatic
meter read parts for our various meters. And John will talk to that in a
little more detail why that makes sense from a good business
perspective.
He's also asking for one additional FTE for the code enforcement
responsibilities and will discuss that further with you also, and that
revolves heavily around a litter program that we'd like to implement.
The one last thing I'd like to note as you look at that $9.7 million
budget, approximately 46 percent of the increase is for IT -- IT direct
line support. There's a 16 percent increase, or almost 400,000, for
payments in lieu of property taxes to the general fund, and our indirect
cost reimbursements of$I.78 million in FY-'05, and the payment in
lieu of taxes in itself, almost $3 million, represent about 47 percent of
our budget alone. Very, very fixed type costs that we need to incur.
If there are any other questions, I'd like to respond to those, or I'll
turn the mike over to Mr. Y onkowski.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Might as well turn that mike over.
MR. YONKOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is John Y onkowski, the utility billing and customer service
director, and I'm going to present the utility billing and customer
Page 156
June 29, 2004
service budget to you this afternoon.
The department's mission is on the top of page PU-7 of your
budget book, but I would like to direct your attention to page PU - 7 in
your budget book. That's the -- right about in the middle of the page is
subtotal billing and assessments.
The proposed FY-2005 budget is $3,526,100. Both the operating
and capital outlay sections of that budget are less than the budget for
last year. It's less than the budget of last year partly because of the
efficient use that we have made of our tools, new electronic
capabilities.
The utility billing customer service has a staff of 41 full-time
employees. We are totally funded by user fees, interdepartmental
payments, and charges for services to fund the department.
I would like to turn your attention to page PU - 7 where those
three expanded services requests are. They are an inventory program
that I'll talk to you about in just a minute for the automatic regular
read meters, a second request is for a code enforcement vehicle that's
no longer used.
The division has gone through a vehicle optimization program
just recently after this book was put together, and Mr. Anderson has
graciously agreed to give one of his vehicles up to us. So that item is
no longer needed.
And the third item is a litter program that I'd like to talk to you
about at length, if I can.
The inventory request is a request for $500,000 to fund parts.
Currently what we do is when a piece of the meter -- and this is it, the
electronic read meter. This is the base, the ERT (phonetic), and the
antenna. We buy them as a unit.
When a part of it goes haywire or becomes dysfunctional, we
take it apart, and this brass part at the bottom very rarely goes bad, but
the other parts, the electronic apparatus, goes bad.
So what we're asking you to do is to fund -- and this will be the
Page 157
June 29, 2004
first year -- is to fund an inventory. And the reason that it's set at
$500,000, that covers the entire year. We did not plan to ever have
$500,000 in cash in inventory sitting there. We're going to use an
accounting tool, that's an economic order quantity theory, so that we
know we will have parts at different processes in its delivery line to
us. We will never have $500,000 worth of parts sitting there at one
time.
But what we anticipate for the entire year, we're going to need
$500,000. We do not want to come back to you in the middle of the
year because we asked for $250,000, for an increase to fund the
additional parts that we need for the rest of the year. So we're asking
for the entire amount up front.
This process is needed, and over a period of time it will save
dollars, because the base doesn't go bad. We will reuse the bases and
only order what we need of them as they go -- as we perform the
process.
As I said before, the second re -- or second request, expanded
request, is for a vehicle we don't need.
But the third request is for a litter program. And all of you
commissioners know how many calls you get about litter. It's on the
road, it's at different places throughout the county.
We have tried several different processes to control and monitor
litter and make sure that it gets disposed of correctly. You have an
Adopt-a-Road program. The road -- Transportation Department helps
when they can, but their time and resources is limited.
What we're looking for is for you to fund an exploratory program
where we will hire a couple of entities that will only get paid on a
service delivery basis, that when there is an instance where there's a
huge pile of trash or litter out someplace, we can call those people up,
and they will pick it up and carry it to the landfill.
If we can identify whoever the person is that put the trash there,
then we will charge them for it, fine them for it, and we will get that
Page 158
June 29, 2004
portion of it replaced. But this is an exploratory program that we
think will be very beneficial for the litter that is -- that you see and
hear about in some parts of the county.
Lastly, I have an unfunded request, and I -- in the discussion that
has been going on, we have four people that are qualified to do code
enforcement areas for the -- the public utilities division, and we
specialize in the code enforcement for the three enterprise activities,
the water, wastewater, and the solid waste.
Solid waste covers the entire county. Water and wastewater only
covers the district boundaries, except for the new program that you
added last year, which is the water restrictions ordinance, and that
covers practically the entire unincorporated area of the county, and the
solid waste area actually covers the City of Marco Island, too, because
we provide the trash services for the City of Marco Island.
The county has continued to experience growth. We have 2,000
new water accounts that come onboard every year, 3,000 new
wastewater accounts, and we have over 4,500 new trash accounts that
come onboard every year.
And the distance that these code enforcement officers have to
travel is quite a ways, some of them 30 miles at least one way. We
would like to maintain the level of service that we currently provide,
and we do feel that we need an additional individual that's trained in
those areas to help maintain the same quality and level of service that
we currently have, so we'd ask that you support this.
And that's basically all that I have. I'm going to turn it over next
to Mr. Roy Anderson.
MR. DeLONY: John, if there's any questions for you.
MR. YONKOWSKI: If there's any questions, Commissioners, I
could answer those now.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. In regards to the litter
cleanup program, I believe there's rules and regulations now that we
have here in Collier County. And what type of funding do we get
Page 159
June 29, 2004
from assessing fines? Do those fines go to you or do they -- where do
they go at the present time? Or aren't there any enforcement of litter?
MR. YONKOWSKI: Yes, sir. We -- this year we're taking in a
little bit over $6,000 in revenues for litter fines alone.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And do you have people on the
road presently that check this for litter and catching people throwing
stuff out of their vehicles and everything else?
MR. YONKOWSKI: Well, not throwing things out of their
vehicles, Commissioner. But, for example, if someone out in the
Estates -- all of a sudden a big pile of litter will appear at some
intersection. Quite often contractors will do this. Instead of taking the
leavings from a construction job that they have on the back of their
truck and going to the landfill and paying the tipping fee for it, they'll
find an isolated spot in one of the roads in the Estates, and that's where
it goes.
And then somebody's got to pick that up, and that's either your --
our group, your road transportation group -- and that -- basically
there's nobody else to pick it up, and then that has to go into the
landfill, we lose the tipping fees at the landfill for it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other thing is what -- do you
have anything -- any control over litter along the highways?
MR. YONKOWSKI: Well, the Adopt-a- Road program and the
sheriffs office has their weekend assignment for people who will go
out and clean up right-of-way along the road, and the Adopt-a-Road
program, which I think is very effective. There's quite a bit of that
that's cleaned up. This program is geared more directly to those big
piles of litter and construction debris that ends up at the --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if we -- and if you take a look at
the amendment -- if I may, interrupt. Jim Mudd, for the record.
If you take a look at the contracts that we have with Waste
Management right now, if we find a truck where litter comes off that
truck and we can I.D.'d the bumper number, we basically get them to
Page 160
June 29, 2004
go pick it up. If they have a certain number of occurrences within a
day or three-day period of time, we find them -- fine them as part of
their contract to make sure that they're -- they're doing what they need
to do to make sure the trash stays on the trucks on their ways to the
landfill.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm not so much concerned
about the truck -- litter coming off the trucks, let's say, from Waste
Management. I'm concerned about litter that's coming out of people's
vehicles, the citizens of our county that sometimes are -- who are
reluctant of taking the trash home and disposing of it in a nice manner.
And a lot of times they'll roll the window down and throw it out the
window.
So I was wondering if -- because we have laws to that, and let's
say that there's a citation given by the sheriff, who gets those funds?
Does it go back to you or does it --
MR. DeLONY: Not -- for the record, Jim DeLony. Sir, there's
two prongs of -- two prongs of effort going toward litter problems.
And what this is set up to do is provide us a tool we don't currently
have.
I get a call from -- and it's too bad Mr. Coletta's not on the
telephone, because usually it's in his district we'll get the call. And on
the comer of X and Y street in the Estates out there where nobody's
watching, someone's dumped something off, and we need to re -- we
need to rectify that, and we don't really have a means or method to do
that currently.
You know, I can do it on a one-time basis, but I don't have the
authorization from the board on how to handle that directly. I don't
have a contractor onboard to do it. We're seeing more and more of
this now as we're beginning to move into the Estates, and there's an
expectation that the county will fix this problem on demand of the
citizens that are affected by people doing illegal dumping.
Now, when we go out there to pick it up, if we can go through it
Page 161
June 29, 2004
-- and we will send one of our code enforcement people with the
contractor to pick it up, and I find someone's address or name to
somehow tie that back, we will do the investigation and take the
appropriate action. That absent, we still need to remove that irritant
from the county.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand.
MR. DeLONY: And that's what this is set up to do. It's not set
up to do roadside police. I'd defer that to Mr. Norm Feder and his
folks who do a wonderful job in my view for some of the challenges
that we present in terms of road maintenance here in this county. But
this program is secular or singular toward that instance that I
described. And I don't have any way of doing it right now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. DeLony?
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I am on the line.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Obviously you can't hear me
every time I speak. And I am listening very carefully to what you say,
and I have to tell you the truth. Your code enforcement as far as the
litter goes has been doing a fairly good job. They've been on top of it.
whenever they got a citizen's complaint. They haven't been able to
resolve every situation in an expedient manner for the simple reason,
it's not an easy one to enforce and bring solutions to. But for the most
part, I think people are very impressed with what the inspectors are
doing out there.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you, sir. The key of it is, this gets those
mattresses off the road and out of those lots on a demand basis. That's
what we're trying to accomplish.
Answer your question, sir?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, you did.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
Page 162
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: Okay. I'm Roy Anderson, engineering
director for utilities.
The mission of my department is to provide the Collier County
Public Utilities customers with effective, efficient, responsible,
reliable, and high-quality utility services that exceed customers'
expectations, as stated in our mission statement on page PU-11.
The county manager's fiscal year '05 budget has depicted in detail
on page PU -12 -- is depicted in detail on page PU -12 for the PUED
department.
The total FY-'05 budget, as you can see, is 3.8 percent over the
adopted '04 budget. This budget will provide us with the ability to be
responsive to the water, wastewater, and solid waste operating
departments and will allow us to begin to tackle the capital projects
backlog.
During the past year our focus has been to meet compliance and
to meet demand. We're pleased to report that we have met all consent
order requirements, most notably bringing the south wastewater plant
online. In fact, Dr. Amanti of the FDEP in his visit to Collier County
last month noted with satisfaction are accomplishments.
On May 25th, 2004, you also approved the 2003 master plan
updates for water and wastewater which describe all the compliance
and demand proje -- demand projects necessary for the next 20 years.
In terms of departmental operations, our direction has been to
move from the reactive to the proactive as evidenced by the following
examples: Monthly we meet with the transportation -- our brothers at
the transportation division to discuss planning and engineering
projects; we have regular contact with the real properties department
to address reliability and new wellfie1d projects and our various
pipeline easements required; we cooperate very closely with Joe
Schmitt and the CDES for timely utilities input for private
development projects; and we have a monthly project review board
Page 163
June 29, 2004
which discusses emerging proj ect issues and provides awareness to the
team members in all departments of all project issues.
Pro activity is also manifest in availing ourselves to obtain
opportunities to obtain grants from the Big Cypress Basin, South
Florida Water Management District, to obtain funding, and also to
obtain funding through the SFR loans through the FDEP.
In order for the department to totally fulfill our goals to the
board, it is necessary to add two additional FTEs as noted on page
PU -13. Currently our proj ect managers have an average workload of
18 projects per person. The project needs include a current project
workload amounting to $250 million to expend. Over the next five
years an average of $90 million per year is being programmed into
additional projects in the master plans.
These two positions are required to meet the board's goals of
meeting compliance, meeting demands, taking care of our customers,
and building our proj ect team for the future. Two additional FTEs are,
therefore, required to address these overall needs.
I'd be happy to answer any questions. If there are none, then I --
MR. DeLONY: Roy, you have a couple UFRs? You have two
additional UFRs. Two expanded and two UFRs; is that correct?
MR. ANDERSON: Oh, that's correct.
MR. DeLONY: Okay. So there's two additional that are in the
expanded requests this year to meet our proj ectized (phonetic)
requirements with regard to project management, and two in the
unfunded category that are in the same category -- that meets the same
category need for the department.
Commissioners?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. No questions. Looks like we can
move on. Oh, uh-oh.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is your anticipated rate of
expansion through the next fiscal year in regards to customers coming
online?
Page 164
June 29, 2004
MR. DeLONY: John, would you give those numbers, again,
please, for the commissioner.
MR. YONKOWSKI: Yes, sir. Commissioner, there will-- we
anticipate that there will be 2,000 new water customers, 3,000 new
wastewater customers, and 4,500 new solid waste customers.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. YONKOWSKI: Yes, sir.
MR. DeLONY: Paul?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Paul Mattausch, director of the water department.
I'd like to refer you to page PU-14, probably the largest budget
that's -- actually it's a single-page budget that I'm going to ask you to
look at briefly.
It's the operations center budget. The operations center is located
in the industrial park east of Airport Road between Progress and
Mercantile Avenues and was purchased under board direction on June
24th, 2003, to provide a consolidated location for the operation of
utility billing and customer service, for water distribution, and locates
operation of the public utilities division. It's a new cost center and
appears in the budget for the first time this year.
The FY -'05 budget request is in the amount of $95,300 and
includes expenditures for electricity, trash collection, water and sewer
service from the City of Naples, expenses related to the upkeep and
maintenance of the building, and for operating supplies.
Because this is a brand new facility for us, these expenditures are
estimates based on our experience with facilities of similar size and
type. There are offsetting reductions in both the water distribution
portion of the budget and in the budget for utility billing and customer
services for costs such as electricity and rent.
If you have any questions related to the operations center,
operating budget, I'd be glad to answer them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No questions.
Page 165
June 29, 2004
MR. MATT AUSCH: If not, I'd like to proceed directly to the
water department budget. That is found on page PU -15.
You know very well what the water department does and what
our challenges are. In fact, for the last 25 weeks, you've received a
weekly report from us giving you exactly what is happening on a
weekly basis with the water department.
You've been in our facilities, and you are very intimately familiar
and involved in the water department more than any previous board,
and I appreciate that, and I want to thank each of you personally for
that involvement in the water department.
And given that, I'd like to take you directly to page PU-19 and
talk about my two expanded requests and one UFR.
The two expanded requests. The first is a request for two
additional vehicles for use in the water department section in the
amount of $60,600. The addition of these two vehicles is consistent
with the vehicle optimization study, a comprehensive study that was
completed this year by the water department, and that is also in
compliance with fleet management recommendations for those
vehicles.
The two vehicles will aid and optimize in staff resources in the
expanded well fields in our expanded service area.
The second expanded request is for a portable generator for use
in the wellfie1ds in the amount of $60,000.
There are currently 10 wells in the -- in the wellfie1d that do not
have on-site generator capabilities, and the purchase of this generator
will improve our well field reliability in the event of extended power
failures.
The UFR that I have before you is the request for one additional
FTE. This position is for a new instrumentation electrical technician
for the South County Regional Water Treatment Plant. The total cost
for the additional FTE, including wages, benefits, and operating
expenses, is $86,000.
Page 166
June 29, 2004
The water department is an enterprise fund business that doesn't
receive support from ad valorem taxes. It is a high growth rate
business that has a need to maintain the current level of service
standards. In order to do that cost effectively, we need to rely on
technology. This position solely is in support of that additional
technology that we're using to be as cost effective as we can be.
The choice comes down to the addition of one in-house
technician or adding -- adding additional funds in this budget for
contractual services. We have to do one or the other, one way or the
other. We have to do it -- either we have to do it in-house or we have
to do it contractually.
The $86,000 first year cost of the in-house technician provides
services equivalent to in excess of$150,000 of work contractually. In
other words, this is a two-for-one cost benefit ratio.
We've clearly demonstrated in the past couple years this
substantial cost savings in both the North County Water Regional
Plant and in the water distribution section by using in-house
technicians versus contractual services, not to mention faster response
times and ownership of the finished work product.
And this position for us is critical to staying in compliance and
meeting the demand for water for our customers.
And I'd be glad to take any questions that you have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think you pretty much answered it
when you were saying that the best cost benefit is in-house versus
going out and contracting these. Maybe you can elaborate a little bit
more. Why would it be more cost effective to have it in-house? Do
we have to pay --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we just put it in the
budget?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Absolutely. Our contractual services cost
us $80 an hour on regular time, and on nights and weekends, that cost
Page 167
June 29, 2004
to us is $120 per hour. We can do that much more cost effectively
in-house.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Even paying wages and benefits
and everything else, we're still ahead of the game?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Absolutely. The cost benefit ratio is
$86,000 first year cost, and compared to about $150,000 worth of
contractual services work, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That surprises me. Okay,
thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's just put it in the budget.
It's a no-brainer. It's going to save the customers money. Do we have
enough direction for that?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I agree. Okay.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Thank you, Commissioners.
I'd like to turn this over now to Joe Cheatham, director of the
wastewater department.
Joe.
MR. CHEATHAM: Thank you, Paul.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, my name is
Joseph Cheatham, wastewater director.
You also are fully aware of the wastewater department, and
you've toured our facilities many times. And we appreciate -- the
team members of the wastewater department appreciate your
continued support as we have expanded our facilities, as we continue
to meet the demand of our customers for reclaimed water, as we've
had a continued improved customer relationship with our customers,
and we always continue to strive to build our team.
The wastewater department has been organized around proactive
compliance through evolving use of technology, thereby affording the
department the opportunity to better manage flows and the most
Page 168
June 29, 2004
efficient use of chemicals and energy.
We have also successfully addressed compliance through
preventive maintenance with members of our delivery team within and
with outside (sic) our organization.
The department moves forward with compliance as our number
one priority. We will not go back to the failure mode we had in 2001
when we did not have the resources and the capacity needed to stay in
compliance.
You see the slide on the chart now showing what the north
county plant looked like in 1999. By staying in compliance and
meeting demand, our reliability is a top priority as well.
In the next slide you'll see where we are today with the North
County Reclamation Facility as we have increased capacity to meet
our demand, as well as insuring compliance.
Please redirect your attention to the bottom of page PU-24 where
you'll find the following figures in the summary table: The
department's proposed in the fiscal year 2005 budget includes 124
FTEs and expenditures of$16,341,000. While this represents 6.6 (sic)
increase in total expenditures in fiscal year '04 adopted budget,
operating expenses increased by only 1.6 percent from the fiscal year
adopted '04 budget and is well within the county manager's guidelines
of2.1 percent.
I'd also like to highlight the performance measure on this page
showing the cost per thousand gallons in fiscal year '04 as $2.54, and a
projected cost in 2005 is $2.60. This represents a two percent increase
in cost from fiscal year '04 to fiscal year '05, despite growing by six
percent per year in the amount of flow and over 3,000 new wastewater
connections per year.
The wastewater department's operating budget is consistent with
the 2002/2003 wastewater master plan update as approved by the
Board of County Commissioners.
Now please refer to page PU-25, and you'll see the wastewater
Page 169
June 29, 2004
capital improvement request for this fiscal year. Some of the things
I'd like to highlight is the replacement of a 14-year-01d camera truck
of$210,000. We also have to replace two crew trucks due to high
mileage and maintenance, and a budget crew necessary for safety in
our SCADA program.
All of our vehicle replacements have been approved by fleet
maintenance and are in compliance with fleet management directives.
Other capital improvement items include backup meters for
facility reliability, hydrogen sulfide meters to protect the health and
safety of our wastewater team members, process control equipment
and facility equipment needed for maintenance activities.
Now, if you would, return to page PU-26, and we'll look at the
unfunded requests for the wastewater department. We have pared
down our requests and are only asking for what we need to have --
continue to operate in compliance.
The reclaimed water department has completed installation of
$200,000 of supervised ( sic) for control and debt acquisition
equipment, called SCADA, and we're asking for an additional
$800,000 of fiscal year '05 to complete our SCADA project.
With this we need to add one instrumentation electrical
technician to maintain these capital improvements. A vehicle's also
being requested for this reclaimed water position.
The wastewater department laboratory requests one pretreatment
inspector to focus on compliance and growth of the fats, oil, and
grease, and pretreatment programs where we have over -- greater than
400 customers, six permitted industrial users, which comes to over 12
thousand -- 1,200 inspections conducted annually.
You see on the slide here, this is the stuff we need to keep out of
the wastewater treatment plant to increase --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure looks nasty.
MR. CHEATHAM: -- our compliance record. This program last
year has helped to reduce the fats, oil, and grease inflow by 98
Page 170
June 29, 2004
percent.
We'd looked internally in this department. We were looking at a
vehicle to use in the laboratory. But by looking -- taking a second
look and doing some in-house looking around, we found one in our--
in our department and reduced the need for the expanded vehicle
position, or vehicle use.
In the fiscal year '05, it is expected the USA Environmental
Protection Agency will probably make a federa11aw that will permit
wastewater collections systems similar to wastewater plants, which
mean the collections systems will now be permitted, and we can be
cited and fined for sewer overflows and backups, where in the past
they were not fined for this.
The wastewater collection department is requesting two FTE
maintenance specialists, and what they'll be doing is actually
providing increased maintenance in our system to increase reliability
and also to ensure compliance.
Right now we're cleaning over 40 miles per year of sewer gravity
main, and we need to clean at least 100 miles per year to stay in the
new CMOM federal regulations.
We've performed a cost benefit analysis on this, and the cost
above $28,000 feet of sewer pipe per year is more cost effective for
our team members to perform work instead of contracting this work
out.
And the last position we're asking for, we're looking at -- South
County Water Reclamation Facility is requesting one instrumentation
electrical technician to maintain capital improvements of over $3.5
million in instrumentation and electrical improvements and ensure
compliance.
If you look at the slide here, you can see the south county
expansion is almost double in capacity, and we're only adding one
position at this facility. We've looked internally, and the more that we
automate, the less operational staff is required.
Page 171
June 29, 2004
Wastewater department has a total of $291,400 of expanded
requests for the fiscal year '05. The requests for these positions have
been made after careful cost benefit analysis and evaluating other
alternatives for the required level of service.
In closing, I'd like to say I am committed to ensure Collier
County's wastewater department is the best in the market and the best
in the nation at minimal cost.
Are there any questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Two of the anticipated
positions, inspectors that you're going to need, is basically driven by
federal regulation; is that correct?
MR. CHEATHAM: The maintenance inspections in the
wastewater collections department is driven by federal regulations to
ensure compliance with wastewater collection rules to minimize sewer
backups and sewer overflows.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So that's -- basically that's a
given. We have no other option on that one?
MR. CHEATHAM: Yes, sir. That's a must.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions?
MR. MUDD: Do I see -- do I see three nods for -- and I'm on
page 18 -- and it's the two maintenance specialists under wastewater?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MR. DeLONY: Tom?
MR. CHEATHAM: I'd like to turn that over to Tom Wides.
MR. WIDES: Commissioners, again, Tom Wides, for the record.
On the -- if I can take you to page PU-27 for a moment to discuss the
debt service relationship in the public utilities water/sewer district of
Collier County.
First off, as you're -- as you're well aware, the sources of revenue,
the primary sources of revenue for water/sewer district are user fees
Page 1 72
June 29, 2004
and impact fees. There are no ad valorem revenues supporting this
business segment.
Reviewing the debt service for a moment, please note
approximately in the middle of the page that appropriations for FY -'05
are approximately 141.4 million, a 3.2 percent decrease from FY-'04.
The debt service on this existing -- on these existing capital
projects and the anticipated external financing is anticipated to be
about $18.7 million for next year, for FY-'04. That's the debt service
component.
Today there's approximately $135 million of existing debt in the
water/sewer district that we are, in fact, paying down at this point in
time, thus the financing for the debt service.
The anticipated new debt will come from a combination of the
existing commercial paper loan that you approved approximately a
little over a year ago of about $70 million, and we will continue to use
state revolving fund loans, which we've talked about on a couple of
occasions. Very low interest rate loans in the neighborhood of
approximately three percent.
And also we do anticipate, with the large capital expenditure
program, that we'll have approximately $113 million of additional
debt due -- coming through the bond financing, the mechanisms that
we'll work with the financing committee on.
So in total, we expect approximately $223 million of new debt in
FY -'05 that we'll be starting to incur the debt service on as we move
forward.
That essentially is -- discusses the topic on the debt service for
the water/sewer district.
Are there any questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No questions.
MR. WIDES: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: Paul?
MR. MATTAUSCH: For the record, again, Paul Mattausch,
Page 173
June 29, 2004
water department director.
If you would turn to page PU-28 briefly, I'll walk you through the
Good1and water district fund 441. Good1and water district budget
provides for a clean, reliable, and safe source of drinking water for
approximately 500 service connections in the Good1and water district.
The budget provides for the operation, maintenance, and capital
improvements of the facilities of the Good1and water district.
The significant increases in the budget this year are for
engineering and critical capital improvements necessary to maintain
the current level of service for the customers of the Good1and water
district.
A very small portion of the increase is for actual operation of the
facility accounting for increases in electrical costs, chemical costs, and
the purchase of bulk water from the City of Marco Island.
It should be noted that this budget does not include any overhead.
It only includes actual operating and maintenance costs and line level
staffing to accomplish only those tasks as required and necessary to
maintain minimum operations.
And I would be glad to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Didn't we have some reliability
problems last year? And how have they been addressed? We were --
had a lot of maintenance, I think, on the pump system there in
Good1and.
MR. MATT AUSCH: Yes. And part of this budget is a
continuation of that. We have found that there were some operational
difficulties in being able to complete that. But that -- that project is
underway.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: And those revenues have been rolled forward
into this budget, sir.
MR. MATTAUSCH: That's correct.
Page 174
June 29, 2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if I may?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Yes, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, thank you. I just -- now
this is where we buy the water from Marco Island?
MR. MATT AUSCH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then pipe it over to
Good1and and service the customers. Is there any possibility that
eventually they can become part of Marco Island utilities?
MR. DeLONY: Paul, I'll take that.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Mr. DeLony.
MR. DeLONY: Yeah. For the record, Commissioner, Jim
DeLony, public utilities administrator.
Yes, sir, there is a possibility. Mr. Moss and I spoke recently
about just that matter, and we'll be bringing some -- back some
proposals to that effect sometime between now and October of this
year, and talk about the pluses and minuses of doing that.
I don't want to use the word swap, but there's a potential that in
the case of the Marco Shores area, which you know is that area off
island on 951 currently serviced by the Marco Utilities. He's
interested in possibly us taking that over because of the proximity to
our services, our reaches service, much like you're considering looking
at Good1and from their view, sir.
Did I answer your question?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, you did. Thank you.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: If you're considering doing that, wouldn't
we then also expand to the Isles of Capri?
MR. DeLONY: We -- no, we're in there right now, with the
water right now.
Page 175
June 29, 2004
MR. MATTAUSCH: That is part of our current water--
MR. DeLONY: And that's currently in our water system, but--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But not the --
MR. DeLONY: -- not in our wastewater system.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
MR. DeLONY: Right. And that would be something, I think,
we will take a look at and see if there's something there.
Up to now, we've only had preliminary discussions. There's a
long way to go in terms of who pays and how they pay and how you
value assets and so on. This will be the journey, but we are certainly
looking at that to see if we can find a best value alternative that we,
we, could offer to you as well as Mr. Moss could offer his -- his
commissioners, or his councilmen, rather.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know Isles of Capri would be very
interested, I think, to work with us. They -- they would love to come
onboard, I believe.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am. And the bottom line of it is, we're
going to look for the best alternative for both service areas, that being
the Marco service area and our service area, to see if we can find the
best fit for our customers.
And if everything stays the way it is right now, I'm actually
going to bring back to you in July a proposal to hire a rate consultant
to take a look at just what we've been talking about here.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. DeLONY: Did I answer your question, ma'am?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir, you did.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
Mr. Yi1maz?
Thank you, Mr. Mattausch.
MR. YILMAZ: Thank you, Jim.
Good afternoon, Commissioners.
For the record, George Yi1maz, public utilities solid waste
Page 176
June 29, 2004
management department director.
In addressing the fiscal year '05 budget for my department, please
turn to pages PU-32 through 41, and the mission of our department is
stated on page PU-32.
The key programs to achieve our stated mission are
environmental compliance and liability, customer focus, recycling
centers, and landfill operations, which we have over 70- to 90,000
customers go through on an annual basis, waste reduction and
recycling programs, and hazardous waste management and disposal
program.
The department has a total proposed budget of $32.2 million.
This proposed budget represents a less than 2.1 percent increase,
therefore, in compliance with the county manager's policy.
Our proposed budget is designed to accomplish the following:
Continue to fulfill requirements of A UIR, annual inventory utilization
report, continue to stay in compliance through prudent environmental
risk management processes and activities, meet the demand in our
collection, processing, recycling, and disposal infrastructure, provide
outstanding customer service, and integrated strategic planning for the
future, ready for execution to do all of the while for the next 20 to 30
years.
Turning to page PU-36 for solid waste landfill closure fund. The
driver of the 6.3 percent increase is due to interest earnings in this
fund. This is a closure fund for the current and future closed landfill
cells that the county's responsible for managing risk.
Now, if you might, please turn to page PU-38. Solid waste grant
funds is pretty much outlined here. This budget is shown for
illustrative purposes only. Weare working closely with the grants
coordinator's office for identifying opportunities as well as execution
and monitoring of these grants. As they become available, board will
seal and approve every individual grant proposal for execution.
If there are no questions now, I'd like to return to John
Page 1 77
June 29, 2004
Y onkowski for budget discussion for our solid waste mandatory trash
collection Fund 473, starting on the page, PU-39.
MR. YONKOWSKI: Good afternoon, again, Commissioners.
John Y onkowski, for the record. If I could direct your attention to
page PU -40 of your budget book, the program budget for the
mandatory trash collection program for this year is $13,594,000. That
is a 10.3 percent or $1.274 million increase over the budget for last
year. But let me point out to you that this is contractual and not
operational increases.
The main drivers are customer growth, which we anticipate 4,500
new customers that will come on this year, and there is a contractually
driven consumer price index increase for the -- both contracts, for the
collection contract and for the management contract at the landfill.
The -- and then at the same time, there's -- growth drives the
amount that we pay to the tax collector and the property appraiser for
their effort in collecting the funds.
And there are no expanded services in this budget, and it's -- as I
said before, it is strictly contractual as opposed to operational driven.
And if there are any questions, I'd be glad to answer them at this
time.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
Commissioner Coletta, any questions?
MR. DUNNUCK: I would like to take you to rate, too,
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: Go ahead, John.
MR. YONKOWSKI: If could take you to --
MR. MUDD: PU-41.
MR. YONKOWSKI: -- page PU-41 of the book, the rates that
we're recommending for next year are $140.34. That represents $5.50,
or 4.12 percent increase over the FY-204 (sic) rate.
The collection fee portion of the increase is $1.97. That's the 2.5
Page 178
June 29, 2004
percent consumer price index.
MR. DeLONY: Speak up, John, please.
MR. YONKOWSKI: The -- it's $1.97 for the collections side,
which is a 2.5 consumer price index increase for the collections
contract. On the disposal side, it's a $3.96 increase. That includes the
2.5 consumer price index to the landfill management contractor and
the tipping fees.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that -- we're still going to
maintain the same level of service, correct?
MR. YONKOWSKI: Yes, sir, we certainly are. As a matter of
fact, even with this increase, we still remain at our relative position of
fifth actually in the state from the lowest side, and we still have the
highest quality and level of service.
The people that are lower than us either have smaller containers,
they do not have the same -- for example, Manatee County is below
us. But up in Collier County, you get unlimited pick-up of white
goods. In Manatee, you get one a year, and their price is lower than
ours.
We have the highest level and quality of service in your
mandatory trash collection program, the best bang for the buck, the
best value in the State of Florida.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Wow.
MS. FILSON: Madam Chairman?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, ma'am.
MS. FILSON: We have a speaker on this issue, or would you
rather wait until public utilities has completed?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No. We might as well address that now.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello, Commissioners, staff, and public.
My name's Bob Krasowski. I'm with Zero Waste Collier County
group. I'm here speaking on their behalf and -- as well as my own
Page 179
June 29, 2004
interest.
I would just as soon have heard the rest of public utilities
presentation because they seem -- public utilities seems to be a matrix
of interconnected offices and maybe my questions would have been
answered, but this is fine.
I'd like to start off by saying I picked up the budget packet that
was left for the public out there, and there's PU -- I guess that means
public utilities. But PU page 4, and then it goes to -- and then
everything's missing until you get to PU page 30. And then -- then it's
-- on the back page ofPU-30, it's PU-42, and then it skips to PU-50.
And so Mr. Yi1maz has detailed comments, and many of the
other comments of Mr. Yonkowski's, areas I'm interested in, the
economics of the solid waste department, are not available for me to
follow along.
So I'd like to request now as a public person that's interested in
this stuff, if I could get a complete copy of this. If you have an extra
one or if I could have one provided to me, even you know, otherwise.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what we put outside was a
summary packet. We didn't print all of this for everybody that was
sitting out there. We tried to give them a summary packet so they
could work the budgets from -- and then work that process. We'll be
glad to get Mr. Krasowski his own copy.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you. I really appreciate that, and I
understand you try to -- not to produce tons of materials that nobody
uses, but a few of these would be nice. But thank you.
I have a couple of questions and maybe points to make in what I
saw at the solid waste summary on PU-30. The -- I can't extract an
understanding of where the consultant fees are.
Now I know since the middle of 200 1 till present day, over a
million and a half dollars has been spent on consultants in the solid
waste department for various projects, and you're familiar with all
these projects. You've approved every penny of it one step at a time.
Page 180
June 29, 2004
And so I'd like to -- my question right now, and I have some
others, if anybody could answer, or I could wait for it at a later date --
where is that indicated? Where is this million and a half dollars?
Where would I find even the most recent consultant fees? Because I
understand it was a project recently given to Red Oak or some other
consultant firm. So where is that shown in here?
Because that's the kind of stuff I'd like to know, because you just
said that -- when one of the gentlemen here pointed out, it's very cost
effective at times to have in-house services as opposed to pay a
consultant to do the work, which is something we've been saying for
years to you, that rather than give this million and a half to Malcom
Pernie for this, you could have hired a team of people to develop our
own understanding, knowledge, and position.
You know, sometimes consultants are appropriate and others not.
I'm curious to know about this. So that point would carry on this. But
where would I find the information about how much has been spent on
consultants in this budget?
Anybody want to answer now, or should I go on?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I think you only have five minutes,
and maybe somebody could get back to you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Well, I'll emai1 that question to Mr.
Mudd, and we can see if that information's available.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. KRASOWSKI: You know, there's been a -- comments
about enterprise accounts or these are all fee-based services that we're
talking about here, or many of them, but that's still taxpayers' money,
you know. And oftentimes there are shifts in -- from -- we say we
have lower taxes, but we're still paying for all these fees instead. So I
have to make that point. We're still using taxpayers' money and have
to scrutinize what it's used for.
The Zero Waste Collier County group -- as my clock ticks down
-- on the solid waste issues, as you -- as you know, we have been
Page 181
June 29, 2004
involved for years on this, and our original interest goes back to '85.
We've been with you since 2000 when the newest evaluation of the
system has -- came up.
And we plan to continue to provide -- the Zero Waste Collier
County group plans to continue to provide leadership and education to
this community, its residents, its businesses, and its government
entities on the solid waste issues and recycling. Now, whether you
follow what we educate you on or not, so -- my time is up.
Thank you for your attention to the comments, and I look
forward to reading the budget once I get it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have any other speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
MR. DeLONY: Madam Chair, we have one last department to
cover in the public utilities.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. DeLONY: Mr. Smith?
MR. SMITH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Ray
Smith. I'm the director of the Pollution Control and Prevention
Department.
The proposed budgets before you -- if you turn to page PU -44
and PU-45. The proposed budget is based on a -- is not based on
enterprise funding like the other departments within the division.
Weare -- our department's budget is based on two referendums
that were approved in 1984 and 1987. The -- from the taxpayers of
Collier County for one -- up to one tenth of a mill of ad valorem taxes.
On top of page PU-44, you will see the department's mission
statements. Weare a customer-driven organization. The bottom line
is, we protect your safety, health, and the welfare of the community in
the sensitive environment from pollution sources.
The programs on the left-hand side of the pages indicate that we
do groundwater monitoring, surface water monitoring, air quality
monitoring, we maintain compliance for storage tanks, petroleum
Page 182
June 29, 2004
storage tanks, hazardous waste, wastewater compliance, and sludge
transportation and disposal.
In addition to that, we respond to pollution releases. Again, we
are customer-driven in the safety, health, welfare of the community,
and the environment as our main concern.
On page PU -46 we are asking for the proposed budget of
approximately $2.5 million to meet the demand of our customers and
to remain in compliance with the ever-changing federal and state rules
and regulations.
We have -- we are asking for no expanded services or expanded
requests. We are remaining millage neutral at .0347, which is
approximately 35 percent of the one-tenth of a mill that the county
taxpayers have approved us to go up to. So we're well under control
regarding our budget expenditures.
Weare asking for an 18.2 percent increase in appropriations, and
that is due primarily to the increase in capital outlay, which deals with
minor -- minor improvements to the building and replacement of
existing equipment and enhanced equipment in that area.
In addition to that are reserves. We have put aside in reserves for
capital outlay as a good business practice funding in the event for --
it's a proactive stance on the eventual future replacement of expensive
laboratory equipment and aging vehicles without causing a millage
rate spike in the future.
If you look further down on page PU-46, you will notice that this
past year we had cut one FTE and had that transferred to the water
department. In addition to that we had two FTEs trans -- transferred to
fund 116, which is a grants fund in the petroleum cleanup.
If you refer to page PU -4 7, this is primarily for illustration
purposes, the petroleum cleanup and restoration grant program that
does not coincide with the county fiscal year. We will be forwarding
-- an executive summary and budget amendment will be prepared for
the board approval once the Florida Department of Environmental
Page 183
June 29, 2004
Protection issues an annual task assignment that identifies the revenue
to conduct the assigned work.
So since this is not consistent with the county's budget year, we
have to wait for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection,
which funds this program, to forward us an annual task assignment,
then we'll come through with a proposed budget amendment before
the board.
Through petroleum storage tank and wastewater treatment and
disposal compliance inspections, hazardous material compliance
assistance, water quality monitoring and pollution complaint
investigation, the Pollution Control and Prevention Department has
and will continue to protect our community and environment from
pollutant releases.
We will also continue to take advantage of other outside revenue
sources when available that are aligned with our mission, and when
appropriate, take advantage of new technology that will help us meet
the increase in demand while staying in compliance with the federal
and state standards.
If there are any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, he's millage neutral, okay? He's a
special assessment that was done way back when. He's coming in
millage neutral within your policy.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions, Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No questions. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. SMITH: Okay. If there's no questions, I would like to turn
this over to Mr. DeLony, public utilities administrator.
MR. DeLONY: Madam Chair, if we can, that concludes our
presentation of the operating budget. We can move now to the capital
budget, if you so direct or so approve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure, please do.
MR. DeLONY: Okay. Roy Anderson's going to present the
Page 184
June 29, 2004
public utilities capital budget for FY -'05, which includes covering all
of our capital projects associated with water, wastewater, solid waste,
and coastal projects.
Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you, Jim.
Coastal projects are predominantly funded with tourist taxes.
The board typically addresses these through the grant application
process. And this year, that culminated at the board meeting on April
13th, 2004.
The proposed capital budget for 2005 for water and wastewater
consists of approximately 60 new projects, about half in water and the
other half in wastewater.
These projects are all as identified in the AUIR and in the master
plans for water and wastewater, which were approved this year by the
board.
The total appropriation for water and wastewater is $73.4 million,
as shown on page PU-50. Ifwe back out $15.7 million for transfers
and reserves, the net FY -'05 water and wastewater budget request is
$57.6 million.
Now, that's a summary of our capital projects.
And if there are no further questions, I'd like to turn it back over
to Jim DeLony, public utilities administrator, to conclude.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Looks like no questions from here.
MR. DeLONY: Ma'am, that -- that concludes our presentation of
both the operating budget for '05 and our capital budget for our public
utilities division, other than your questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm going to tell you, you guys gave a
great, great presentation. Everybody had everything written out and
told us which pages to turn to and where to look. It was really easy to
follow.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, that completes public utilities.
We'll go to debt service, if that will --
Page 185
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think we first need to -- look at the sigh
of relief. We need to give our court reporter 10 minutes.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. WEIGEL: Madam Chairman, just to let you know that
you'll need a physical quorum in a room, notwithstanding
Commissioner Coletta, to have a quorum to commence the meeting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I think they're going back to rouse
them up.
Thank you, David.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
DEBI_SERYICFS
MR. MUDD: Next item is debt service. It will be -- will be
presented by Mr. Smykowski, and he's on DS-l. It's behind the debt
service tab.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Good evening. For the record, Michael
Smykowski. On DS-l is a debt service summary which represents the
principal and interest payments on outstanding general government
debt issued by the county. Overall a debt appropriations decrease, 12
percent.
You've paid off one of the issues, the special obligation revenue
bond fund 290 that had an adopted '04 budget of $1.9 million. Also
you have some major decreases in the Naples Park drainage at Pine
Ridge and Naples Industrial Park debt service as you're making
prepayments -- principal reduction payments due to prepayments
received from people paying off their special assessment loans in
advance.
I guess the only other thing of note, obviously this reflects some
recent board decisions to purchase the Arthrax building and the CD
Page 186
June 29, 2004
Plus, the Hanson replacement that Joe Schmitt talked about, as well as
the purchase of the Fleischmann property, and that -- that is reflected
in the large increase of 137 percent in the commercial paper loan debt
service repayment due principally to those three new -- three new loan
agreements.
Obviously this isn't a discretionary item for the board. It is --
represents outstanding debt that the board has previously agreed to,
and you've got bondholders that you're looking to satisfy with our
required payments of principal and interest.
MR. MUDD: Without further questions, that brings us to the
management offices. We've heard Pelican Bay this morning.
County manager's budget came in at 3.4 percent. We're basically
just talking about increases to the salaries and the health care and
things like that in our particular budget. There's nothing exceptional in
that particular item.
Without any further questions -- and that would be on MO-4, is
where those -- that item is laid out.
I will say that Ms. Walsh is over at Domestic Animal Services,
and they are recruiting for the director there, and she'll be coming
back. So that helped a little bit as this year went on as far as a
reduction is concerned.
The -- what would I have on that one? John, you want to do
next?
MR. TORRE: Sure. Commissioners, John Torre, director of
communication and customer relations for the county. In my
proposed budget for FY -'05, we have no expanded service items. I
have one unfunded requirement because it is a vehicle department,
cargo van requested.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What page are you on, John?
Page 187
June 29, 2004
MR. TORRE: I'm sorry. It's MO-14, 15, and 16.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. TORRE: Head count will remain constant, and with the
addition of the county citizen liaison, we are now fully staffed in the
department.
And with that, I could answer any questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Couldn't you get vehicle --
retired vehicle on a fleet?
MR. TORRE: I think there was some discussion about that.
(Commissioner Halas entered the hearing
room. )
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We're going to take a look at that. We've
freed up six vehicles out of the -- Mr. DeLony's request and one out of
transportation, and those need to be reflected in your budget as
subtractions off of those expanded positions, because we scrubbed
those.
We have two vehicles that are coming back from the court side of
the house, and, yeah, one of these vehicles could go. So we've got to
annotate those particular issues. As you approve the budget, we'll
make those annotations. And when we have our public hearing, we'll
annotate that budget and give you updated copies.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're doing good.
MR. WERT: Next would be Jack Wert, tourism director. And
I'm happy to report that tourism is doing extremely well.
And just as a reminder, we're on -- going to be on -- page 10, 11,
and 12 will be the pages related to the various funds that tourism is
involved with, and I'll just remind the board that we do split that fund
between the beaches, and 66 percent of the total tourist tax goes to the
beach renourishment proj ects, 19 percent to the museums, and overall
Page 188
June 29, 2004
15 percent to promotion and tourism -- of tourism and advertising.
The budget for 193 you've actually already heard. That's the
museum budget. 194 is the advertising and administration. That's
where all of the promotion dollars come from, and that is within the
guidelines. And 196 is actually our emergency fund and one that we
have not touched, and that's on MO-12 if you want to look at that.
We have allocated $300,000 from that budget that you approved
just last month so that if we need to use money for emergency
advertising, it's there but does not affect our operating budget in any
way.
I do have one expanded position, that's in the beach fund 195,
and that's converting a part-time position that's actually in the job pool
now, and we would be moving that to full time. That position has--
has become more than full time. We have someone on that all the
time in the administration side of all the beach projects, and as you
know, we have considerable dollars allocated to that.
With that, I'll answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. One question. You have listed here
the Botanical Garden, 372. Is that figure still good?
MR. WERT: It's actually -- no. It will be, I think, 279, I believe
is what was recommended and that's what -- you'll see that contract
coming back the end of July for approval of that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
Any other questions?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, earlier you made reference to -- it
had to do with museums and the percentage of dollars in tourism. And
when you looked at -- you looked at those dollars allocated from the
TDC side of the house, there was a percentage like 28 percent that was
on there as far as increase is concerned.
And the way the ordinance reads, the dollars are allocated on a
percentage for those three. And so if there's a 28 percent increase as
far as revenues are concerned into the museum in that particular case,
Page 189
June 29, 2004
there's a 28 percent increase across the board--
MR. WERT: Across the board.
MR. MUDD: -- because of the increased tourism that we had
this particular season. So I just want to make sure that you understand
that it just wasn't, you know, a bullet in museum. It's -- they get a solid
percentage of those dollars.
So the more Jack Wert is successful in his particular program, the
more money comes into the revenue side of the house for tourism, and
then those percentages are constant and cut off of there so there'll be
more money in everybody's budget for the particular item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay. Looks like no other
questions. Move on.
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, Dan Summers, director of
emergency management, and I would say the Rookie here, but not for
long.
Just a couple of things. Let's try to take these in sequential order.
Let's start with MO-20, which is the emergency management
organization itself. There are no new positions in emergency
management 20. There is some expanded services there, which I'll be
glad to share or have any discussion with you.
The only thing that is -- there are a number of important issues
there, but we've not done any significant disaster exercises, and I'm a
believer that you only manage as well as you plan and prepare and
practice. I have asked for that to be an expanded item.
Our shelter supplies and equipment, we're very deficit. We're
making good progress, however, thanks to some funding you provided
mid-year, but I do want to work hard on providing additional
evacuation shelter supplies.
I'm going to be ready to show you the fruits of those efforts in
about 30 days with 11 disaster response trailers that we'll have ready
for future events.
The emergency management technician is a position that has
Page 190
June 29, 2004
been supported by our office for a number of years. That is ajob bank
to make sure that we can properly use the volunteer agencies in a
disaster.
Very quickly, I'm on page MO-21. There is a request there -- this
is something relatively unique, and that is to put disaster rental
equipment on retainer. As you could imagine, we're at the end of the
line, so to speak, with the need for disaster equipment. FEMA does
not automatically provide these items anymore. They look to the
rental market to do that.
And we would be in a near impossible condition predisaster if we
-- or post disaster if we had to compete with the marketplace for rental
equipment.
I used this for seven years in North Carolina very successfully. I
put generators -- large, large generators, pumps, and other essential
emergency equipment on a retainer, a firm we put out to bid, we put it
on a retainer, and it guarantees delivery of that equipment as a
predisaster event scenario. And that is the best money that I have ever
spent in my career in emergency management.
Once that equipment is used, FEMA pays for the entire
reimbursement, including freight. Now, there's a chance I get it here
and I don't use it and I have to pay a week's worth of rent on it. But
you know what? I had it as opposed to not having it. So that's a new
program that I'd like to explore with you this year, and that's an
insurance policy for emergency management to have the essentials.
The hurricane evacuation restudy. We have talked about this in a
number of hearings in that our office is not comfortable with the
current research and technical information that's provided on
evacuation study, and I want to get down more to the neighborhood or
zone level, if you will, for evacuation recommendations and
discussion. And I think that having a restudy done, how much traffic,
how much cuing time, what type of neighborhoods and locations I'd
like to evacuate, and I'd like to have that study done again this year as
Page 191
June 29, 2004
an outside effort.
That -- we are not requesting any additional personnel within
emergency management. We have made a request for a vehicle, a tow
vehicle, something that will allow us to tow a lot of our equipment.
And I believe, again, with this vehicle reorganization or restudy, there
might be an off-line vehicle that we can use for towing.
That's all I have on emergency management. Would you like any
other questions? Do you have questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that's great. I'm glad that
we're going to have that hurricane restudy. I think it's very important.
My discussions with you, I think that you were stating that most
of the data was anywheres from five to six years old. And at the rate
that we're growing here in this county, I think it's very essential that
we make this study, and I commend you for going ahead and putting
this on the budget.
I'm in great support of it. I'm also in great support of the lease
equipment. Rather -- rather make sure that we have the insurance
policy than trying to scour all over the countryside looking for
generators and pumps and everything else that's needed in case we do
have an emergency.
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you, sir.
The next organization is the Medical Examiner's Office. That
will be MO-30. I'm very proud to say that if I could -- my time with
the medical examiner, that is a contract arrangement that we have with
med -- District 13 Medical Examiner's Office.
I frequently check on them and visit them. That organization has
very high standards, basically on autopilot. Their increase is minor
related to salary increases and benefits.
We worked with them very hard this year, and actually we're able
to flatten out their malpractice insurance, so we did have some savings
there this year. That's all I have on the medical examiner.
Page 192
June 29, 2004
Chief Paul Wilson -- my next line is Ochopee Fire, and that is
MO-54. Chief Wilson, due to a family situation, could not be with us
today. There are no additional positions requested at Ochopee. There
is a scheduled replacement of a vehicle that has been highly
recommended by fleet due to maintenance and age, also OSHA and
fire compliance -- fire programming compliance issues.
There was a substantial amount of overtime at Ochopee this year
due to a medical leave situation that was almost six, seven months.
There was also the outcome of the public employees relation, or the
PERC hearing. So those -- the PERC hearing, some leave, overtime
situations have addressed most of the issues at Ochopee.
Any questions or concerns?
(No response.)
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you.
Forestry is on MO-28. That's a standard program. That's a coop
-- cooperator's agreement that we have with forestry every year that
ensures forestry's participation with us in wildfire management. And
rest assured, this season we got our money's worth from the effort with
forestry. They did a phenomenal job.
The other two are the small districts. Good1and/Horr at MO-58
and District 1, MO-46. Pretty much routine in terms of capturing those
revenues.
And as I close, I want to thank you again for your support of the
emergency services complex. We've got a lot of work ahead of us, but
it's a very exciting time to bring emergency management forward, and
I thank you for that.
That's all I have, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Good afternoon. My name's Emilio
Rodriguez, chief of Isles of Capri Fire Department. And today I have
Page 193
June 29, 2004
two expended services. One is to replace a current fire truck with a
lease option, and the next is to add an additional firefighter to the force
that we currently have of seven FTEs. We'll be going to eight FTEs.
Any questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Chief--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What page is that on, Chief?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: That's -- I'm sorry, MO-52.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some questions.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This was presented to the
advisory board?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. Yes, it was.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The concern that I have
is personnel services include 11,000 of salary adjustments. That
whole paragraph there, can you explain it to me? On page MO-52.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. I believe that was the salary
adjustments for all of -- all of the merit raises, and also we brought up,
under the inspectors, we promoted to the assistant, the chief, where --
that was where the $11,000 came from, to adjust the salary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's for the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Chief.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- former inspector now,
assistant --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Well, he's always still-- he performs the
inspections.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And then, continue on,
personnel service increase of $89,000.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: That's the total, sir, and then --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the total --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: That's the total amount.
Page 194
June 29, 2004
MS. SMYKOWSKI: With the detail --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: All in pieces.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's recommended that the
chief gets an $8,000 increase; is that what that is?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No. I'm not getting any increase at all that
I'm aware of. I don't know if Robin has something on that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Now I get it. It's just
the way it's laid out. It shows like there's a whole bunch of increases
all over. Thanks
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Any other questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thanks.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: You typically expect the fire district
budget will be adjusted to reflect the final approved -- or certified
taxable value that we just got yesterday from Mr. Skinner.
MR. MUDD: Mike, do you want to do office management?
MS. SMYKOWSKI: Sure. Office management budget's on
MO-8. It's a 5.4 percent increase. There are no expanded services.
As the forecast exceeds the operating budget, there was a
payment for a law enforcement impact fee study carried over from the
preVIOUS year.
We've worked extensively with the productivity committee on
the pay range and job description for the senior operations and
management consultants that we're currently in the recruitment phase
for.
Again, no expandeds and there are no UFRs in that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No questions.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: That concludes management offices as a
whole.
MR. MUDD: Hang on, you guys. Don't go away. We're going
Page 195
June 29, 2004
to talk about capital. Don't all run. Get over here, Dan.
And the one piece that we're missing is the capital budget, and I
want to make sure that the board takes a look at the -- those cap -- that
capital program, and one of the things of interest, especially in
emergency management --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Page, sir? What is the page?
MR. MUDD: I'm looking for it, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, sorry.
MR. MUDD: It's on page MO-61.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, sir.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And you have -- you have Pelican Bay
projects that are on there. They're basically done with their
assessments per se. The Isles of Capri are asking for reserve dollars
for a project to the tune of about $34,000.
Chief, do you want to talk about that for a second?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. That's for additional equipment
due to the growth over on the Mainsail Drive area to put in the new
truck that we're going to be purchasing.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Dan, if you'd like to talk about the Ochopee
Fire impact fee, $60,000 expenditure.
MR. SUMMERS: They are -- again, that goes for equipment
also to supplement their replacement vehicle and some set aside for
their marina services.
MR. MUDD: And Commissioner, last but not least, Dan has got
an emergency command post that looks more like a damn jalopy than
it does a command post. It's exceeded its lifetime on the road, and it
needs to be replaced.
Those command vehicles are not cheap. He will get whatever
equipment that he can get off the old one and move it over to the new
one, but the expenditure of that mobile command post is $256,000,
and it's on that line under emergency management 301.
Anything you'd like to add, Mr. Summers?
Page 196
June 29, 2004
MR. SUMMERS: Duct tape is a rather popular item that goes
with that existing vehicle. But we -- we're either going to utilize this
fund and drive -- and purchase a particular chassis, or if the
opportunity exists, to match this with some homeland security money
and go to something of more of a heavy duty type chassis.
But yes, the bulk of the equipment we do have -- can transfer
over to the new vehicle. And we actually have found through
Department of Homeland Security some very nice used equipment
from the FBI, so we're even looking at that type of -- as a resource
possibility .
But I think this will do the job that we need with -- possibly
purchase new in the R V type format, or might can purchase used in
the heavy duty truck format.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions? I'm curious. Is this
building hurricane proof?
MR. SUMMERS: This building is a very sound building, but in
the worst-case scenario, our first floor could be severely impacted by
storm surge. The mobile command bus has had an enormous amount
of field use, not only for training and education, but actual response.
It has dozens of field days just with the fire season this year. And in
theory, it is your alternate seat of government.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's pretty compact, let me tell
you.
MR. SUMMERS: Yeah. It's cozy, yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we bought that, Mike tells me,
about 15 years ago --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I remember that.
MR. MUDD: -- and it was used when we purchased it, okay?
So it's seen its time in the county. And we just need to upgrade it.
Dan looked at me and said, Boss, I don't know if I'm going to get
another year out of this thing. And I said, well, I think we pretty much
stretched this one as far as we can stretch it so let's put it on the
Page 197
June 29, 2004
budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, no further questions on the
management offices, we'll go to the county attorney's budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That means if we have a hurricane
coming on in, they always tell us we have to be here, we're safe here,
right?
How come everybody's laughing?
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, we're safe here. I wouldn't rate this
building for 150 miles an hour wind, okay, and have the windows say
that they're going to be there. I mean, we go through a -- we go
through a procedure.
If there's going to be a hurricane, we put plastic over the
machines in case there's some damage from roofs. We make sure the
stuff that can blow around gets packed away off of desks and whatnot,
and get prepared for a particular hurricane.
It seems -- it seems very odd that our emergency management
organization of Collier County is based on the one floor in this
building that's susceptible to storm surge, okay, so they would not
operate on their first floor as they're so organized, and they would
have to -- and they would have to get out of that floor because there
would be water.
And in heavy rains, we did get waters in our parking lots.
Building H, people get out and it's over their ankles as far as water is
over there. So -- and that's what people have told me in the four years
I've been here. I have not experienced that. I've had to take my shoes
off a couple of times, but nothing above my ankles or up to my knees.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you walk on water?
MR. MUDD: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh.
MR. MUDD: Absolutely not.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We hear you can.
Page 198
June 29, 2004
MR. MUDD: Mr. Weigel?
COl.IN.TY ATTORNFY'S OEEICF
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Jim.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. WEIGEL: Good late afternoon, Commissioners. David
Weigel, county attorney. And with me is Debbie Allen, the legal
office administrator for the county attorney.
Our budget materials are shown under BCC pages 7 through 11 --
7 through 10, actually. And as you can see, we endeavored mightily
to stay within the county manager's recommendation, and our office
has a three percent increase. It also has bundled in there the Legal Aid
Society, which has a significant increase, but I want to assure you that
it's a placement merely for a place in the budget process, and Legal
Aid Society is entirely fee driven through the court system, not with
ad valorem taxes whatsoever.
Our office serves as a legal sufficiency monitoring clerical
review of receipts that pass through the process for the legal services
that Legal Aid Society provides, typically for indigency for the civil
side of litigation.
Other than that, we have no expanded positions. We did have a
modest increase to provide for replacement of some computers and
some salary adjustments.
And if you should have any questions, we're ready.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No questions.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you're not increasing head
count at all?
MR. WEIGEL: No, not at all.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And if you'd look at the revenues from fees and
charges down there, he has an injection of$160,000 under FY-'04/'05
Page 199
June 29, 2004
current services that basically gives him that 25 percent of that $65
surcharge in that ordinance that you passed on the 22nd of June.
There's four iterations of $160,000. You saw three on the court side,
and this is the missing fourth.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I see.
MR. MUDD: It's been mandated by the state that we would fund
this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, it's great when you stay right in
these guidelines and everything. We don't even have any questions or
anything. I hope that continues on that way all day tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whoops.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, if you're set, then we're set. I thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: The next particular item -- do you want to do the
Airport Authority, or you want to do the BCC first? BCC normally
takes a couple of minutes because there's normally a dialogue with the
commissioners on the dias.
Do we want to do Mr. Gene Schmidt at the Airport Authority and
get him gone?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let's get him out of here. Maybe
we'll get lucky and we'll get all this done by six o'clock.
MR. MUDD: Well, he said he was going to give you some
money in this particular case, so I'm looking forward to this particular
briefing.
MR. SCHMIDT: Actually what I'm going to do is I'm going to
ask you for permission next time to go in alphabetical order. We'd
come right after administrative services. At least if I think I would do
that, if I had -- if I remember my alphabet.
At any rate, I know that you're all tired and a little sore from
Page 200
June 29, 2004
sitting here, and I -- frankly I don't know how you do this. I know you
do it very often, but I commend you for your perseverance here and
keeping your cool.
But in any event, I've appreciated the opportunity to visit with
each of you during the past couple of weeks. And your comments and
questions have been helpful to us, particularly to prepare for this
presentation here, and we think that we have most of your -- the
answers to most of your questions that you asked.
I'm going to -- in an effort to save some time here, I'm going to
turn this directly on over to Bob Titus. I'm sure you all know him.
He's our financial officer, and he is my right-hand person, and
left-hand also.
.AIRE.ORI...AIIy
MR. TITUS: Thank you, Gene.
What you have before you is a budget prepared by the staff prior
to the Airport Authority giving its blessing. The Airport Authority
itself reviewed this budget, and as a result of their review, the general
fund transfer was reduced by approximately another $105,000.
So they made some adjustments to our budget so that now the
general fund -- the official request is for general fund transfer of
$585,000 rather than the $690,000 that's shown there, which
represents a decrease from the prior budget, which was $679,000.
One other salient point about this budget is that you would notice
that the carryforward going into the '05 budget was a significant
number. There's $156,000 that had a big effect on the reduction of the
'05 total budget, and that $156,000 came about primarily because our
fuel sales during '04, which -- much, much greater than we had
budgeted -- than we had budgeted. Our fuel sales, particularly jet fuel,
in Marco was about 25 to 30 percent greater than last year.
So that, in summary, is what our budget is. And we're open to
Page 201
June 29, 2004
any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- Mr. Schmidt gave me a
little cheat sheet, I think it was yesterday. And the question was, you
got a personnel service forecasted for this year of approximately
$850,000, and it's budgeted for this coming year of $950,000. So
approximately 100,000 increase of what you actually think you're
going to spend this year. What's the reason for that?
MR. TITUS: Personnel service numbers computed by OMB.
They simply take our current level of staffing, our current salaries, and
they imply -- they apply the increases of what the anticipated salary
increases of what's going to be the portion share of retirement, the
health service, and they compute that number. There's no increase in
the number of personnel.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Any bonuses?
MR. TITUS: Not--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is the cost-of-living
Increase or --
MR. TITUS: That's computed by OMB.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it? No other hidden --
MR. SCHMIDT : Well, there is overtime for days like today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. GREENWALD: I'm Randy Greenwald, for the record.
One of the things is, they have had some vacancies, so that's why their
forecast would be down a little bit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay. Okay, that's where it
is. And the -- one of your Airport Authority members thought that,
hey, you know, Everglades Airport is most likely going to go to
Everglades City, therefore, the director of the Airport Authority can
run Marco Island and still have a manager out there in Immokalee.
My guess, that's shot down?
MR. SCHIMDT: Well, let me clarify that. There was some
Page 202
June 29, 2004
misunderstandings, I believe. First of all, with regards to the
Everglades Airport, we're going on the assumption that we're to
proceed -- in fact, these were our directions from our board -- to
proceed as if the Everglades Airport is still going to be with us, and
we based our future -- our requirements, our budget requirements and
so forth, based on that assumption.
If that doesn't happen, if the Everglades Airport is turned over to
the City of Everglades, why then, of course, this will all change.
Now, with regard to the -- the issue of personnel, shortly after I
took the position of executive director, I was asked to take a look at
personnel requirements and also the budget.
And I -- after a lot of soul searching and a lot of looking very
closely at our budgets, I entertained some ideas of areas where we
could, perhaps, reduce workloads and, perhaps, even do something
with some of the personnel positions.
I went to our board and I told them that I had some options for
them, and that was misinterpreted as a recommendation from me.
As it turned out, I finally was able to correct the -- the so-called
record. Actually it wasn't in the record. But the fact is, is that, what I
told them was some options.
And you may recall that there was one vote against and the other
members said that it was up to the executive director, it was his choice
as to what he wanted to do.
So at that point I went back to -- excuse me -- I went back and
re-examined each one of the decisions and all of the data that I had
used to make those decisions, and I decided that it was virtually
impossible to operate, considering our expansion at the Immokalee
Airport.
What we had to do at the Marco Airport -- and you've seen some
of those projections. We gave them to you -- that it would be virtually
impossible for us to operate three airports with one or -- one or two
people, and I elected to stay with -- and my recommendation was that
Page 203
June 29, 2004
we stay with the two airport managers. One airport manager is taking
over the Marco Airport and Everglades, and the other airport manager
would be at Immokalee.
And as you know, we have a lot of things going on up in
Immokalee. And so that's -- that's the positions that I took on it, and
it's -- and it's working. And I don't see at this point how we can
reduce that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, if the -- depends on
what happens at the Everglades. Would that decision be revisited as
far as the manager at Marco Island Airport?
MR. SCHMIDT: Well, considering the projects that we have
going at the Marco Airport, for example, as you know--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it won't.
MR. SCHMIDT: To answer your question, it's no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
MR. SCHMIDT: Because we're going to be doing a taxiway,
and we've got a lot of other -- a lot of other issues going on there.
And by the way, there's a lot of interaction between the airport
managers, between Immokalee and the Marco Airport, and they do
work together. And this is important to have that dual -- those dual
qualifications out there.
On the one hand, we have one of our people who you know, Mr.
Tweedie, who has a tremendous amount of experience. He goes back
a long ways. And we have another man up at Immokalee who is very
good with the Immokalee community. And between the two of them,
they make a good team, and I want to keep it that way.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Also, don't we have liabilities by
the FAA in regards to airport management in case there's some type of
an emergency? Isn't there somebody that should be right on site to
take care of those emergencies and also to make sure that we don't
have any fuel contamination and that people who are parking aircraft
Page 204
June 29, 2004
follow the rules of that particular airport?
MR. SCHMIDT: You're absolutely correct, and that's a vital part
of our -- of our management function.
For example, 1'11-- we have been given awards and
commendations continuously for our fuel -- fuel supply -- from our
fuel suppliers and in the way that we manage our fuel. As you know,
there are -- have been a number of accidents that were caused by
improper fueling.
We also have people working as our technicians who are moving
aircraft, are parking aircraft, doing a lot of things, servicing aircraft,
and it becomes very important that these people be trained and that
they be monitored and that they be supervised very closely.
We also do things such as runway inspections for foreign object
damage and all of these sorts of things. And as you know, the
Concorde was brought down because of foreign object damage. And
so we're very careful about those things. These are all things that need
to be done. Most people don't even know that they're being done.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If we looked at getting rid of one of
the airport managers, what kind of liabilities would that put -- would
the county face in case of a problem?
MR. SCHMIDT: Well, I think that you'd have some serious
explaining to do, especially if the FAA concluded that this was -- that
the accident or the some deficiency was caused by a lack of oversight
by a manager, the lack of a manager. I think it could put us -- it could
jeopardize our position.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So in other words, it relates back to
health, safety, and welfare?
MR. SCHMIDT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Gene, we discussed the budget
yesterday.
Page 205
June 29, 2004
MR. SCHMIDT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We went over operating fund 495.
I can't find anything in the budget packet that resembles what we
talked about yesterday, and I'm trying to match up some of the issues
we discussed with the numbers in the budget package here, and I just
can't do it.
The operating fund 495 we discussed yesterday was the income
and expense budget for the cost of operations for FY-'04/'05 of
$788,300, and a general fund transfer of an adjusted amount of
$105,000. Where can we find that in the budget presentation?
MR. TITUS: I wasn't at the meeting yesterday --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. TITUS: -- but I assume that you're referring to this --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. TITUS: -- this schedule. Yeah.
What I did in preparing this schedule, this comes closer to the
way a commercial operation would show -- or show how they run
their business by taking fuel sales, not putting it in operations, but
putting in the cost of sales, as showing the gross profit from the sale of
fuel, and really putting the income on top of the -- the income on top
of the expenses and showing a cost of operations was really a net --
net loss.
The two numbers would come together. If we look at the fiscal
year '04/'05 budget, the general fund showing the 690,000 -- this is
before the $105,000 adjustment. The $690,000 there ties into the
same general fund transfer that we show on our sheet, which is the last
number, the $690,000.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Where do we find that in the
budget documents though?
MR. TITUS: It's on page BCC-13.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right.
MR. TITUS: BCC-13. The -- the last column to the right. I
Page 206
June 29, 2004
mean next to the last column to the right. The $690,000 is the first
revenue item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how about the net revenue for
fuel sales, 671, 700?
MR. TITUS: Okay. What you would have to do is that you
would have to -- you would have to go to the individual cost centers
and look at the fuel sales revenues. And then from that number,
deduct -- which is in the operating expenses -- the cost of purchasing
the fuel. So it's a net number.
It's a -- basically it's a -- if you take the fees and charges for $1.9
million, and then from that you subtract the cost of fuel which is in the
-- well, it's spread throughout the various cost centers, and deduct that,
and then also deduct fees and charges from other sources. I can spend
some time with you in reconciling the two numbers, but they do
reconcile.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I guess, to me that sheet of
paper there that we -- that I talked about yesterday is more meaningful
when we want to try to determine what the general fund transfer is
likely to be than the way it is displayed in the budget packet.
It is curious, however, that the net revenue from fuel sales from
FY -'04 and '05 is exactly the same to the penny as the forecast for '03
and '04, despite the fact that fuel sales have -- the cost of fuel has
increased fairly dramatically during the mid and latter part of this
current fiscal year.
So I'd be interested in understanding the rationale for having the
same revenue from fuel sales next year as we had this year.
MR. TITUS: Oh. That -- why did we predict -- why did we
budget the same gallonage for '05 that we have in the forecast, that's
the question?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For '05 that we have in '04.
MR. TITUS: '04 forecast?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
Page 207
June 29, 2004
MR. TITUS: Yes. All right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. TITUS: In the past, the way that we proj ected the gallons
for gallonage of fuel -- and by the way, the way that we get a gross
profit on the fuel doesn't -- the cost of the fuel is not really a factor
because there's a set dollar markup on the cost, so for every dollar that
the cost goes up, the sales goes up, and the gross profit is the same, so
we're really concerned about --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The margin remains the same all
the way through?
MR. TITUS: The margin remains the same --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. TITUS: -- per gallon. So we're really concerned about the
number of gallons that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. But if you don't sell
more gallons, you're not going to make more money.
MR. TITUS: That's correct.
Now, in the past, the way that we prepared our budget to
determine the number of gallons that were sold, we used to use some
statistical software, forecasting software. We'd take all of our
gallonages per month, per location, separate it by jet fuel, separate it
by av. gas, put it in this statistical software, and that software would
statistically project what your gallonage should be in the future year,
and I prefer that because I hate when human hands touch something,
because we can't predict the future. If we could predict the future, we
wouldn't be sitting here. We'd be in Las Vegas or someplace. So we
used that in the past.
But this year when we put in the actual numbers, the -- the
computer looked at these numbers, says, uh-huh, says, this looks like
an aberration, because you were 20 or 30 percent more.
So thinking that this was an aberration, what the software did was
average the future years down because they thought that that thing
Page 208
June 29, 2004
was sticking up too hard. They said, well, you're going to have less
because it doesn't follow your trend.
Well -- we said, well, we really can't trust this software this time
because there are certain structural changes that justify that big spike.
Two things primarily, one, nationally there's been a tremendous
growth in general aviation air traffic throughout the country because
of the trouble people are having on planes and those that can afford it,
they go GA rather than go to the commercial route. They don't have
to go through securities, they don't have to take off their shoes and
things like that.
So we looked at that structural change and said, well, that's going
to stay. I mean, that's not going to change.
And the other basic structural change that we saw was that there's
a general increase in the number of high-income homes being -- being
built in our -- in our area. Marco, you have a lot of high- income
homes. We have Hammock Bay right here, we have Fiddler's Creek.
So given that, we said, well, the number can't go down. We don't
think that the computer's right by averaging it down. And since I'm
enormously reluctant for projecting an increase -- and I don't have any
crystal ball, and maybe with the increase in the price of fuel, the
number won't go up.
So we said, well at least we want to take the number of gallonage
to be the same as what we forecast, and that's what we're going to use
for '05. So that's why the number of gallons, which equals the same
gross profit, is the same in the '04 forecast as it is for the '05 budget.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other questions?
MR. SCHMIDT: There was -- excuse me. Commissioner Coyle,
when you and I were speaking the other day, we talked about the stage
two bands, and you mentioned that out in your area in Montana and in
Wyoming, there were these changes to stage two that had been
allowed.
Page 209
June 29, 2004
And the -- you might be interested in knowing, I just learned
today that there has been a change as of June the 3rd with the FAA in
considering their stage two bands as being okay as long as they're not
affecting areas such as natural parks, and that's the reason why -- I just
recall that you and I had been talking about that, and I wasn't able to
answer it until I read the note in today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's only one to my knowledge
that is in a national park, and that's the one in Jackson Hole.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yeah. But they also look at refuges, animal
refuges and other things.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They don't care about humans.
MR. SCHMIDT: No, that's right.
MR. TITUS: I--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we have this conversation
some other time?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't you let us talk about
something we're interested in. We don't interrupt you when you talk,
okay?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Everybody else just take a break
while you have some personal --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Take a break.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- conversation? It's got nothing
to do --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So that's about it for the Airport
Authority?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, they have one --
MS. FILSON: Madam Chairman, I have one speaker.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, and you've told me that. And I'm
sorry. And I have to ask Commissioner Coletta yet if he has any
comments.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I think Commissioner
Coyle said it all.
Page 210
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine.
We have one speaker.
MS. FILSON: Bob Krasowski.
MR. MUDD: And you have one capital project in the Airport
Authority, and that's basically to get their PUD out at Immokalee
Airport up to speed, okay, so that they can actually run an airport
legally.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello Commissioners, Airport Authority
people, public. My name's Bob Krasowski. I'm here speaking as an
interested citizen.
I've, at home, watched a number of Airport Authority meetings
on the television, and I thought I'd speak up today in this budget
workshop to raise a couple of points.
It's -- in the newspaper one of the articles I read regarding the
Airport Authority did mention that the -- one of the gentlemen from --
involved with one of the Polish businesses, when he arrived here, was
very surprised that there was little question about the environmental
impact of the -- of this -- what was -- is being discussed.
And I agree with him, I think. This is a very big proj ect. It has a
lot of ramifications, implications, and seems to have some very
positive, promising things about it. On the other hand, it could very
well represent the development of the Immokalee area in a way that is
not necessarily to the advantage of the people living there or to the
environment there.
As mentioned earlier, fuel spills, pollution from engines, an
airport property the size of the Miami airport there could very well be
developed in an overzealous fashion by empire builders, but hopefully
that's not what's going to happen here.
But I was concerned when there was use of funds to subsidize
salaries that -- or the operation of some of these people who you're
inviting that were coming out of environmental funds that was
supposed to be used to address issues at sites that were, in fact,
Page 211
June 29, 2004
polluted.
But apparently this is not the case at the Immokalee Airport, so
why should we be using those funds? Those funds should go to a
project that needed the funds to address -- for that issue.
So I'm concerned about the environmental impact of this, and I
hope that the people that develop this are visionary in the way they
establish this airport so we have something that's new and positive for
the future and not something that's just an extension of our
unsustainable economic environmental business practices that, at the
present time, cause pollution and degradation of the environment.
This is on the edge of the Everglades.
And another issue -- as I have a limited time, of course, and I
appreciate the time I have. Another issue would be the discussion on
how this would be an enhancement to the quality of life of the people
that live in Immokalee.
I think there should be some specific of -- liaison between the
interest of those people and the -- and the people who stand to benefit
from the development of this airport so that we can have a true interest
and develop that interest of using the Immokalee people, the kids in
Immokalee High School, in training them in programs where they can
work on these planes and be involved in these businesses and not just
let that slide by the wayside.
You know, I think we should have somebody there that will
attend to that. Maybe you could take it out of the $100,000 the
gentlemen talk about saving. Maybe this liaison person could be
there. We could work with the school system and work out the job
training programs so that the people there actually get a quality of life
enhancement, and it's not just new people move in with the higher
skills, with the higher salaries, and the people there now are displaced,
because most of them, I believe, are tomato workers and farmers and
other people very capable -- I'm sure they're capable of being trained.
So I just -- to make that point.
Page 212
June 29, 2004
We want to -- we want to, as been stated by you, it's my
understanding of a point you've made, we want to improve the life of
the residents of Collier County, get the good paying jobs here for these
people, bump up their -- improve their situation, not move ahead with
these programs that just bring in new people that take the good -- the
good and better paying jobs, and it doesn't enhance the quality of life
for the people there.
I know you've given some attention to this. I hope you continue,
and I hope we keep focus on that.
Thank you for the attention to my comments.
MR. SCHMIDT: I appreciate those comments because it's -- it is
an important point, and we are work diligently on that.
Commissioner, or Chairman Fiala, you know that what we're doing
with Lorenzo Walker Institute of Technology --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Uh-huh.
MR. SCHMIDT: -- you know about our connection with the
Bethune campus out there, you also know -- I'm sure most of you
know that we are planning to have a facility at the airport for training
A&P mechanics, aircraft and power plant mechanics, and we're
moving forward with that, and I'm working very closely -- as a matter
of fact, I'm on the foundation for the Lorenzo Walker Institute of
Technology, and I'm taking a great interest in what's happening at the
Immokalee Airport. I travel up there on a regular basis, and we're
working diligently on that.
And I appreciate this gentleman's comments.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was just going to point that out.
We've been working it a long time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good.
I think that we're on to the next subject. Thank you very much for
Page 213
June 29, 2004
a great presentation.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And the -- and the last item for today is the
BCC budget, and Ms. Filson will present.
MS. FILSON: I'll be very quick. I'm requesting no expanded
positions. I stayed within the guidelines. In fact, I've only increased
four line items.
And I'm available to answer any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, that was quick.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Has there been any -- have you put
any additional funds for travel allowance for the commissioners?
MS. FILSON: No, sir. Each -- in the budget I have $4,000 for
each commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. With the advent of a lot of
us traveling now and also the costs going up, I'd like to see added at
least a $1,000 per commissioner to their budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any comments? Oh, I'm sorry.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- do we have a breakdown
of what's being spent so far this year? I think we're pretty much at the
end of our --
MS. FILSON: Actually, I anticipated that question, and I do
have it. Do you want me to give you what you've actually spent or
what you have remaining?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What we have in remaining.
MS. FILSON: District 1, $2,770; District 2, $903, but that's
going to be minus 100 or so, so right now it'd be $803; District 3,
$2,564; District 4, 3,367; District 5, 1,311.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So -- and we're pretty much on
vacation for the next couple of months, coming back in September,
Page 214
June 29, 2004
and the new budget taking over in --
MR. MUDD: 1 October.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- October.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. If I may?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we -- you know, my opinion
that -- it's just, I think we did pretty good this year. Besides, we can --
we got moneys if somebody needs to go somewhere in September,
that they can request funds from other -- some other commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, when you allocate the funds,
it doesn't mean you spend them. It's just the idea that it's there, and
you're looking at -- you look at what it costs anymore to travel by
aircraft, the expenses are going up. So it's just kind of making sure
that we have a cushion there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I understand where
Commissioner Halas is coming from. Two years I had to have other
commissioners lend me money from their budget to be able to meet
the needs.
This year I'll be honest with you, I have not been as active in the
Florida Association of Counties. The previous year, I don't know, I
made something like 11 trips up to Tallahassee with some
unbelievable numbers, just sort of burned out. But I took about a year
reprieve on the whole thing and plan to go back at it next year to see
what I can get for the county.
So I don't know. What I didn't spend this year, I definitely
probably could use next year, but--
MS. FILSON: It doesn't automatically roll over.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. So where does it go? It goes back
into general --
MR. MUDD: It goes back into reserves.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- funds.
Page 215
June 29, 2004
MR. MUDD: It goes back into reserves, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I was going to ask that question.
We have seen a number of budgets today where we've got
carryforwards from the prior year. Why don't -- doesn't the access
from this travel budget carryforward into the next year?
MR. MUDD: We normally carryforward on an obligation or
encumbrance. I'm looking for the encumbrance out of the board. If
you're saying you need those dollars for the additional year because
I'm going to be the F AC representative or we see that we're going to
make four trips more to Tallahassee to lobby our legislators in a
particular year, you encumber it, and then we'll carry it forward as part
of the budget submission. I mean --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't -- I don't see how any of us
could justify many trips between now and September, but I would be
happy to allocate whatever additional funds I have in my budget to
any of the other commissioners who are running short, at least for the
remainder of this fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I may?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm never too sure when I
should speak or not speak. It's difficult over the phone. I wish I could
see you on television and I'd get a clue what to do.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Push your light.
. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Huh?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Push your light.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, you've got a way of
making me forget what I was going to say. In this case it didn't work.
No. I have no problems borrowing from commissioners again to
be able to meet the needs of the future, but I don't really have any
intentions for the remainder of this year. I think I got one thing
planned in October, and it's a minor trip. I can't even remember what
Page 216
June 29, 2004
It IS now. I think it has something to do with the MPOAC.
Other than that -- but I -- when we start the whole process over
again with the Florida Association of Counties -- and I'd like to even
get involved in some of the efforts that are going to take place in
Washington, D.C., with the federal MPO to see about working with
that effort.
I know Bob James goes every year, and I would like to
accompany him sometime to see what I might be able to do for our
area.
Then, again, too, you know, if there's a limit to the budget, there's
a limit to what we can do, I'll live within it. But I, for one, would like
to see another $1,000 added to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we've got -- the FAC has
got a meeting scheduled for September for the new legislative agenda
coming up for the next session with the House, so I'm sure that there
will be some commissioners from Collier County that might be going
to that to get involved in those workshops so that we can draw up
legislation to send to the Florida -- or to Tallahassee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm going to go, and I'll
loan you the remainder of my money, if you're running short,
Commissioner.
MS. FILSON: And just for your information, if I may interject, I
do have a line item for F AC, like if the chairman traveled to F AC a lot
-- and I do have a line item for that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Looks like we're covered.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. And I'd be happy to donate my
money, too, whatever I have left.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that works for me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Maybe -- is there a way -- you
were saying something about encumbering. Is there away, say, we
take 2 or $3,000 of unencumbered funds that we end this year with,
Page 217
June 29, 2004
and just set them aside for next year in case there are, you know, trips
to take or something?
MR. MUDD: If the board decides that they want to take what's
left over and they want to move it into the next year because they
believe -- you know, we're going to talk about a lobbyist here during
the UFR list, and we're going to make that decision, so it's not
something you need to make tonight. But we can do that. If you
decide that you want the Chair to do a lot more lobbying than they
did, we can put it in a F AC particular fund and encumber it and carry
it over. We can do that based on board direction, and we'll talk about
that a little bit tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's good.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, just one more thing real fast. And
just as you go tomorrow, we'll start with the property appraiser, go to
Supervisor of Elections, Clerk of Courts, do the sheriff, then we'll talk
about UFRs or whatever we have to -- we have to do.
I showed you this chart early this morning. I bring it up because
some things came up today that piqued my interest.
You heard Mr. Steve Russell, the state attorney, mention -- or it
might have been the chief judge that mentioned about a referendum
that could be on the November ballot that's moving its way through
signatures to increase the homestead exemption from 25,000 to
$50,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: If that happens, that's a -- our estimate, it's a net
loss next year or -- next year's budget time, not next year in the
budget. It wouldn't happen until the -- in '06. That's a net loss of
anywhere from 7 to $9 million as far as revenues are concerned.
We talked about it a little bit with Commissioner Henning off to
the side, and he mentioned, you know, the real loss is going to be the
amount of revenue sharing that we're not going to get because your
internal counties are already at 10 mills and they can't go any higher.
Page 218
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good point.
MR. MUDD: And when that happens to them, it will devastate
their particular budgets, and the state will have to corne up, and we
will become a donor again. So yeah, it's 7 to $9 million of our tax
dollars that we won't see at today's -- in today's tax rate, but the real
impact is going to be the amount of money that we don't get back in
the revenue sharing, and I think Mr. Smykowski mentioned that that's
about $25 million that we get, and that money would get -- would get
significantly diverted in order to make up some great holes in other .
counties, at least that's what we believe.
And I'm not trying to play chicken little, the sky is falling. I'm
just letting you know that the second piece of the homestead
exemption might not be the best thing that ever happened to Collier
County, especially when your rates don't look like they're going to go
back up, that they look like they're on the assent, and it could give you
some -- it could give us some real financial challenges next year.
The other -- the other piece --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before you leave that, I feel
compelled to emphasize one thing. For those people who like charter
government and like to make decisions based upon charters, this is
another good example of why you don't want to do that.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The other piece that we need to talk
about sometime tomorrow -- and I don't want to take -- and I really
don't want to discuss it now, but I want everybody to think about it.
The Chair wrote us a letter as the chairperson of the Tourist
Development Council basically talking about bringing the interest
back into the TDC, and that's something that we need to discuss
tomorrow, because that would also reduce our general fund dollars by
some $700,000, so it would create more of a hole for us. So -- and
when you start that, Commissioner, there will be --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You open up Pandora's box.
MR. MUDD: -- there will be a series of dominos that will fall
Page 219
June 29, 2004
that will cost this county almost $8 million in interest that we get back
into the general fund in order to allocate. So it's just not a simple
thing, and we've already told the DSAC no on the 113 revenues
before.
So really, we'll talk about it tomorrow, because -- give everybody
ample time in order to do it. But I wanted to bring it up, because you
did send this message out on 8 June. I held it for budget times in order
to discuss it, and it isn't in your packets.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who brought that discussion up
at the TDC?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: TDC committee, probably.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh. Was it staff?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, it wasn't -- it wasn't staff. It was -- I
don't know. You know, we were sitting around in the TDC workshop,
and I don't remember who brought it up. There were quite a few
people there.
MR. MUDD: But I've got the information. The letter was sent to
all the commissioners on the 7th of June so -- and you might not have
it. But we need to talk about it, because it does have budget
implications.
Madam Chairman, Commissioners, that's all I have, subject to
your questions. See you tomorrow morning at nine o'clock.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Meeting adjourned.
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:16 p.m.
Page 220
June 29, 2004
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have a hot mic.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. The second day
of budget hearings is now in session. Please stand and say the pledge
of allegiance with me.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Mr. Mudd, do you have a
certain arrangement as to how you've planned these -- or have you
promised anybody --
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. There's four participants this
morning. The property appraiser, the supervisor of elections, the clerk
of courts and the sheriff. In that order. And then we'll go into
wrap-up.
And at 11 :00 or so I told our administrators to be back to be able
to talk UFRs with you, if you need them.
EROffiRTY A-eERAISER
The property appraiser gave me a call this morning. He doesn't
normally corne to this meeting because he gives his particular budget
to the Department of Revenue for approval. His budget carne in at 2.8
percent less than it was last year. When you put board facilities into
that, board financing, you know, you pay for the rent and the
electricity and whatnot for the property appraiser, it's a net decrease in
budget of about 1.6 percent. And that's on Page --
MR. SMYKOWSKI: CO-4. It's the very -- the last tab in your
notebook.
MR. MUDD: In CO-4, it's when you put the board finance, it
comes in at minus 1.6 percent. This is the third year that he's given us
a budget that's in the minus, is a reduction. Staff commends him for
his efforts to stay as frugal as he possibly can. And he sends his
Page 221
June 29, 2004
regards, okay. But he didn't have many issues as far as staff was
concerned, and subject to your questions, and I can get those questions
to him and get answers to you before noontime, if you have any.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any questions, board members?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, this one was easy. Is Jim Coletta
with us?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I'm with you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning, Jim.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm fine, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hope all is well up there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As well as can be expected.
MR. MUDD: The next presentation, then, Commissioners, the
supervisor of elections, and I'd ask Pat to corne on up to the table all
by herself. Do you need company?
MS. POCHOPIN: I don't think I need company. Good morning,
Commissioners, Mr. Mudd, Mr. Ochs. How's everybody this
morning? Mike, how are you?
I'd like to start off with -- I have a presentation from Jennifer. As
you know, the state has a registration drive for voter registration. And
we'd like to present you all with a register and vote button. And Mr.
Coletta, I will be sure that I have one sent to you.
Now, we'll move on with important things. Commissioners, our
budget this year did corne in at what -- below what you asked us to.
We have no new positions. And any questions that you have,
hopefully I can answer for you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas has one.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Your -- as you said, your budget
carne in under the guidance that we gave to you. How is this going to
Page 222
June 29, 2004
reflect with the new voting machines and with the upcoming election?
MS. POCHOPIN: Well, Commissioner Halas, I feel very
comfortable with this budget being able to maintain the quality of
elections that we've had in Collier County. I do have about $30,000 in
there to pay poll workers for early voting. But we've had good, good
response for volunteers. So a lot of our voter education and poll
workers are on a volunteer basis. That is saving us considerable
money.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great. Thanks very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pat, you did good work.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thanks very much for corning in
under the budget. We really appreciate all the efforts. I don't -- you
don't have any head count that you're going to increase by this year?
MS. POCHOPIN: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we want to thank you very, very
much. Appreciate it.
MS. POCHOPIN: Thank you for all your support. We really
appreciate it. And let's look forward to great elections.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. You guys do good work over there.
MS. POCHOPIN: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Make sure you have the right
result.
MS. POCHOPIN: I definitely will. The right results the first
time, that's what we're aiming for. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, subject to your questions, the next
constitutional officer to present is the clerk of courts.
CLERKD.F COUIITS
MR. MITCHELL: Commissioners, good morning. For the
Page 223
June 29, 2004
record, Jim Mitchell. I'm the director of finance for the clerk's office.
To my right I have Jay Cross, who is the executive assistant of the
clerk, and also Torn Whitecotton who is our human resources director.
First off, I'd like to send Dwight's apologies. Unfortunately he is
up in Tallahassee. There's a couple of issues that are still floating
around with Article 5, so he has meetings both today and tomorrow
that he's having to attend to work those things out. So he does send
his apologies.
Let me start off by saying this is probably the most difficult
budget year that we've ever faced. Revision 7 to Article 5 has
definitely impacted our office. We started working several months
ago with Mr. Smykowski in the budget office to try to identify those
impacts. And we're prepared today to talk to you about that.
The budget that we did submit to you is -- it was unlike anything
that you had seen before from the standpoint that we wanted to give
you the opportunity to compare apples to apples. If you look at the
funding that was provided last year and the budgets that were provided
to you last year, they in no way -- they do not reflect at all in the way
the budgets are done this year. In prior years the county had a
responsibility to fund certain components of the state court system for
the clerk's component. And that primarily consisted of the county
court system, which would be your misdemeanors, your county civil,
your traffic, your misdemeanor collections area, and also the indirect
cost of those related to overhead, such as your administration, your
bookkeeping functions and things like that.
As we move into Article 5, that cost has now shifted to the state
and there's a new fee structure in place to fund that. So what you're
going to see in this budget is a significant decrease in our demand on
your general fund.
What we're looking at this year, and keep in mind, when I'm
speaking to you, I am not including the county paid component, which
Mike adds on. But in our budget request, we're looking fors
Page 224
June 29, 2004
$4,557,500. Compared to last year, and you look at it from a full what
your responsibilities were, it was $8,584,900, so there's a little over a
$4 million difference or a 46 percent difference. Now, what I tried to
do in the budget book is to take last year's numbers and convert them
to make them as if Article 5 was in effect at that time, and also do the
same thing to the '03 cycle. So if you do it that way, what we have is
a net decrease to the general fund of .03 percent. We're able -- well,
we're trying to do more with less is what we're doing.
What you will see in this budget, and keep in mind, the budget
that we're presenting to you is strictly the non-court component of the
clerk's office. The court-related component is now approved by the
Department of Revenue and it's not due to them until sometime late in
August. So what we're talking about here is strictly the role of clerk in
his capacity as clerk to the board, auditor, custodian of funds and
recorder.
In this budget we do have two expanded positions. One of them
is in my office. It is a very high level position. The fully burdened
cost on that is $115,700 dollars, and that is going to assist us in
ensuring the integration throughout the SAP system is complete. One
of the problems, as was highlighted in our audit this year, is we don't
have the full knowledge of the SAP system that we need. What we
have is areas where certain people know certain things, primarily on
the system side, and certain people know certain things on the
accounting side. What we're looking for is somebody that can bring
that together. So we're looking for somebody that has extreme system
knowledge and also has extreme accounting knowledge. And we have
found that that is a very expensive proposition. So the fully burdened
cost on that is $115,700.
The second position is a systems analyst in our MIS department,
and that's primarily driven by the increase in workloads that are
corning in that area. We do have expanded positions in our court area,
and that does have an impact on this budget, because with Article 5,
Page 225
June 29, 2004
there are certain costs that the county is still obligated to pay. It's
primarily the maintenance, the facilities, the telephones, certain
equipment costs and things of that nature. We are adding 10 positions
in our court area. Those 10 positions are driven, four of them are
driven by the fact that we assumed domestic violence during this last
budget cycle. We have done the job, but we have never hired
anybody to do it. And there is a demand in that area to add four
positions there.
Another position is our indigent examiner. With Article 5,
indigent examinations are going to be performed by the clerk of the
circuit court. So that's one position that we've never had before.
The other five positions in the court's area is driven by increases
in volumes, in expectations that there will be new judgeships corning
down this way.
With that -- let me first state a couple of other things. This year
it's been an extreme pleasure to work with Mike. He had certain
questions, Mr. Mudd had certain questions, and we sat down last week
or the week before and really went through that budget, and I have to
admit they had some really good questions. I hope that we've
addressed all of them. I've tried to provide each of you a copy of the
questions that carne out of it and the responses.
With that, we'd open it up to any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners? Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In regards to the individual that
you want to hire to bring on-board as an SAP specialist and software
specialist in accounting, is this going to be a full-time job or is this
going to be part-time?
MR. MITCHELL: No, sir, that will be a full-time job and that
person will be extremely, extremely busy. Let me kind of outline to
you the need that's happening there. The one thing that you have to
realize is everything that you as a board do has an impact on us.
You're getting ready to go live or implement a new Hanson System.
Page 226
June 29, 2004
That Hanson System is going to be integrating into the SAP package.
We have to understand that full integration. We have to know the
footprint of those transactions through our system and how it's going
to result in our financial statements. There is several software
packages, especially listening to yesterday's workshop, that are going
to be corning on line. And we have to be prepared, we have to be able
to know the transactions, know the footprints and make sure that the
recordation of that transaction is proper. So it will be an extreme
full-time position.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jim, with respect to the board
minutes and records department, there is an increased cost of $56,000
because several of our advisory boards appear to want verbatim
records. Now, I would like to get a better understanding of that. I'd
like to -- and maybe you're not the one to answer the question. I think
maybe the county staff would have to answer that question. What
purpose it serves and how will things be done more efficiently as a
result of providing verbatim records for some of these advisory
boards, and which advisory boards are asking for them?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that's what I was -- if you weren't
going to ask the question, I was going to ask the question. I know for
a fact that the planning commission, there's been several requests for
commissioners on the dais, and one on the phone right now, that the
planning commission have verbatim minutes. There's been several
instances when you've had a planned unit development or a
conditional use or variance that's been controversial that has gone in
front of the planning commission, and in order to be prepared for that
presentation or that issue when it gets put to the board, commissioners
have asked to go over the deliberations in the planning commission to
see if they can get additional information from the deliberation and
from the public comment. We've provided the tapes, because we tape
Page 227
June 29, 2004
them all. And some commissioners say that makes it difficult for
them, because they would like to have the ability to mark, to take
those notes and stuff on a printed page. And the TV tape doesn't
necessarily get it.
A while back, almost a year and a half or two years ago, we
basically carne away from court reporters in total, and we have a little
scribe that sits there from the clerk's office that basically takes the
minutes, but it isn't a verbatim minute, and then basically comes out
with the meeting minutes. And it's up to the board how much detail
you want from those particular advisory committees.
I know that the planning commission has been one where there
has been requests from commissioners, Board of County
Commissioners, to have a written record that's more detailed than just
the minutes of the meeting that's done from the scribe taking freehand
notes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, is it just the planning
commission? I can understand--
MR. MUDD: Just the planning commission. And we've all had
e-mails from a certain member of the Coastal Advisory Committee
about board proceedings and more detailed minutes in that particular
case, and I don't think I need to bring that issue up anymore. I think
you know exactly who I'm talking about.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I sure do. Let me ask you a
question. There have been occasions when I had the same need to get
a written transcript of something from one of these meetings. I found
that the staff was able to look at the tape, do a search and transcribe
the information I needed. Would that suffice, rather than having a
court reporter for the entire planning commission meeting or is it --
would that result in more work?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I would ask your fellow
commissioners what they think on that particular issue, because this
request is coming from the dais as far as the planning commission is
Page 228
June 29, 2004
concerned. Jim, are you aware of any other ones?
MR. MITCHELL: The only -- the other ones that we're aware of
is Coastal Advisory Committee. We have heard quite a bit for those --
that group definitely wants minutes of verbatim records. There has
been rumors or discussions about other ones, and unfortunately I don't
have a list of them in front of me. Contractor's licensing board. We
occasionally, actually here recently, pretty regularly get requests, why
don't we have verbatim minutes. What you have in front of you is
probably the worst -- the highest cost that it could be if we were to do
all of them. If you wanted to add one or two of them, we'll go back
and look at that cost, work with our court reporter to see what those
would be and bring that back to you.
Let me take you down the road a little bit more, though, okay.
One of the things that we're going to be looking at is a proj ect very
similar to what they recently did in the courthouse, and that is a
program over there called Court Smart, where in essence you do not
have a court reporter sitting in here, it's all computerized, and you
have a program that recognizes the language. And it's an on-line, real
time type of transcription that's taking place. We're going to look at
the cost to bring that in here. And hopefully that will be something
that we'll be able to recapture, that cost in the outer years by not
having to have a contracted court reporter on-board.
That's going to be a significant undertaking, something that we're
going to start looking at this year. And if it becomes something that is
fiscally feasible, it will probably be included in our '06 budget.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'm familiar with the system.
I think it works fairly well. But my concern really is not with a single
request, let's say, for the planning advisory commission. My concern
is, and it says several of the advisory boards. And I am concerned that
if people begin to -- all of the advisory boards begin to request this,
we're going to be faced with a fairly heavy expense at a time when
we're trying to control budget expenditures.
Page 229
June 29, 2004
So I would just ask the commissioners, would it meet your needs
if you were to ask the staff to provide you a transcript of that portion
of the minutes that is relevant to the subject you wish to review. I
have been able to do that, I get four or five pages back, typewritten,
and it has been very effective. And that way we don't have to
transcribe the entire proceeding in order to provide us something we
can leaf through and search for.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I know that the planning
commission said that they would also like to have this done. I can see
where maybe the planning commission, but I don't think -- I don't
believe that we should do it for the rest of the commissioners -- or
commissions that we have.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I wouldn't have any
objection to doing it for the planning commission. That's a very
important proceeding.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's important, because that's --
that's directly up to us after they make decisions. I know that I
requested it, and I know that there's been people on the planning
commission also that's requested that we take verbatim minutes on
that. But I would think that the other advisory boards and the other
commissions that we have, I believe that, Commissioner Coyle, like
you say, that if we need that, we can get that off of the -- off the
record.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To answer Commissioner
Coyle's question, there are more than just the county commission and
the planning commission doing research on action that a planning
commission or the Board of Commissioners has done. So I think it's
an important tool to provide the public. But I don't know if it's proper
for us to make that -- those decisions here today in a workshop. I feel
it should be done in a public hearing, and let's discuss this issue in
Page 230
June 29, 2004
more detail and not have our advisory board spend the taxpayers'
money, or request to do so. That's my opinion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree with Commissioner
Henning on that, I don't think this is quite the place. We need to
approach this from another direction.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Yes, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me follow up and make sure I
understand what we're doing. Jim, you said the $56,000 was the
maximum you would expect if several of these committees were to do
that. So we're discussing a budget item of $56,000 that assumes that
more than one will ask for this. So we have to make a decision on a
budget.
Now, do you want to go ahead and approve the entire amount of
this, or would you rather find out how much it's going to cost to do the
planning commission alone and then evaluate the others as they come
along?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why don't we put it in the budget
and we can always take it out after we make our discussions and find
out. Why don't we leave it in and then we can always take it out later.
MR. MITCHELL: Commissioners, what I'll be happy to provide
to you is that additional -- there's two things that we're looking at here.
One is there's going to be an increase in the contract itself for the --
what we're doing today. And the other is additional verbatim minutes.
What we'll do is go and break that down, here's the contractual
amount, here's what the increase in that is. Here is the cost if you only
add the planning commission component of it. So you will know that
data. We'll get that back to you today.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. That will be very helpful.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now that we finished that
Page 23 1
June 29, 2004
discussion, Jim, I just want to say, Mr. Mitchell, that I found the --
today's -- this year's or upcoming year's budget request very helpful
when you take previous years and do the comparable, you take out the
court system, the Article 5 system -- very good budget, so I'm very
pleased. I had some concerns initially, but after sitting down and
reviewing and studying it, it's a great budget.
MR. MITCHELL: One of the things that I wanted to comment
on, and this came out of your workshop yesterday, and I wanted to
compliment Commissioner Coyle. You had requested that we do a
reconciliation of the Article 5 impacts. I agree 100 percent. And we
look forward to working with Mike and Mr. Mudd in helping you
guys do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was going to be my next
question. We really do need to work that out. We need your help to
decide how we do it, because it really is confusing to me. I have no
idea how we're getting jobbed (sic) by the state government on this
deal. So it would be real good if we were to understand.
MR. MITCHELL: There's so much components to that. You
have the clerk's impact, you've got the state attorney's impact, you've
got lost fines and fees, the public defender coming in there, and to see
the whole ball of wax is really what you as the legislative body needs
to see.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. And you believe it's
possible to do that?
MR. MITCHELL: I know it's possible. It's not going to happen
overnight. You know, it's going to take a little bit of time. But I
would suspect within a 30, 60-day period. Let me back up. It may
take a little longer than that because we're on the eve of going live
with Article 5 today. Tomorrow is our day. We are going to be here
late tonight. We're in a go position. We feel very comfortable. But as
usual there is an expectation there's going to be wrinkles that we have
to iron out. And there could be additional changes coming down.
Page 232
June 29, 2004
But we actually look forward to working with you on that. That's
a number we want to see also.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We can't do it alone.
MR. MITCHELL: Neither can we.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Subject to other questions, I have one. And I just
want to make sure that you understand that there's a missing link in
this budget, okay, and there's a missing link in our budget that we
submitted, and it has to do with the $4 fee that they can -- and I
alluded to it yesterday, but there's a $4 fee that they tack on now to
every record that gets recorded. Two dollars goes -- and Mr. Mitchell
gave you a little diagram in his response. I asked Mr. Mitchell, I said
you know, just kidding with him. I'll kid with him a little in public
right now. I said, you know, I'm the one that had all the tabs on your
damn budget and all the questions that you answered in your sheet and
you didn't even put me on the distribution list.
But he -- and good responses, by the way. And I did look at the
budget, because it was very difficult in this year, you know, because it
isn't -- you can't compare. It's very difficult to figure out exactly
what's going to the state. But there's this $4 fee. And this $4 fee
equates to approximately $2.7 million. So I want to -- our projections
are $2.7 million. And it can be for court IT related for the county's
side. Clerk gets $1.90, the Board of County Commissioners gets $2,
and there's 10 cents that goes out to the state for their interconnection
of their system, for future interconnection.
I'm going through our court IT accounts to figure out -- because it
can pay -- it can pay for a color printer cartridge, okay, on the court
side of the house, and that's how far down we have to bore to figure
out what that cost is going to be. And I'm going through right now
state attorney, a public defender, court budget, to figure out how many
printer cartridges they project they're going to need. And it's not like
Page 233
June 29, 2004
somebody counted them last year so that they'll know. No, they have
to take a rough guess, because nobody counted. They have an idea in
the general voucher, but I can't tell you who used them. So we're
going down into that depth to figure out how much of that money that
I can put in. It's earmarked. You can't do anything with it from the
board side of the house except for IT costs in the court system.
I believe we can find around $350,000 of this IT money that I can
put into the court side and into the public defender in the state
attorney's office and move general fund monies out. And we're going
through that itemization right now. And I'll have the definitives for
you for the hearing in September so that you'll know exactly what it is.
At the same time, I'm trying to interject a million dollars into the
clerk's side of the house. We had an interesting conversation a while
back about, you can take it. No, I can't take it. You can take it. No,
you can't take it, okay. Here, take it, will you. It's the first time
anybody said they couldn't take a million dollars from me.
And we all went back and we read it again, and yes indeed, it can
be used. The clerk has made an honest offer in the fact that he said
hey, look-it, I'll take those dollars. I was going to take it out of my
trust fund money, and it basically talks about financing his
management information system on the court side. He was going to
take it out of his trust fund. He alluded to that trust fund in his
response to you in a letter. That he could set one up.
At the same time, if there's monies or there's a public records
modernization program that can be used for all the taxpayers, he can
use money from his trust fund instead of using our general fund in
order to do that. And there's about 200 to $400,000 worth of stuff I
saw in that budget that I need to talk to Mr. Mitchell about and see if
there's a way that we can use that trust fund money in the fact that I'm
giving him a million one -- see, it's a million one already -- a million
one to maybe get 400,000 back on the general fund monies within this
budget so I can bring some more dollars to bear -- tax dollars. And I
Page 234
June 29, 2004
still have to talk to Jim about that particular item. But he has time
because he doesn't give his state budget where that trust fund is
reported until the 1 st of August. So we have a couple of minutes to go
through that dialogue.
MR. MITCHELL: Let me follow up on that, if I can. And we
certainly appreciate what Mr. Mudd is offering there. Currently we
have a public records modernization trust fund that has an extremely
limited use. There's -- it cannot -- it can be used to enhance public --
the computer systems related to public records. But there can be no
personal services costs. It's a very limited use, but it applies across a
number of different areas. It's not limited to court area only.
We did participate in the SAP acquisition. We actually spent $1.2
million out of that public records modernization trust fund. With
Article 5, they introduced an additional public records modernization
trust fund, and that's where that $1.90 that flows to the clerk's office
will reside. And it has a limited use. It can only be used for public
record modernization related to courts. But it can be used for personal
services and things of that nature.
The budget that you have in front of you only shows our MIS
costs for non-court related activity. The court side is about $2.2
million. We're getting ready to enhance our criminal -- actually our
entire court information system. We're moving from a mainframe
system into a more database, more current system. So there is a huge
demand this year on dollars for court related IT. We anticipate that
there is probably about a $600,000 shortfall between what we're going
to receive in that court related public records modernization trust fund
and what we're going to receive. Our plan was to go over here to our
other public records modernization trust fund since we can use that to
fund this. And in doing that we would be losing monies here that we
could use for other projects down the road. The money that Mr.
Mudd's referring to, the $2 that you get, is very limited use. It can
only be used for courts. And it's limited to state attorney, public
Page 235
June 29, 2004
defender and the clerk of the circuit court. So there's a winJwin here
where we can fill the hole that we have with a portion of the money
that the county is going to be receiving and at the same time we can
share, as we have in the past, this public records trust fund over here.
So once again, I applaud Mr. Mudd on coming up with that
concept.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, that's great.
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That answered my question.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Boy, that works really well.
MR. MITCHELL: Any other questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're all set.
MR. MITCHELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks for that letter yesterday, by the
way. That cleared up a few things for me.
MR. MUDD: The next constitutional in our -- I'm sorry? Ms.
Filson, you okay? Good.
The next constitutional and the last constitutional before the
wrap- up is the sheriff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that the hot one?
SHERIFF HUNTER: Is this the hot one?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're not going to tell you which
one's wired.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Good morning, Commissioners. Don
Hunter, Sheriff, Collier County.
Page 236
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Morning.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Are we ready?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
SHERIFF HUNTER: I'd like to introduce a couple of people.
Actually, three people. To my far right is Captain Chris Freeman,
who is the jail administrator and runs all three facilities, the Naples
j ail, the Immokalee j ail and the drill academy.
MR. FREEMAN: Good morning.
SHERIFF HUNTER: To my left is Chief Greg Smith. Greg is
responsible for the judicial and corrections components of the agency,
meaning the bailiff group that maintains the security and protocol
within the court system, as well as the corrections responsibility. He
also has records, recordkeeping and public records of the agency and
various other functions, including warrants and fugitive warrant
service. And then to my left is director Crystal Kinzel, our chief
finance officer for the agency and in large part responsible for the
budget preparation. And all three, as well as some additional staff
who we asked to come with us, will be available for additional
questions that the board may have.
If I may take just a moment to make a brief statement to give you
an overview of where I believe we currently stand as an agency and as
a county, I would appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Madam Chair.
To begin, as you all know, our most important outcome measure
is, that we are typically judged by, is our crime rate and the incidence
of crime within our county, and tangentially, there's also this issue of
the fear of crime that we see in many populations across the state and
nation. And I am here to tell you that I believe in Collier County we
enjoy one of the lowest crime rates, certainly in our region, if not the
Page 237
June 29, 2004
state, and for seven years going now, we have had reductions in crime
rate, which is the risk of crime that each individual member of this
community suffers, as well as any visitor to this county would suffer,
and we now are at a crime rate that we have never seen in this county
since the beginning of the collection of these statistics by the State of
Florida. And we're pretty happy about that. But nonetheless, we are
not in any way satisfied, because we still have over 7,700 victims of
crime in this county. Each one of them significant. Many of those
being burglaries to homes, our most secure place, in our minds,
psychologically, and therefore, very significant situations.
Nonetheless, we have a good outcome there. And I think if you
judge us by that, we are doing the right things and moving in the right
direction. But again, we're not satisfied where we currently reside.
We also conduct from time to time community surveys that
demonstrate to us that there are a few things of some importance to
our citizens that we need to be mindful of. But yet our citizens on the
whole believe that they are safe to walk in the neighborhood, shop,
attend theatre, go to the Philharmonic, and that they generally enj oy a
very good life here, quality of life is very good. Their concerns, as
demonstrated in the surveys, typically revolve around the presence
and visibility of more deputy sheriffs and patrol vehicles, and
especially traffic enforcement, which is on all of our minds, safety on
the roadways.
We have recently spent many hours with your productivity study
group. I'd like to say enjoyable hours, but they were -- there were
hard questions, of course, as you directed, and we did enjoy hosting
them for the afternoon and giving a tour of the jail, which has become
something of a focal point in this budget year, this ensuing budget
here, owing to numerous consultant studies that were conducted over
the course of 17 years by this board and its predecessors.
We have demonstrated through those consultant studies that we
are suffering from an overpopulation in the Collier County jail facility.
Page 238
June 29, 2004
Your productivity study group, as I say, asked many good questions,
but left us with the impression that their questions were answered.
And we have received no further follow-up from the productivity
study group pertaining to any unanswered question and any confusion
that may have existed in that group. So I believe that we are of one
mind at the moment.
Focusing in on the 60 positions. I may -- actually, we're going to
reserve, hopefully, some time for the captain and the chief to explain
the 60 positions that have been asked of the board for this ensuing
fiscal year. There are other positions. I was attentive to the
presentation of the supervisor of elections when there's -- when Mrs.
Edwards' staff made presentation, and if it were our case that we could
satisfy the needs of this county for traffic enforcement, the evolving
violence and the attacks on homes, businesses and vehicles by way of
machinery, I think you would find that we could easily fit within your
budget policy and we would be satisfied, I think, or more fully satisfy
the board that we've done what you've asked us to do.
Regrettably, though, we're unable to stop the construction of new
schools and nor should I suggest that we would try to stand in the way
of the construction of new schools. Nor in people having babies or
new visitors coming to the county or part-time residents or full-time
residents. That's just simply our situation.
But all of those visitors, residents to this county bring with them
a certain set of needs that the agency and you must respond to. In our
case, it is new businesses coming out of the ground, new homes
coming out of the ground, utility sheds, construction sites,
construction sheds, heavy equipment, new vehicles on the roadway,
vessels on the waterway, all to be both protected and policed for
safety. Those are the concerns that we deal with.
And we are a very labor intensive organization, as you know,
because roughly 80 percent of the request we have before you is for
personal services, the ability to respond to a person's need.
Page 239
June 29, 2004
And that response takes many forms. One is the simple
answering of a phone. In the 911 emergency center where we take
that first initial contact with government service and we hand that off
numerous times, whether to EMS, to fire service or to a sheriffs
deputy responding, 80 percent of the time it will be a sheriffs deputy
responding to some needed service. A call for service. And we triage
those, to use a medical analogy, we triage those calls so that the call is
either -- if we can have the individual come to us for a walk-in report,
we may take the report over the telephone, or if absolutely insistent,
we will send a deputy sheriff, a very expensive resource, to the caller,
the complainant on that particular call for service. And we consider
all calls complaints, if you will. Complaint of noise, a complaint of
traffic, a complaint of a burglary having occurred, a robbery, et cetera.
So we are labor intensive, and as a result of that, we have
provided you with a budget that reflects this need that the community
is experiencing in this burgeoning population and burgeoning
construction that Collier County has been suffering, if you will, for the
last couple of decades. And I don't see any end to it. And I know that
your county manager and his staff is busily attempting to predict
where we will be next year, two years from now, five years from now,
10 years from now. And we share in that concern.
So you will see a part of this budget, if I may bifurcate it a little
bit, part of the budget is a response to this increasing need to protect
property and people and to investigate those cases where we've been
unable to prevent the crime from occurring. For instance, two recent
cases you'll -- of high priority that you've undoubtedly read about,
we've just had an individual arrested from a weekend shooting, a
killing, an estranged husband killed his wife, fled to the east coast.
We've been able to make the arrest through the FCIC/NCIC system.
That person will be delivered to the jail hopefully today. We had
another shooting, a woman shot her husband in the head. He
apparently will survive, but nonetheless, that cost us six hours of
Page 240
June 29, 2004
non-regular duty time, overtime, on that scene, to extract her safely
without having to kill her, from her home, and placed her in the
Collier County jail.
And you will hear evidence today that our inmate population is
becoming more representative of a far more violent and serious group
of individuals. I think that's just evolutionary. And we could suggest
that many counties across this state and across the nation are suffering
the same type of impact. Nonetheless, you will see that part of the
budget is responsive to that. More investigators, an Orangetree
substation consisting of the minimum staffing, 10 people, that's two
people per shift, 5.5 people for a 24-hour post. That's two people per
shift. You'll see four investigators. You'll see some people coming off
of grants that we've been very fortunate to have received over the
course of years from the federal government. We've become a very
competitive county here in terms of retrieving federal dollars sent by
our taxpayers to the federal government to fund necessary positions.
But those are coming off grant now. Over the course of years it's
known that we will gradually come off those positions. They'll remain
necessary. They're patrol positions and school resource officer
positions that will be necessary. That's one part.
The other part is a 60 inmate population supervisors, if you will,
the corrections officers of this county, who we will need to add to the
expanded facility. And I know that we all -- we spoke with you
earlier prior to the submission of the budget. And I had originally
forecasted we might need 110 corrections officers. We believe that by
phasing this move and by reorganizing ourself in a way that will
provide that we can occupy the current facility, part of it, while we
occupy a more fully expanded facility, that we could reduce the actual
need of additional staff to about 60.
And what you will hear today is that if we don't move
immediately to begin hiring, putting those members, those new
corrections members in the academy of five months in field training,
Page 241
June 29, 2004
in the operation of the facility for approximately three months, which
is the way that this works, that we will miss our opening date. So we
are compelled to begin seeking these new members, because it does
take about three months to hire them, five months to train them in the
certification academies in the State of Florida, another two to three
months to train them on the facility and at their post. So you're
looking at virtually well in excess of a year just to have that person
ready to supervise the inmate population.
I have seen a sudden surge. Again, you'll hear some of the
specifics on this this morning, but I've seen a sudden surge in the
complaints that the agency is receiving from inmates, owing to the
overcrowding conditions in the jail facilities maintained by this
county. And I have never seen that before to the extent that we see it
today. I won't be able to quote you numbers, but I know that we have,
for instance, two cases under litigation today that can be directly
traced back to our overcrowding situation.
And the overcrowding becomes even more significant, I believe
Chief Smith will be able to give you greater testimony to this,
becomes more significant when you put more and more people into a
tighter and tighter space. You not only concentrate contagion that's
shared not only by the inmate population but by the jail deputies who
supervise them, contagion, some of it very serious and potentially
fatal, like MRSA, which is a resistant strain of Staphylococcus, staph
infection. You not only concentrate that contagion, but you
concentrate bad attitudes, a very violent inmate population who are
combative, not only with one another but with jail deputies, and you
create a situation that becomes very difficult to control.
And I give great weight and my strongest respect to the
corrections officers, the very professional corrections officers of this
agency for their ability to maintain control over this more and more
violent jail population who have been squeezed, this inmate
population has been squeezed into a very tight space.
Page 242
June 29, 2004
We were designed for 306 inmates. We're running well above
that, over 700. And just in the Naples jail facility. You'll hear some
of that, I'm sure, momentarily.
Those are my concerns. As I say, we've had three consultant
studies before funded, your predecessors funded, to demonstrate
whether we needed expanded facilities or not. And I think any
growing county, it's a given that you are ultimately going to need jail
expansion. What we've been able to do over the course of 1 7 years
since the initial study was published in '87 is that we've been able to
identify some concepts that have assisted us in relieving the need for
the board to construct that expansion. But as you know, that
expansion is virtually done. We're on schedule, we're told, to occupy
in September of next year. And owing to that, we have requested the
60 positions.
Having said all of that, I appreciate your attentiveness and the
support that we've enjoyed from this board previously. We will work
with this board to do the very best we can to limit the impact on the
public. I am unhappily here to report that we were unable to
completely comply with your policy in the letter of it, but I absolutely
guarantee you that we attempted to comply with the spirit of it to the
best of our ability, because we know that this board is faced with a
huge infrastructure need, very large -- for this county -- very large
concerns from the public pertaining to what is necessary from our
constituents. And we want to be your partners, not your foes in this.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Go ahead. Do you want to
proceed?
SHERIFF HUNTER: I am -- and I'm going to excuse myself if I
may. I've asked the finance director, the chief and the captain to
remain. If we run into any major stumbling blocks, I'll come back
over. But I need to be over at headquarters building this morning, if I
may.
Page 243
June 29, 2004
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before you go, Sheriff, I would just
like to give you a personal observation. I think we've got the finest
sheriffs department in the State of Florida. I think your people do a
really, really good job. And I'm sure the people of Collier County are
very satisfied with the services you perform.
Our problems are purely budgetary in nature. And I do not think
we would like to do anything that would diminish your ability to
provide the necessary services to the people of Collier County. But
the rate of increase of the budget is, of course, every year exceeding
our fundraising abilities without turning to increases in property tax
rates. And as each year goes by, we get closer to the point where
we're going to be forced into a property tax increase.
Now, there are some who argue that property taxes here are
relatively low and they're not maxed out like some of the other
counties. But the problem is that we have very high property values.
And so our current millage rates multiplied by property values results
in fairly high taxes for our residents. And the last thing I ever want to
do is try to max out the millage on property taxes in Collier County.
There are a lot of hidden dangers to that. Weare already a donor
county. And the more we increase our property taxes, the more likely
more money is going to get transferred to other counties in the State of
Florida. So we do ourselves harm in two ways: We increase property
taxes, we penalize our residents in Collier County, and we also wind
up supporting other states -- or other counties in the state that don't
have the same revenue stream we do. So we're viewed as a cash cow
in Tallahassee for that reason. So we've got to avoid that to the extent
that we can.
And so my discussions today are going to be focused on how we
can work together to achieve the common goal of meeting your
objectives without a tax increase, and trying to do it in the most
efficient manner possible. But I hope there is no doubt about our
endorsement and support for the sheriffs department and for you
Page 244
June 29, 2004
personally.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good. Commissioner Halas --
SHERIFF HUNTER: I believe there can be no doubt from the
public that this board has been a very strong, strong supporter of law
enforcement. And we very much, not only are we aware of it, but we
appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sheriff Hunter, I want to commend
you for the wonderful outstanding service you've had here in the
community in regards to crime rate.
My concerns, again, are similar to what Commissioner Coyle
stated, and that is we gave direction to all the other constituents --
constitution officers and asked them to come back with a lean and
mean budget, and all of them have come back with that. And I
understand your concerns and the concerns of making sure that the
people here in Collier County are safe. But I look at your budget that
you submitted to me and I have some concerns, and I'm hoping maybe
you can give me some answers on that.
When we look at Collier and Lee and Sarasota and Charlotte
County, we look at basically they're a growth county too, a heavy
growth county, especially Lee and Sarasota County. And when I look
at what they must be doing to hold their budgets down -- and when I
say holding down, I'm looking at the unincorporated aspects of this,
I'm wondering what they're doing different than what we're doing here
in Collier County.
When you look at, for instance, we're at about $403 per person,
and when you look at Lee it's 296, and Sarasota it's 304, and
Charlotte's 262. That's the counties that we border around in this area.
And I'm just wondering how are they being able to control their
budget and yet still meet the needs of the citizens in regards to crime
and other issues that all of us are confronted with each day. So I'm
hoping you can give me an answer on that, sir.
Page 245
June 29, 2004
SHERIFF HUNTER: Well, the answer would likely take several
weeks, because what you're talking about is digging into the
individual budgets of individual agencies that serve unincorporated
areas. I know that one of the answers is that Sarasota and Lee County,
two of your top examples, are simply doing it by way of annexation.
Cities are annexing more and more territory in Sarasota and Lee
County, and they have major metropolitan agencies that satisfy the
need for law enforcement services in that area.
When we begin to try to take -- strip away, if you will, the layers
of the onion and look at more pure information, if you will, from Lee
County and Sarasota, then you get into the detail. Cost of liability
insurance policies, cost of bonding, deputy sheriffs' services, the cost
of maintaining vehicle fleets, fuel, those kinds of costs, is what you
want to begin to look at.
You will also begin to look at things like cost of living and the
ability to recruit, retain members of your agency. Typically that's
done through incentives such as salaries. And you will see that there
are different salaries offered by the various agencies across the State
of Florida, the hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the State
of Florida. And what might work in one location will not work in
another.
This leads me to observe that we've suddenly filled our positions
in the agency and it's something that you will hear this morning,
likely . You will remember that we had been running historically
about 80 positions vacant in this agency, well beyond the 4 percent
attrition that you predict each year. And then suddenly we've been
able, and thank God, we've been able to fill those positions that we
have previously had vacant. These were critical positions in the jail
and in the comm. center. I think that you will find in Lee County, for
instance, that they were not suffering that problem. They were not
suffering the need to spend overtime in order to satisfy posts in the
communications, 911 communications area, and the jail. So we've had
Page 246
June 29, 2004
a greater expense, because we're paying overtime, time and a half
dollars for what they were paying straight time.
You might find the same in Sarasota. I can't -- I don't wish to
speculate, but I do wish to suggest that that is a very difficult question
or observation to respond to, because it would require detailed review
of the individual budgets of those agencies.
What I can tell you and what the productivity study group, I
believe, will also tell you, is that this agency is very careful, very
efficient, very effective in our outcomes, and that we are doing a very
good job at attempting to manage our budgets to the best of our ability
to remain within your policies. And that's my certification to you.
But that does not mean that we're not open to suggestions and
recommendations that get us to the same level of effectiveness or
better but can demonstrate more efficiency. For instance, you funded
for us mobile digital terminals in the vehicles. We were able to
acquire some grant funding as well to defray the cost. Lee County had
already established all of that at some previous date. So had Sarasota.
I recall in my former life as a member of the Department of Justice
under the LEAA programs that I assisted with Sarasota acquiring their
terminals back in the '70s. Those are expenses that Sarasota and Lee
County do not suffer other than replacement. We suffer because we
are currently attempting to acquire that technology.
Again, just by way of analogy, that's anecdotal, but I know that
those are expenses and issues that we face that they do not face.
Sarasota does not have the same cost of living that we do. I believe
we're above them. I know that Lee County is not at our level, cost of
living. To attract people to this county, whether it's in law
enforcement uniforms, EMS uniforms, fire uniforms or the people that
you surround yourself with in your professional positions, it is
difficult to acquire, because they know they can get a similar position
in a county that does not cost them the same.
Those are considerations, and I just ask the board to be aware of
Page 247
June 29, 2004
that. And we will certainly work with you in any evaluations or study
that you wish to undertake.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What concerns me is in my former
life I was with a manufacturing company that was competitive
worldwide, so we wanted to find out how we compared with our
competition. When I look at the cost per man here and I add up all six
columns, 515,403,296,304,262, and it's kind ofa spread -- and then
I divide that by six, it comes out about $355 a person. That seems to
be the general trend. And we seem to be somewhat above that, $403
is what you proj ected.
Then I decided that well, maybe that's not a fair assessment. So
what I'll do is I'll throw out the high and I'll throw out the very low,
and then we'll come up with an average there, including Collier
County. And of course that even drops it down lower. So that's
probably not a true assessment. That comes out about $338 per
person.
So I would say that what we need to do is I think we really gave
you budget direction and we gave budget direction to all the other
constitutional officers, and we're in a dilemma. We've got a lot of
infrastructure that we've got to address and -- just as you do. And
we're trying our darnedest to make sure that we keep within our
budget confines of what the county manager has set the limits to. And
we were really hoping that you -- you know, we could work with you,
and we want to work with you, to see if we can bring this in line.
We're really looking for some sort of reduction here, if at all possible.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Understood. And as I said before, in my
preliminary opening comment, I'd love to be able to work with you,
we're your partners, and we certainly will do everything that we can.
We have submitted a budget based upon our understanding, and none
of us have that crystal ball that would be wonderful to have. We don't
know what lies ahead. We've done what we can to roll in our trend
information in our history of this county, 25 years, in my experience,
Page 248
June 29, 2004
to try to predict to the best of our ability what will be necessary in
order to maintain what we currently enjoy.
This is not an expansion of any services to give you a crime rate
of2,000, 100,000 people, or to suddenly see some new surge in
incarceration rate. This is just to maintain where we are. And I
certainly understand the concerns of the board. Again, keeping in
mind that Collier County enjoys a number of different things other
than being the cash cow for the State of Florida, or one of them, along
with Palm Beach and Orlando through its tourism dollars, et cetera.
Being a cash cow is one thing.
We also know that we happen to enjoy being the largest county
in the State of Florida, and every person at the end of every roadway
in this county deserves exactly the same service as another. And that
means a great deal of effort goes into deployment strategies to try to
provide and deliver that service. I think we're far more comparable to
your EMS group, another pie labor cost, if you will, to the Board of
County Commissioners, as opposed to say the planning group or to the
clerk's members who sit at terminals and can shut the terminal off at
the end of the day and go home.
I think if you look to see what we represent, a labor intensive
group working every square mile of this 2,000 square mile plus
county, that you will better understand the needs of the agency, along,
again, with the increased inmate capacity that you have already
authorized and are well underway to construct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But don't you feel that other
counties have the same growing pains that we have? They have--
they're looking to lower their crime rate, they also have a growth
problem whereby they're getting more and more people that are
coming into their community to live. So I think they're facing
basically the same kind of problems. And obviously they must be
doing something right to try to keep the cost down. And I guess that's
where I'd like to see if you could go back to your budget and see if
Page 249
June 29, 2004
you can tweak it some more from where we are today.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Well, again, at the risk of irritating
Commissioner Halas, because I know we've had these discussions
previously, and I certainly don't intend to irritate you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, and I'm not here to irritate you
either, sir. We're here to try to work this out together.
SHERIFF HUNTER: We are well aware of the numbers. We've
assisted in putting the numbers together in comparison form. And
Finance Director Kinzel worked with the other finance directors of
these agencies on a regular, ongoing, routine basis to discover any
new ideas, any new ways of saving a dollar. What we have
discovered is that the various agencies in the State of Florida enjoy
different methods of accounting. The board funds different things.
They have different pricing for fuel, for services, for -- they may
provide weapons or they may not provide weapons. They may have
Tasers in their agency or may not have Tasers. There are trade-offs
there, there are advantages and disadvantages. They may issue pepper
spray or they may not issue pepper spray.
There is wide variation in the levels of professionalism, tools
available to individual members throughout the State of Florida and
the agencies of the State of Florida. And I -- I don't disagree that
when we think of ourselves, we think of ourselves more liken to Palm
Beach, Sarasota, somewhat to Lee County, although I don't believe
they're at our level, this county's level. And I choose to live here, not
Lee County. But I do believe that when people try to frame this in
their mind, they liken us, Collier County, or actually, they try to liken
other counties to us. Palm Beach and Sarasota come to mind.
Nonetheless, I think you have to get into the detail of the budget to
understand why there's variation in a cost per capita or the cost per
staff member, before you can simply say we ought to be able to do it
for this. I also had that --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I look at, you know, like you
Page 250
June 29, 2004
suggested, using Sarasota as a guide. So if we look at that, they're
about $100 cheaper than we are per person.
SHERIFF HUNTER: I'm not suggesting we use Sarasota as a
guide. I'm simply saying the public, when they think of Collier
County, I think they liken us more to Sarasota County, because it's a
coastal county. It enjoys the same type of part-time resident traffic,
visitor traffic. The difference right straight out of the box is they have
several, actually, major municipal police agencies that provide
services to the incorporated areas. Sarasota Police Department is one
of our largest municipal agencies. They also have Longboat Key and
a number of other police agencies that they rely upon at Sarasota
County Sheriffs Office to provide services.
Again, that's just a -- as with you, a broad brush approach. You
have to delve into the detail, and I didn't mean to suggest that we
should select Sarasota County as our -- comparable.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the end result is, if we can't
come up with some kind of compromise, and I really hope we can
work on some kind of a compromise, we're going to be forced with
raising the millage. And I'd sure hate to say well, it's because the
sheriffs budget is, we feel is out of whack. I don't want to put that
label on you, sir.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Well, yes, I would hope that you wouldn't
consider us out of whack.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I do a little bit. I mean, when
we look at what, 20 percent increase or 19 percent increase, that's
pretty substantial. So, I'll let my other commissioners, maybe they've
got some questions for you, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? Are you up there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I am. Thank you very
much. I find it works a lot better if I turn off the speaker on this phone
and just use the regular phone.
Yeah, I share many of the same concerns that Commissioner
Page 251
June 29, 2004
Halas and Commissioner Coyle have already stated. My question to
you, Sheriff Hunter, is if we didn't approve this budget in its entirety,
would the safety and welfare of the citizens of Collier County be in
jeopardy?
SHERIFF HUNTER: If you did not approve it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In its entirety.
SHERIFF HUNTER: In its entirety. Well, Commissioner
Coletta, I think that -- I don't wish to speculate, and I believe that the
Naples Daily News would probably enjoy the theatrics of my trying to
suggest that there's great fear to be inspired by a reduction in budget.
What I'd rather say is what we have done is carefully construct the
budget around what we perceive to be your needs, your concerns, your
constituents' concerns. For instance, the Orangetree area that we've
postponed for at least five years, and the jail that you've constructed.
It will be occupied at some point and we must by law provide
corrections deputies to maintain the care and custody of that inmate
population. And again, that inmate population is becoming far more
serious and violent and we're only holding the serious and violent
largely in the jail facilities of the county.
So I would, sure, certainly I would say that if we do not provide
for the proper incarceration of inmates and offenders of this county,
then certainly the public would be at greater risk. But we've already
attended to that need and now it's a simple matter of staffing it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, so in other words, if we
can't approve the budget, then these inmates would have to be
released? Is that what we're saying?
SHERIFF HUNTER: I'd say at some point there will be a
successful case against the Collier County Sheriffs Office and, more
importantly, the Board of County Commissioners that are always
joined in these cases, inasmuch as you're responsible under the
constitution for the facilities.
Yes, it would make for a very dangerous situation here, because
Page 252
June 29, 2004
we are incarcerating more of the career criminal population of this
county and that is the result -- that has resulted in a reduction in crime
here.
So if you turn them back to the street as opposed to incarcerating
them, then I will absolutely guarantee that that will be a more
dangerous situation, yes, sir. That would be a fair characterization. I
adopt your view.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The bottom line is is that if we
don't approve this budget in its entirety that we will have to release
prisoners out onto the street; is that what we're saying?
SHERIFF HUNTER: No, no, I didn't say that. And hopefully I
haven't confused you in that regard.
Earlier in my opening remarks I attempted to separate the budget
in two parts, if you will, one would be expanded positions that are
responsive to workload, new facilities such as schools coming out of
the ground and operational next year, and Orangetree, which is a
service area that has gone without a substation, that constituents have
asked for for about five years. That's one part of the budget.
The other part, just in my analogy, is the staffing, the preliminary
staffing of the jail expansion, the building that sits behind us now to
our northeast. I am not trying to suggest that if you don't staff an
Orangetree substation that suddenly the Orangetree community is
going to be at risk. That is not the need that is fulfilled by a
substation. The need fulfilled by a substation and with the additional
people to staff it would be to maintain control of the Orangetree area,
particularly pertaining to traffic. And traffic hazards, roadway safety,
in the Orangetree community which as you know has a very long
history of safety need.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sheriff Hunter, I'm very well
aware of the needs for Orangetree and I know I'm very well aware of
the needs for the substation there. And I hope that this little talk hasn't
been directed to me as the commissioner of Orangetree area in such a
Page 253
June 29, 2004
way as to try to influence my decision on the budget that if I don't go
along with it, Orangetree substation will no longer exist. I hope this
isn't the way we're going with this.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Mr. Coletta, I'm not trying to be
contentious. You asked me a specific question pertaining to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know, but the way you
answered it and the particular example that you used I found to be
very disturbing, sir.
SHERIFF HUNTER: I'm simply attempting to put it into
perspective for you, Mr. Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coletta, please,
and I'll address you as Sheriff.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sir, if I may suggest, the whole
problem comes down to one simple fact, and it's money . We're either
going to have to cut back on bare-bones items that exist out there now
to be able to meet the needs of the sheriffs department or simply we're
going to have to raise the millage. That's the only two options we have
to be able to meet the needs of your budget as it's so now stated. And
I'm not too sure what we're going to do in that particular direction yet.
I'll leave this up to the rest of my commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The question is the comparable
to other counties. Who put that together? Was that the county
manager who did that?
MS. KINZEL: We both put out different segments of it. I think
Mike did some things from his county perspective. But the ones that
are in our budget book we put that together. And we have some
additional information for you today, Commissioners. For example,
our crime rate is much better than Sarasota --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not done with my question.
So thanks, that's what I was going by, what's in your budget book.
Page 254
June 29, 2004
And there is a disparity there. We didn't put that information together,
it was the sheriffs office that put that together for us.
SHERIFF HUNTER: The material in our budget book was put
together by us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I see that -- the
difference between the different communities. I also seen in your
annual report, a very nice glossy report of the state of the county as far
as law enforcement, I see that we have -- I think it's five additional
programs. That's nice. It's kind of like my wife wants for me to buy a
new Cadillac for her to get her around, and I'm looking at okay, what
can we afford to do? What is our source of income and how can I
provide this to her? And at this time I tell her that I can't afford to
provide that to her. But I am providing -- or we are providing
transportation for my family.
That's a comparable that I see that I have concerns about the
sheriffs department. I agree with what everybody says that think that
we got a wonderful staff in the sheriff s department. Sheriff, you've
over the years provided a great service to the citizens in Collier
County, and visitors. And it's proven over and over each election year
that Sheriff Don Hunter always returns. The problem that I see,
Sheriff, I don't know that we should continue with this proceedings
because I don't see a majority of the commissioners approving your
budget, and I don't hear anybody telling you what to cut, Orangetree
station or the jailor any of that. I think what we're asking is to live in
-- within the guidance that we set forth. That's all.
So if we can -- I think it would be more productive to ask the
Sheriff again to live within the guidance that we set forth. And at the
adoption of the budget let's see if we get a super majority of support,
what we need to adopt the budget, not just a simple majority.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sheriff, I really -- this was given to
me this morning, and it really concerns me. And that's in regard to the
Page 255
June 29, 2004
sheriff costs per capita. Comparing fiscal year '04 and fiscal year '05.
I don't know if you've seen this. But right now you're at $412, and
you're projected to go up to $467 per capita.
SHERIFF HUNTER: No, I'm not aware of that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, this was given to me this
morning by county manager's office, because I asked for additional
information in this. And you can check that and see if maybe we
made a mistake, but that's very -- that's very not so much enlightening,
it's -- I look at that and I'm thinking we're on the wrong track here.
And I would think when you sat down and started looking at your
budget and you look at what it costs to run other departments in other
counties that you can see that you're really not what I call in line. If
you want to compare Palm Beach, I mean, that's kind of like the
Hilton. And of course they've got a population of over a half a million
people.
But if I look at what we have on the west coast here of Florida, I
think we're a little bit out of line. That just is my feeling.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'm not telling you what to
have to cut or anything else, I just think that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I suggest perhaps a way we
might be able to proceed constructively? I tend to agree that it's not
going to do us any good to try to pick through your budget and try to
tell you how you are to do your business, because we can't do that,
we're not qualified to do that. But it does appear that a number of
things in the budget are related to timings: When are things expected
to come on line, when are schools expected to be built, when must you
have the youth relations deputies for the schools and cops in schools
and that sort of thing. And even things like -- at the risk of irritating
Commissioner Coletta, even things like the Orangetree substation,
what can be delayed a few months that would help us get closer to
achieving our mutual goal of finding a compromise on the budget?
Page 256
June 29,2004
Certainly if you're making the assumption that you're going to
have the jail fully staffed in September of next year, what would it
look like if you really had it fully staffed in December of next year?
How many beds are we really going to fill in that period of time?
What will be the impact based upon your assessment, if there were a
delay in fully staffing some of these things? And whether or not there
are any efficiencies that could be achieved with respect to overlaps in
responsibilities of the cops in schools and youth relations deputies and
things of that nature?
We're not qualified to make those decisions, but I'm just throwing
out some ideas that might help you get what you want but not
necessarily on the schedule that you would prefer. And by slipping
the schedule a little bit on some of these things, we might be able to
save enough money we could reach a compromise on the is
SHERIFF HUNTER: May I, Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: If you wanted to respond? I was just
going to say, that's an excellent idea.
SHERIFF HUNTER: We have -- sorry, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I'll just go on and say that's an
excellent idea. It's a good way of -- as you can see, from all of us
here, we have a great deal of respect and admiration for what you and
your staff are doing, and the service that you provide for all of us.
And not only that, nobody's ever hit the pay scale, because we're
happy to pay what you need to pay to keep these superior officers
protecting us. And being able to live in a community that's just so high
priced. And what we're doing is asking, as you can see, very
judiciously, if you can't -- I love the way, maybe realign the schedule
somewhat so that it will bring the cost down so that we can come in on
budget. We don't want to take the money from something else. We're
working on so many things right now with public utilities and
stormwater management and all of the other things that had gone
astray for so long, and we're trying to pick them all up and put them
Page 257
June 29, 2004
all together and make sure everything is taken care of. But we need
your help, too. And I think that's an excellent suggestion, as far as just
the timing, changing that somewhat.
Go ahead. I'm sorry if I spoke too long.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Perfectly all right. Commissioner Coyle,
and Commissioner Fiala, all Commissioners, the -- we do each year
look at phasing in of the positions that appear to be phaseable, if you
will. Certainly Orangetree, for instance, could be phased in
theoretically. We're responding to a constituent request. And that is
the reason I used that as an analogy in trying to respond to
Commissioner Coletta's comments earlier. Would we be safer or
would we be at risk if we don't fund elements of the budget. I'm
simply telling you that some elements of the budget respond to
constituent concerns and considerations as opposed to whether I can
place a risk factor on it. Roadway in the Orangetree area has been an
ongoing concern. And I simply made light of that to respond to that
particular question.
The issue of phasing, and I tried to address this in my initial
comments, phasing of jail staff or school resource officers is
problematic because the schools will literally open -- they're ready to
open today. They will open in August. The elementary schools, the
middle schools and the new high school will open its doors in August.
So we won't be able to satisfy that need immediately. We'll have to
find a way to give some coverage to those schools.
The jail issue is a far more serious situation, because our current
overcrowding, the density of the inmate population within the cell
walls has created significant risk to not only the inmate population that
we are absolutely charged with providing proper care and custody to,
otherwise we suffer federal lawsuits. But it's also a danger and a risk
to the individual jail deputies who maintain the care and custody.
So if you try to slip the date -- and some slippage is going to
occur anyway because, as we know, construction projects historically
Page 258
June 29, 2004
do not come in on the day that they say they're going to be here.
We're simply trying to predict when the doors will be open and when
we can begin to shift inmates into those expanded areas to relieve the
county and the Collier County Sheriffs Office of litigation costs and
relieve the county and the Collier County Sheriffs Office of the very
high risk posed by this very dense population of people living within
those cell confines. That's the only consideration about phasing of the
new jail positions.
So we'd have to go very carefully there. And we'd certainly work
with you to the best of our ability. If there's some delay, we certainly
will be, hopefully, informed of that and we will try to work with it.
But as I expressed to you previously, we're talking about a
one-year lead time in order to occupy that expanded facility in order to
have the people. Three months to find the people, encourage them to
apply, 94 percent fail rate in the application process, and drug screens,
background investigations, and polygraph exams. We get about 6
percent of the applicants to be successful to the process. Takes about
three or more months.
Then an academy required by the State of Florida for minimum
standards, minimum standards, to become a j ail deputy. And then
training in the facility, training on the policy and procedures of the
agency, which control contraband, weapons in the jail, confrontations
between jail deputies and inmates, and inmate upon inmate
confrontations, to be trained on policies and procedures in a manner
maintaining safety in the jail.
So that's a one year period of back-up we need to start planning
for, and that's what we're simply informing you of today through the
budget process. Our best prediction, based upon what we've been told
by your staff of when we would be opening and when we can begin to
relieve the county of these litigation exposures that you currently
enjoy, if you will -- but certainly phasing is one of our devices we
have used historically to relieve not only the agency but the board of
Page 259
June 29, 2004
expense. And we will work on that again, to the best of our ability, if
you'll keep us in the loop on when we will be opening facilities and
that sort of thing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You touched briefly in saying that
we would be -- we would be probably involved in litigation if we
didn't open a new jail.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Yes, I did say something to that effect.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So, do we have that option of not
opening the j ail to try to contain costs, and address all the other issues
to schools, the new schools coming on line and not address the jail at
this point in time until we can figure out how we're going to get the
funding for it?
SHERIFF HUNTER: Well, the board has the authority and
control of the j ail until it is released to me for occupancy. So the
board has the authority to make those decisions. I would advise, if
you're seeking my counsel, I would have to strongly ask that the board
open it as soon as possible in order to relieve the very high risk to jail
deputies that they currently are exposed to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are there any counties that you
used as part of the benchmark that are in the process of expanding a
jailor going to open a jailor have opened an additional jailor an
addition to their jail? Do you know of anybody?
SHERIFF HUNTER: For purposes of design of the jailor -- in
what regard?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What I'm getting at is when they
opened their jail, whether they expanded it or not, what was their cost
involved? How much did it spiral up?
SHERIFF HUNTER: No, sir, a lot of that's uncontrollable from
our aspect.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What I'm asking, though, Sheriff,
is, the counties that you used for a benchmark, have they recently had
Page 260
June 29, 2004
an addition to their jail whereby when they opened it up, what were
the costs involved in bringing that jail on line? How much did the
costs spiral up?
SHERIFF HUNTER: I don't know the answer to that question.
Lee County has expanded, I know.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Can you find that cost out
for us?
SHERIFF HUNTER: If it would be of benefit to the board.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure would, sir.
SHERIFF HUNTER: We'll certainly try to get the cost. But
what I'm trying to convey to Commissioner Halas is that you have
control of most of that cost, other than the actual staffing --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What we're getting at, Sheriff, is
we built the building, and like you say, it's still in our hands until we
turn it over to you. But what I'm getting at is if other counties that you
used as a benchmark at some point in time, recent history, like a year,
six months ago, have brought on an addition to the jail, an expansion
to their jail, what was the cost that the sheriffs department incurred for
bringing that on line? And is it the same rate of the way it's spiraled
for us, it's going to spiral up for us, did it spiral up the same amount
for those other counties?
SHERIFF HUNTER: We will certainly look at that and try to
give you the information. Here's the only caution that I would give
you, knowing from my experience what you run into when you begin
to look at the costs of facilities. When I go back to 1986, '85, August
of '85 when we opened the doors of the current jail, Naples jail
facility, we immediately understood that there was exceptional cost
involved with staffing that facility because of the design that the board
at that time had created for the facility. They had many angles.
Angles, in the nuances of jail practice, are not desirable, as
Commissioner Coyle knows.
When you cannot directly observe an inmate while they occupy a
Page 261
June 29, 2004
cell or a day room area, then you are at risk. The inmate population is
at risk of victimization from other inmates and your jail staff is at risk.
When that facility was designed by board staff, it required a certain
staffing pattern. The same will apply to the expansion of -- the
expansion effort here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Have we learned something from --
SHERIFF HUNTER: The footprint -- well, we do learn over
time. But the footprint forces a particular design as much as anything.
For instance, this jail, the current jail, was built around a retention
pond.
Now the expansion is going to be built around certain design
features, available property and whether it should be vertical or not,
the retention pond, et cetera. So my point is that when you begin to
try to postulate whether our expenses in the Collier County experience
are going to be exactly the same as or similar to other j ail expansion
efforts in sister counties, contiguous areas in the region, in the state,
you begin immediately to run into this flawed logic of how do I
extrapolate and determine that our costs are comparable.
That's the difficulty you run into. You can't extrapolate directly
because of the design features of the available land that counties are
forced to look at, the footprint, and that design forces a certain staffing
pattern. That staffing pattern is really what drives your cost from our
side, not the design of the facility, but -- and the construction of the
facility, but from our side it's going to be staffing it. And that staffing,
which is what the chief and the captain are prepared to tell you about
today is somewhat forced by the design of the facility.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You were talking about corners and
angles and things of this nature that you have presently in the older jail
that we have that was built in 1983, I think you said. Is there a
possibility of using surveillance cameras around those corners so that
the deputies can just monitor what's going on in all these nooks and
crannies?
Page 262
June 29, 2004
SHERIFF HUNTER: To some extent, yes. And we have
employed closed circuit television as well as posts to monitor the
CCPDs throughout the existing facility, and we will be dependent
upon, to some extent, electronics in the new facility. And that would
relieve us of hopefully some need for staffing. But that is only a small
relief. But we do perform that as well.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because that seems to me that
would be cost effective. But again, I can't tell you how to run -- you're
the sheriff, you know how to run your operation. So we're just here to
try to figure out how we can work together to try to pare down this
budget. It's pretty enormous, Sheriff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's been so long, I've forgotten
what I was going to ask. But let me try this.
As the new jail is completed, I think it's your intent to move
people out of the old jail in phases and then renovate the old jail, and I
think you'll be putting some people in the new Naples jail and
probably transferring people to Immokalee on a temporary basis. I
guess what -- it would be helpful for us, I think, to understand the
situation better if we saw a phasing schedule and the schedule for
hiring was phased in accordance with the phasing schedule.
It appears now that the schedule for hiring is assuming hiring all
at one time, which of course isn't practical. And as you know, you
said you would be hiring between now and September or October,
whatever. But this phasing schedule which shows that we occupy,
let's say, one level of the new jail for some specified period of time
and then we move people into the next level of the new jail for the --
some specified period of time. And if there's any way to gain some
benefit to the overcrowding problem and still stretch out that schedule
for hiring the full complement of 60 deputies, if -- those are the kinds
of things I'd like to be able to investigate to see if we could do it. That
way, we achieve our goals without hurting you. Although we might
Page 263
June 29, 2004
delay your intentions for a short period of time, hopefully we don't
increase the risk to deputies and/or the problems with inmates
substantially.
But that would be helpful, and I suspect that we have that
information available.
SHERIFF HUNTER: We have that this morning for you. It is
already prepared, and that was going to be the nature of our
presentation this morning before I bogged the board down in replying
to the observations that have been made. Is the board prepared to hear
that presentation?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, but we need to take a 10-minute
break because our court reporter needs to give her fingers a little rest
here. Okay? So if you don't mind, okay, we'll see you back in 10
minutes.
(A brief recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay, did you want to give a
presentation, per chance? Is that --
SHERIFF HUNTER: I would, if the board will entertain it. I did
__ Commissioner Henning, I did go back and look to find those five
new programs. I'm prepared to discuss those. Those are not --
actually, they're not labor intensive. And those are with existing staff.
One is a child recovery program that we are working with the
Department of Justice for under a grant simply to enhance our
computers so that we get the posters out more efficiently and more
effectively. And that should be transparent to the public. And that's
just to recover kids before they're killed.
The other is the Tasers, and the Tasers, as we have heard from
time to time, reports from other communities as well as here, Tasers
are a device used to effect an arrest so that you don't have people who
are battered by batons or struck with other implements, and it relieves
us of a lot of workers' compensation claims, because we don't have
injured members. I see that as an offset, ultimately, and something
Page 264
June 29, 2004
good for us, because we won't be suffering the litigation attached to
use of force complaints filed in federal court.
The alert system is a fanned system. We computerized that.
That is so that we don't have to have people -- when we have a
Cracker Barrel murder or an abduction or robberies at banks, robberies
at convenience stores, this is a system that we use to alert other
convenience stores and banks. It's a computerized system and it's
more efficient than having a person pick the phone up and make
individual phone calls around the county to try to give them the
description of the robbers and whatnot.
Loss prevention program is simply an exchange of information
with local businesses to help their loss prevention members on their
staff to prevent retail theft, which drives, as we all know, consumer
costs, retail costs. And that, I see again, as an offset, because that
drives our crime rate down, and that's good, because then we don't
have to hire additional people for those kinds of services to make
arrests for retail theft and that sort of issue.
The other was commercial motor vehicle inspection program,
which we designated two members of -- existing members of staff to
work with the Department of Transportation to insist upon the
enforcement of and compliance with heavy motor carrier compliance.
These are the big dump trucks that use the various -- some have
braking systems. Some apparently have less so. This is a safety issue
on the roadways and something that the board has expressed an
interest in from time to time, and with the Jake brake discussions that
consumed the board for a couple of months and whatnot. This is just
work with the Department of Transportation. That should be no
additional expense, that's simply a safety device as well.
But again, I, just for clarification purposes, we are attempting to
do the best we can to make ourselves more efficient, as opposed to
simply adding ideas to the agency and creating additional costs to the
board. And we will continue to do so and we want to work with you
Page 265
June 29, 2004
on those ideas and programs.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Board members?
SHERIFF HUNTER: Are we ready for the presentation on the
jail?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I got just one question. And
Sheriff, I'm just trying to make the point here, impress upon you that
in fiscal year '02 to '03, we were looking at $93.5 million, okay. And
then last year your budget went up from 93.5 to 104.9. And then I
also see in your budget book here that you're looking for an additional
$2.8 million on top of what we allocated as your budget for last year.
And then we're looking at a projected budget of $125 million --
125.422.
What I see, if you look -- put this on a graph, it looks like it's
going up at an exponential rate. I mean, that's your proposed budget
that you're looking for, right? And what's the $2.8 million that you
need in addition to what you already have for -- that we allocated for
you last year? Maybe you can explain that.
SHERIFF HUNTER: The 2.3?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The two point -- the 2.8 or 2.3.
Two point eight on Page 56.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Halas, that's the attrition value.
There was actually 3.2 million that the board takes off the top of our
budget for vacancies. We're not experiencing that 4 percent attrition.
We filled those positions this year and so we are paying those full
salaries. And that was a discussion with the board over probably the
last five years about that attrition amount, that if we were fully staffed
and not carrying 80 positions, we would have to come in for those
funds. Because when you passed our budget for 2004, we were
actually off of the top short 3.2 million to our staffing level.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are you still -- do we still owe you,
or are you requesting $2.8 million?
Page 266
June 29, 2004
MS. KINZEL: We hope not to request that total amount. We're
doing everything within our budget. I think you've seen some
efficiencies in our line item response to you in the budget, but we're
trying to save dollars in other areas of operating between now and
year-end. But at the time we prepared that budget book, yes, that was
our best estimate of funds that we would have to come back from
reserves to fully pay our staff in the months at the end of the year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And this is on top of the 104
million, almost 105 million that we allocated to you last year; is that
correct?
MS. KINZEL: Yes, Commissioner, that would be full funding of
our staffing that you approved.
SHERIFF HUNTER: What happens each year, Commissioner
Halas, is that when we submit our budget to you, the staff, your staff
automatically removes 4 percent from our personal services budget on
the assumption that we will not be fully staffed. That's part of my
original presentation to you, my opening remarks to you. Now, of that
4 percent, part or all of that goes for reserve on our recommendation
that if we are able to staff all of these positions that we're going to
have to come back to you for reserves, which is their purpose, and
please reserve some of those dollars.
Now, I don't know exactly how much is reserved, but I do know
that each year we ask the board to be aware that, based upon our
recruiting strategies and our attempts to acquire staff and the board's
very good, sound action just three or four years ago to improve the
salaries of all constitutional officers and the board, that we believed,
as has now come to fruition, that we would be able to fill our
positions. What has happened to us, however, is now we get not only
the cost of the position filled that we're at -- staff -- we're staffed now,
but we also have, while those people are going through training and
academies, we have an overtime cost still incurred to staff the post that
already exists that we've been paying overtime for while we seek the
Page 267
June 29, 2004
full-time position. So we actually wind up spending not only the
regular full-time cost of that position but the overtime necessary to get
that person through the training process to have them come on line.
So that is what's happened to us.
Had we simply been spending the overtime that was
programmed, we probably wouldn't be back before you for the
adjustments. Although we've had some unusual overtime this year
with our orange alerts and with the additional responsibilities that have
been attached to the office, we've had some unusual, but we've also
had those regular, if you will, over the last five to six years, those
regular overtime costs for jail and communications center that have
consistently been our problem.
But now, as I say, we've got both the overtime while we train
those new people up, get them through the process, and the cost of the
position. And that's why we will be making a separate presentation to
you on the 2.8.
As to why we went from 93 to 104, that was explained during the
last budget year. Some of it was the result of the phased-in salary
adjustment that the board and we agreed to over the course of the last
four, five years. Certainly this year it's going to be largely because of
the jail, and the jail expansion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What I see is the cost up at an
exponential rate, and we've just got to get a handle on it. I really feel
bad for the other constitutional officers who really spent a lot of time
and were very diligent in trying to cut the budget, because we knew
that we weren't going to have the revenues that we had been
experiencing the last few of years.
And so we asked the other constitutionals to really get involved
and really help us out. And they did. And we're just asking you to
help us. And we feel that this budget is just way too heavy. But I'd
love to hear the other --
SHERIFF HUNTER: Well, just so that the board and the Naples
Page 268
June 29, 2004
Daily News and our media friends are not left with the impression that
we're not diligent, we certainly attempted to be diligent, sir, and we
did what we could to bring you a budget that complied -- at least in
intent the spirit was there. We -- but I don't know a single
constitutional that's building a jail and has to occupy it other than the
sheriffs office.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're building the jail, sir. We're
the ones building the jail.
SHERIFF HUNTER: And we're going to have to occupy it --
we're going to have to occupy it and run it. And that will be in large
part, that's over half the expense there. Then we also -- I don't believe
there are any other constitutionals that are running the fleet that we
have, that have the fuel expense, other than the board, and those kinds
of expenses attached to a sheriffs office.
So I think all of my colleagues and the other constitutional
officers would agree with me when I make my observations that they
don't have the same types of expenses that we have. Although we have
some of the similar considerations that they do have, as I eXplained in
my opening remarks. We do have people sitting at terminals,
maintaining the public records of the State of Florida, as does the clerk
of courts and the county tax collector, assessor and the supervisor of
elections.
But we have other things that are far more costly, in the sense of
providing services, just as you have with EMS. The difference is we
do not charge people under a fee service system for those services.
We're not permitted and we receive no income other than what you
provide by ad valorem and through the grants that we are able to
secure. We don't have a return from tickets written, which were at
record numbers this last year. That goes to other coffers, including
yours. We don't receive any value from that.
So yes, we are suffering along with you. We're your partner.
We're suffering with you, having to bring this to you. I have no joy in
Page 269
June 29, 2004
it. I don't get some vicarious thrill out of telling you that we're now
having to occupy the jail that's been constructed. We've been
dreading that day and dreading that budget presentation because we
know that it's a large chunk and you're suffering from the inaction of
previous boards. And I -- I'm right here suffering with you. We will
do the best we can to make it the least amount of suffering possible for
all of us. Weare also taxpayers and we also don't want to injure
ourselves.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, I'm sort of anxious to
get to the presentation, because I think it's going to answer some
questions. But one of the things that bothers me about this last
discussion was that although we now are talking about an additional
$2.8 million or so in salaries, in looking at the budget, we're talking
about an additional overtime charge of over $2 million for FY '04.
And I'm not even going to get into that, because it just seems to be
strange to me. But we'll deal with that when we get through the
presentation, I guess.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Would you like to move forward
then.
MR. SMITH: Thank you, Commissioners. What we've prepared
for you this morning is a snapshot of the current jail population. We
will go over some of the factors that drive jail management
techniques. We'll also go over the population as it stands today and
where it's likely to be a year from now.
We'll also go over the design of the new facility. We've enjoyed
working with the county manager's staff. We've done an excellent job
together in designing a facility and bringing it on line that is an
absolute model of efficiency and technological innovation that is
going to keep future operational costs at a minimum for this facility. I
think we learned a great deal from not only our previous experience
with the existing jail, but having also visited and assisted other
Page 270
June 29, 2004
counties in their growth projects as well, that we were able to employ
here to take advantage of some opportunities. So from that respect I
feel pretty good about it.
I heard, I think it was Commissioner Halas asked a question
about do costs typically escalate in other counties that bring jails on
line, and absolutely they do. To the degree is driven by the jail
design. And as I said, we have designed a jail here that will be very
cost effective to manage in the future. I'm reminded of a news
headline I read just two weeks ago where the sheriff in the county to
the north asked for a $560,000 budget amendment from the county
commission to bring staff on line now for the purposes of inserting
them into the academy to have them ready for when he opens a phase
of his newly constructed jail. That's not unlike what we're presenting
to do here, to bring these people on in anticipation of having the new
space to occupy.
Another important point that I wanted to make before I
introduced you to Captain Freeman is that the jail system currently
stands at 1,040 inmates. That's as of 5:00 yesterday. That is in far
excess of the system's designed capacity.
Immokalee jail, which is also a wonderful new facility that we've
been in a little over a year was designed for 192 inmates. Today
currently it has 245 inmates in it. That's occurred in just the last year.
The Naples jail center, which was designed in 1985 to house 306
inmates, this morning holds almost 800, 790 was the count yesterday.
The picture is this: We have 6-foot by 12-foot cells that were
designed for two men. Each of those 6 by 12 cells have three men in
them. In addition to that, we still have 60 that are without quarters
that are sleeping on day room floors. That takes us completely out of
compliance with standard and mandated ratios regarding toilet
facilities, shower facilities and mandated personal space by not only
accreditation standards but the Florida Model Jail Standards and the
other state and federal mandates.
Page 271
June 29,2004
If we took the inmate population out of its current situation, when
the expansion is ready for use, we would encumber over half of the
bed space that's been made available by that expansion just to achieve
compliance. Not accounting for any future growth. So that's where
we're at today.
As the sheriff said, the inmates who occupy our j ails are more
violent. They have a longer criminal history, and they seem to be
staying with us for longer periods of time. These are things that we've
been able to manage, we've been able to manage effectively, in large
part due to Sheriff Hunter's leadership and the provisions that this
board has made from year to year, along with the county manager's
staff to help us achieve those goals.
Not moving when the jail is ready for use will have some
inherent dangers. It could result in litigation that could result in a
federal master being appointed. I know of situations where that has
occurred in other jurisdictions that has led to the ordered release of
inmates. That's definitely something that we want to avoid here in this
community as well.
So that you have a -- that's pretty much a broad brush. If you
want to have some detail, I would introduce to you Captain Chris
Freeman. Captain Freeman has been the jail administrator since April
of last year. Doing a wonderful job. And he has prepared this
presentation to make you aware of the current status of the inmate
population.
I stand ready for questions.
MR. FREEMAN: Good morning, Madam Chair. I prepared -- I
started on this project back in August of 2003, the staffing, trying to
get it on line and trying to get a grasp of the numbers. It's been rather
intensive. And the vice chair is asking the questions that I do have
answers for and I'll try to explain in detail.
As the chief has already discussed about the population in the
jail, we're standing currently at 1040 for the jail system, 790 of which
Page 272
June 29, 2004
are at our facility right now. With the 60 inmates that are on the floor,
we're facing a new dilemma within our system, the sheriff touched on,
that related to MRSA, which is Methicillin Resistant Staph Aureus.
It's a very nasty disease. It takes the form of spider bites. And we've
had a horrible outbreak of it in the last few years.
There are people that will say, well, they're inmates, that's not
their concern, but it is our concern, it's the sheriffs concern. In
particular, we have had 16 deputy sheriffs file workmen's comp claims
related to MRSA, one of which had to have surgery, and infected his
family as well, his children. He took that disease home from the jail.
It is directly related to overcrowding within jail systems. We see this
throughout the State of Florida right now . We are aggressively
combating that. And actually we've become a model to different
agencies on how to handle that problem.
The staff, we discussed, and Commissioner Coyle, I know you
had one of these questions. I just want to lay this out as a predicate
that the inmates we have, and I want to go down a breakdown of the
types we have because the productivity committee specifically asked
some of these questions and I think that the commission probably
would like to hear this. Weare faced with 28 percent of our inmate
population, which is approximately 290 plus right now, that are what
we call special needs or special risk inmates. These are pedophiles,
people that are in protective custody, administrative confinement,
disciplinary confinement, high risk, suicidal, juvenile. These are
inmates we cannot have in general population. They create a lot of
need. And these are inmates that we cannot have three stacked into a
cell, a 6 by 12 cell. Three hundred and six cells, obviously if you did
the math and times it by three that's 900. That wouldn't be a problem.
But we have these special needs inmates, which is driving part of the
problem we have when we open the facility.
These inmates will never be allowed to be housed in the new jail
facility. A small segment, approximately 10 or so can, of the female
Page 273
June 29, 2004
high risk disciplinary confinements can, because we've made
provisions for that, or this commission's made provisions for that in
the design of the jail.
The design of the new jail is an open bay facility, which is much
more efficient and -- in housing our inmate population. However,
these 28 percent or almost 300 inmates right now are not -- we cannot
house over in that facility.
One of the questions the productivity committee had was the type
of inmates. One of them asked if there's a way we can get some of
these inmates out of the jail. And we've gone out of our way,
Commissioner Halas and members of the board, to do this. We have
instituted a weekend work program. Currently we're running three
buses -- bus loads of weekend workers that go out and pick up trash
and do community service for the day. We have our deputies pick
them up. The salaries are paid for by the inmate welfare fund. And I
believe we're currently running about 90 inmates per weekend.
When we started looking at the numbers, we petitioned and had
meetings with the judges, the misdemeanor judges, and requested that
they look towards that as an alternative sentence. We're pretty well
stacked in that area now. We have looked towards that.
We've initiated the pretrial release program where we have a
deputy sheriff that interviews those inmates that may qualify. Local
first time offenders, non-violent offenders that we can release on their
own accord with rules and sanctions they have to follow while they're
out. That's a fully operational program as well.
One of the questions that was asked is the population breakdown
of our facility, because there was kind of a misconception that we
have a lot of misdemeanors, that this is a small county facility. And it
was 20, 30 years ago. It's -- I don't believe it's that way now. Just real
quickly, 671 of our inmates in our facilities are felony offenders.
That's approximately 67 percent. Four hundred and fifty-seven of
those inmates within our facilities are in there for violation of
Page 274
June 29, 2004
probation. These are inmates that judges have given probation or
some are post -- I don't want to say post commitment, that's more
juvenile, post incarceration, probation. These are ones that have
violated it, typically. We have actually 19 now, with the addition of
the arrest last night, in for murder. Nineteen offenders, either for
premeditated, second degree or manslaughter within our jails. We
have 32 inmates in our jails for sexual battery. These include sexual
battery on children and women and just lumped all together.
Twenty-two inmates in our facility for robbery. Twenty-eight for
aggravated battery on a correctional officer or a law enforcement
officer. Six for aggravated stalking with credible threat. Five for
arson. Twenty for trafficking in cocaine, marijuana or heroin. Eighty
inmates are in our facilities for burglary-related charges. This makes
up 22 percent of today's population within our facilities.
These are inmates that we are not, and I'm sure the sheriff, if he
was still here, would tell you that we are not going to be looking to try
to get to some pretrial release program. We're pretty well at the seams
in who we can release and who we can cut out -- who we can get into
these different programs.
Mr. Vice Chair, you asked a question in reference to phase-in.
This program, when we originally looked at it, I was asked to review
the blueprints of this new facility and figure out what we needed for
staffing to adequately staff this for security for both the inmates and
our officers or deputy sheriffs. The original numbers, inclusive of
civilian personnel, were 174. Obviously, that's not acceptable. I'm
sure the board would, although asking tough questions today, would
probably ask tougher ones if that's what was presented today. This
was my first take in September of 2003. I was obviously instructed by
the budget director and the sheriff and the chief to redo these numbers.
Let's get this bare-boned.
At some point we've had several meetings, dozens of meetings
related to how we're going to staff this facility. The questions arose,
Page 275
June 29, 2004
probation. These are inmates that judges have given probation or
some are post -- I don't want to say post commitment, that's more
juvenile, post incarceration, probation. These are ones that have
violated it, typically. We have actually 19 now, with the addition of
the arrest last night, in for murder. Nineteen offenders, either for
premeditated, second degree or manslaughter within our jails. We
have 32 inmates in our jails for sexual battery. These include sexual
battery on children and women and just lumped all together.
Twenty-two inmates in our facility for robbery. Twenty-eight for
aggravated battery on a correctional officer or a law enforcement
officer. Six for aggravated stalking with credible threat. Five for
arson. Twenty for trafficking in cocaine, marijuana or heroin. Eighty
inmates are in our facilities for burglary-related charges. This makes
up 22 percent of today's population within our facilities.
These are inmates that we are not, and I'm sure the sheriff, if he
was still here, would tell you that we are not going to be looking to try
to get to some pretrial release program. We're pretty well at the seams
in who we can release and who we can cut out -- who we can get into
these different programs.
Mr. Vice Chair, you asked a question in reference to phase-in.
This program, when we originally looked at it, I was asked to review
the blueprints of this new facility and figure out what we needed for
staffing to adequately staff this for security for both the inmates and
our officers or deputy sheriffs. The original numbers, inclusive of
civilian personnel, were 174. Obviously, that's not acceptable. I'm
sure the board would, although asking tough questions today, would
probably ask tougher ones if that's what was presented today. This
was my first take in September of 2003. I was obviously instructed by
the budget director and the sheriff and the chief to redo these numbers.
Let's get this bare-boned.
At some point we've had several meetings, dozens of meetings
related to how we're going to staff this facility. The questions arose,
Page 275
June 29, 2004
Commissioner Coyle, in reference to the phase-in, and rightly so. The
-- it's my understanding that the date for turnover, or the date
contract-wise, and maybe the county manager can chime in here, is
June of 2000 -- well, what do we have, 2005, I believe, by contract.
We have been told, and I know that the county manager's
corrected me in our conversations, that we have been told that they are
ahead of schedule. And the county manager rightly told me that
unless it's in the contract, Captain Freeman, then it's June. So that's
what we're planning on.
MR. MUDD: Can I chime in?
MR. FREEMAN: Yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: There's some problems with the concrete block
right now. Kraft Construction sent their 35 masons home because
they ran out of concrete block. There's a shortage all over the United
States at this particular juncture, and Florida is going through its own
process.
June or July is when the contract -- it's the end of June when the
contract says it's going to be done. I believe it will be ready for
occupancy, based on what I'm seeing right now, around 1 September.
And I would put that mark on the wall to say that's when it's going to
come In.
If there's no materials on the market in order to put it someplace,
i.e., build the wall of the jailor whatever, and it's not because this is
the sheriffs building that there's a shortage. I mean, China is sucking
up everything that we've got in the country right now on bid issues.
And everybody's having the same problem.
So I've spent some time talking to Skip, that's what I was drilling
him about, what's the best estimate. Contract says June, Kraft right
now is saying they'll have the doors ready to turn over to the county
on 1 September, based on what they're seeing. That's all I have.
MR. FREEMAN: And I did have that same conversation in
reference to the block yesterday. And I was under -- I was actually
Page 276
June 29, 2004
under the impression that they were going to get a large shipment in
today.
But the phase-in, Commissioner Coyle. We planned on closing
and have to close portions of the Naples jail center in order to do the
renovation. The initial phase-in area that we're planning on doing is to
close two of our larger blocks and our complete medical section to
move them into the new facility. That will move 315 inmates just out
of those blocks alone, today's numbers, as of -- 0600 this morning, to
allow Kraft Construction to begin the retrofit for the Naples jail center.
As I said earlier, the 28 percent of our inmates -- or the inmate
population that are of the special needs, we can't move over there. So
we'll have to shuffle them block to block. That will leave them
actually with, I believe, four different blocks. If you take the 125 hard
cells, which leaves -- 125 hard cells out of these blocks, that leaves us
with a couple of hundred, actually less than a couple hundred hard
cells. So we're still at a problem area.
I believe that one of the questions was in reference to moving
people to Immokalee. We're already overcrowded there. We're
already -- one of the things we did to mitigate the crowding there was
to pack them in the Immokalee jail center. Also we have in permitting
at this time the tent structures. And I know that I wasn't here for that __
those that meetings a few years back, but we are rebuilding those tent
structures in the Immokalee jail center, and we will be moving inmates
there as soon as that is out of permitting and up to speed. We believe
that will be up and running in October.
Some of the other things we've done to phase in these numbers to
get in compliance -- and I'll go over it position by position, if that's
what the board would like. We have converted 20 positions to civilian
positions. We did this last year. We converted, I believe it was 10
deputy sheriffs positions to civilian members, jail techs, jail
technicians, and put them in areas that are in -- that do not have inmate
contact. They are doing the job the deputy sheriffs did in the past to
Page 277
June 29, 2004
get them out on the floor for savings for the county.
As I already discussed, we are going to -- phasing in or closing in
portions of the Naples jail center. All of our staff are going to be, and
currently are converting to 12-hour shifts in order to accomplish the
numbers that we -- the bare-bone number that we're talking about, the
60 positions. All of our staff are converted to 12-hour shifts with zero
relief factor. Which means if a deputy sheriff calls in sick, a sergeant
or lieutenant is going to have to work that post. Our sergeants and
lieutenants are aware that we do that. I've worked the post. I've seen
the chief and commander back working post. That's just a reality of it
to try to get us to phase in this proj ect.
We have again, as discussed before, we've requested and
received assistance from the judiciary in reference to alternative
sentencing. We've also asked for and received assistance from the
clerk of courts to speed up the process of getting our commitment
papers for our convicted felons and getting them to state prison. A
year ago we were averaging one to .75. About a month and a half we
do one state run a month. We're up to about three, possibly four state
runs a month, which is 10 inmates we run to the state system. The
state likes to keep them here, because we're paying for them. We've
ramped up our transportation to get them to the jail's facility.
Again, we're taking all the steps we can to alleviate that. And if
you wish, I could go over the staffing, the numbers on how we got to
that 60, or I could do a presentation in reference to where each
position is in the new facility, if the Chair would like to review that?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I do have a question. Commissioner Halas
is also waiting.
If you have the deputies right now to handle the jail and the
inmate population there, and you're going to move them to the new
jail. Luckily we have that new jail looming on the horizon and that's
going to alleviate a lot of these problems with these diseases and so
forth. And you have the deputies right now that are handling this
Page 278
June 29, 2004
overcrowded situation, with much more to deal with because these
people are piled on top of one another and on the floors. You're going
to have them in a safer place with monitoring and so forth, closed
circuit television monitoring. I would think that -- and we're not going
to fill the jail immediately because I'm certain you've built it to
accommodate the future growth of the inmate population. I would
suspect that then as you phase in new inmates, you can be phasing in
new deputies and that we wouldn't need as great a number. I mean,
I'm just looking at it as a common sense type person. Do you give
those deputies, by the way, vehicles?
MR. FREEMAN: No, ma'am. We have one or two members
within the division that are dual certified deputies, the deputy sheriffs
that work in the drill academy, for example. They do provide both
services, so they are -- they do have a vehicle because they do after
care and some other issues like that. Our deputy sheriffs within the
correction setting do not.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do the bailiffs?
MR. FREEMAN: The bailiffs do, yes, ma'am. They are law
enforcement certified and perform law enforcement duties when not in
session. For example, when --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Freeze that. I'm just saying that because
I'm jealous. I don't get a car to get to work in and I was -- I don't think
it's fair that they do. But anyway, just questions.
MR. FREEMAN: Madam Chair, you -- just to address your one
question in reference to what are we doing with the deputies when we
are closing some of these areas out. We're moving them to the new
jail, or the new, the new -- the area. That jail that we're -- the
commission, excuse me, that Commissioner Halas, that the
commission is constructing is almost twice as large as the current
facility. We plan on completely filling that jail the day you hand us
the keys. We're overcrow -- we're going to move those 306 inmates
out of those two blocks and all the other overcrowding into those
Page 279
June 29, 2004
facilities.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then if you have the deputies to handle
all of those people right now, where are you going to squeeze in the
extra 60?
MR. FREEMAN: Weare not -- corrections -- corrections in that
arena, we are not based -- we don't do ratios to inmates. We do -- we
are facility based. For example, we still have to man facilities. It's not
like you can just say we're moving those inmates here, let's close this
jail, move 600 there. We still have to have the -- we're not -- there's
not a ratio of deputy to inmate. What it is is area. Blocks. Blocks or
housing areas for inmates. It's not related to specifically how many
inmates you have. I don't know if that's clearing it up, or maybe the
chief could take a stab at it.
I've been asked the question before and tried to explain it.
MR. SMITH: What happens is you're currently in a situation
that, in order to achieve mandated ratios, you're going to have to move
out one-third of the inmate population. That one-third of the inmate
population would then need staff to watch -- and that's what we're
getting at with the 60. So we can only move one-third of the inmate
population at any given time, and that's the staff that we've asked for
in this budget.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're not going to move staff you
already have accompanying those one-third, you're going to keep
them there in the old jail and move one-third without anybody.
MR. SMITH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I can see places where you could help to
reduce the budget right from that. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I had some other questions,
but I'm not here to try to figure out how you guys want to run your jail
or run your sheriffs department.
I guess where I'm at right this point in time, and that is we'd like
to have you go back and look at your budget and we want to lop out
Page 280
June 29, 2004
$7.1 million. You figure out how you're going to do it.
MR. FREEMAN: I would like to respond to it but I don't think
it's really my place. Either the budget director or the sheriff could
probably answer that, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm telling you right now, it's got to
be $7.1 million.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Halas, maybe I can respond to that
a little bit. And we'll have to work with you. Certainly, as the sheriff
said, we'll look at phasing, perhaps with the youth relations deputies
and the corrections deputies. There's some opportunity but not much
because of the lead time required in hiring a certified officer.
Certainly in some of the other positions we've asked for an
expanded, we can look at those, bring them in later on in the year and
see what our hiring patterns are.
The grant positions that are also listed under expanded positions
are current existing staffing that has already been hired, been on-board
and been paid. Unless we're talking about reducing the force of the
sheriffs office and laying people off or--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, no, no, I think there's some
creative ways.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nobody's ever said that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think there's some creative ways
of cutting corners.
MS. KINZEL: But I think, Commissioner, you can look at our
staffing, and we'll be glad to go over any department or any issue
where you think there might be those kinds of efficiencies, because
that's the process that we have and we do it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ma'am, I don't know how to run
your sheriffs department. You people are experts at that. All we're
telling you is that we need to cut 7.1 million, because we've made a
commitment to the citizens of Collier County that we're not going to
add to the ad valorem taxes.
Page 281
June 29, 2004
MS. KINZEL: Okay, Commissioner -- and also my
understanding is that the shortfall in general overall in total is only a
little over 5 million, not 7. So that is an interesting point on where we
need to be to satisfy you.
We can certainly look at phasing. We can certainly look at some
issues. Commissioner, we cannot cut $7 million from this budget--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just try it.
MS. KINZEL: -- and sustain current services. It cuts into
current service. Under the board's own pay plan, we would be going
back to either reducing salaries, doing away with existing programs.
You've got expanding services in schools, you've got the expansion of
the jail. The jail expansion alone is six and a half million. Now, you
know, unless we just don't want to do the jail when we're building it
and I think our -- the captain and the sheriff --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That could be our option.
MS. KINZEL: Well, I think that the sheriff cautioned a little bit
that he would hope that would not be the direction, but the jail
construction completion is under the board's direction --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
MS. KINZEL: -- so we can come back to that issue. But to go to
that level of cut to our budget, basically doesn't fund the current
staffing with the grants, coming off grants.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let's just see how far we can cut.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, I believe we did that. We go
through a very lengthy process at the sheriffs office. This isn't it.
When the captain of the jail says it's grueling, it really is. We go to
the base level lieutenants. They process ajail request. Our field
representatives in their first line of budget requests submitted a request
for over 380 positions. The sheriffs staff then, through the captains,
then through the majors, with Major Smith and Major Stiess, they
review it again and do additional cuts before it even gets to Sheriff
Hunter. Sheriff Hunter reviews the final submission to him and cuts
Page 282
June 29, 2004
even further. We get through multiple, multiple levels of cut. But I
think if you recognize the growth in this community and the mandates
that we have with that growth to respond to calls for service -- our
calls for service, for example, are up 27 percent.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But every other county that you
used as a benchmark has the same -- they're experiencing the same
problems that we are experiencing in Collier County.
MS. KINZEL: And Commissioner, that's true. But we have a
better crime rate than those cities. We're better in a lot of our cost
areas. I have about four or five additional charts that I'll share with
you in the bar charts. We have the lowest crime rate of those counties
that -- the board actually selected those comparative counties and we
went back and did based on your request, as a comparison.
And I think if you look at the reasonableness, those graphs show,
if nothing else, that we are in the ballpark. We fall between a
Sarasota, a Lee, a Palm Beach, in anyone of those criteria that you
use. We're in the same playing field in the same plane with those
other counties. But if we're trying to say that our costs in a certain
area -- we'll look at each area. I can give you -- if you would like to
pick three or four areas of each of those counties, I'll go back and
explain to you the differences or things that they might do differently.
Health insurance might be funded by the Board of County
Commissioners in one area. It's funded within our budget in our
county. You have to look at every single operational element to do an
apples/apples comparison.
We do that within the sheriffs group. For example, the sheriff
mentioned that we routinely get together with other sheriffs' offices.
Weare in fact hosting the regional roundtable for the Florida sheriffs
finance directors for this region in the month of August. And budget
is the primary topic in those comparative side elements of what we are
requesting from each board.
But I can tell you in discussions with my counterparts, they are
Page 283
June 29, 2004
facing growth issues. Many of them, because of some of the
legislative changes in financial elements on sick leave and benefits,
don't know where they're going to get the money either. And
unfortunately some of those counties are capped out in their millage.
But we do those types of operational comparisons.
I think if you look at the overall operation, our crime rate is
below theirs, we're doing a better job. We have been successful.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But it's costing us a lot of money. I
mean, I don't know where the cost relationship is for how much lower
we want to get the crime rate to how much more is it going to cost us.
If I look at the pie chart from last year, you had about 39 percent, 39.5
percent of the pie chart. This year it's projected at 41.4 percent of the
pie chart.
MS. KINZEL: And Commissioner, that's almost exclusively
because we're building and adding a 600 bed jail. When you're
growing at those levels in an entity like the jail, you're going to see
large increases or bumps in our budget.
And the sheriff pointed to it, too. In a lot of ways we're paying
for the past. I've been here 16 years, this is my 16th budget. We paid
for those below rollback days, when, had they kept the millage neutral
and had they left the millage the same, we could have built in phases,
we could have smoothed out our budget also, similar to what you're
doing in transportation with some of that funding up front and trying
to get it even over the years. But we haven't had that luxury. When
the millage rates went below rollback, we weren't able to keep up with
growth. We even phased in our pay plan adjustments over multiple
years. The board's consultant said we were so far behind. We don't
want to get there again. We don't want to get behind in salaries. We
don't want to get behind in facilities. I think we've had a great
partnership, and in the last couple of years we have been very
successful in catching up. And we don't want to see it fall behind
agaIn.
Page 284
June 29, 2004
We can certainly work with the board in partnership on the
phase- in of positions. We'll go back, we'll do some pencil sharpening
on that regard. But if the expectation is sincerely a $7-plus million cut
to come back to you, I'm afraid that that might be somewhere we don't
want to be when we leave here. I'd like a better picture of really
where the expectation is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're going to give you a vote to
get 7.1, you tell us what your best number is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I find this whole
proceeding -- it's not productive. We're not going to get anywhere, and
it's just a waste of everybody's time. That isn't what we're here for.
We have several choices, Commissioners, that I see is -- and I like
Commissioner Halas's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Send them back to the table and see
what they can do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- suggestion, and I'll agree with
it. But there's also other choices is, we could say well, we're going to
raise the millage rate, or we could say that we're going to take a look
at our budget and see what we're not going to do this coming year or
there might be a compromise. I'm going to go along with
Commissioner Halas and let's move this proceedings, move it off the
dime.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I agree. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I also agree. It doesn't
seem like this conversation's going anyplace at the moment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're pretty quiet today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not going to tell you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I agree.
Page 285
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. KINZEL: Then Commissioner Fiala, what opportunity or
when might we reschedule with the board prior to setting the millage
rate at the end of July --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: September.
MS. KINZEL: -- so that we can bring these back?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: September.
MS. KINZEL: Okay. Then we'll leave it for the public hearing.
But does that imply that our budget will be cut before September?
Because that leaves you no room then if we do have the public
hearings with the public input. We would ask that the board leave the
millage sufficient to cover what we're requesting, and then we'll have
our homework cut out for us between now and those public hearings
to get it done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, we have
different choices besides what is being offered. And I think you have
clear direction, and ask the sheriff to come back in September at the
final budget adoption.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That should give you a lot of time
to become creative.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, let me make sure you understand.
Crystal hit on a good point. At the end of July, okay, you have to set a
millage rate, a ceiling for that millage rate, what it's going to be. If
you say it's going to be millage neutral and it's going to stay the same,
then we're going to go and we're going to cut monies out of the
sheriffs budget and wherever else we have to in order to make that
budget thing. If we have to close the library, we close the library.
Close the park, close the park, we reduce the hours, whatever it takes.
Cut the museum's budget, whatever it takes. If you set the millage so
that it can accomplish the sheriffs budget as it's stated today and
increase it and say we're not going to exceed that, then you have an
Page 286
June 29, 2004
additional option. You can raise the millage rate in September if
things don't work out to your satisfaction. But if you tell us today that
you're going to leave the millage rate neutral, what it was last year,
then you're looking for -- you're looking for cuts in the budget.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me tell you what my feeling is.
There is no way I'm going to vote for an increase in millage rate. End
of story. I don't care whether that means we don't build an overpass or
we don't complete a jail. Whatever the priority is -- and I'm not going
for it, okay . We can adjust priorities rather than increasing millage
rate. I am not going there. I think taxes are high enough, and I think
we have an obligation to live within our budget. And I think we can
serve our constituents perfectly well with the billion dollars that that
we get from them every year.
So it's a challenge for all of us to work within the available
dollars. But that is one option that I will not vote for. So -- and I'd be
happy to evaluate priorities. If we don't want to spend money on
landscape -- road landscaping and lighting of roads and things like
that, we want to transfer that money to the sheriffs department, and if
the board feels that's the best priority, then I'm willing to consider that.
But I'm not willing to consider an increase in taxes.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I need -- what Mike just told me,
and I'd like to turn the mic over to Mike for just a second. You have
another requirement on 15 July that he needs to inform you of.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: We have to release a proposed budget on
July 15th. Obviously statute requires the budget to be balanced. So
we would need direction as to how you plan on proceeding ultimately,
albeit budget reductions, millage increase, combination thereof, in
order to release the proposed budget.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you need a total or a
breakdown of the budget July 15 when you submit? I mean, we're --
MR. SMYKOWSKI: Total.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It has to be the total budget,
Page 287
June 29, 2004
including the constitutional officers. I think we have sufficient
direction. We're not going to increase the millage rate, so whatever
that millage rate is equals to the property, that's what it is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, and I'm not willing to take money
from, say, our water treatment plants or our wastewater treatment
plants or the landfill or the roads or anything, because that also
involves public safety.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, you're talking general fund money is what
we're talking about. We're talking about general fund 001 and 111.
And that's the only funds we're talking about at this particular--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And so I say that we have to remain
millage neutral. We pledged that years ago and we've stuck to that
judiciously, and I'm not willing to move off that level right now or in
the future, actually.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, can I ask a question to the sheriff real
quick just for another piece of information, and it basically goes to
you. You basically talked about 174 staffing in the new jail and you
went bare bones with zero relief. What did final -- what's the final jail
-- see, we told them it's going to be -- we told the commissioners it's
going to be 58 this year for new j ail staffing.
MR. FREEMAN: That's correct. That was after direction from
you to get it to bare-bones, get us to the '06 budget.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And the '06 budget, what's it look like for --
is it going to stay at 58 or is it going to increase another 58 or 60?
MR. FREEMAN: It's -- well, that depended on direction from
the sheriff and whether our people are going to maintain 12-hour shifts
with zero relief factor. No, they're going -- we're going to have to
increase personnel in '06. You can't go zero relief factor over a long
period of time. We've been asked to basically stick it out, get us to '06
because of some of the budgetary requests that the county -- the
commission's dealing with, understandably. And we did the best we
could -- at least in my area I've done the best I can. I can't speak for
Page 288
June 29, 2004
every other area, but that is bare. And when we get --
MR. MUDD: No, I'm not trying to -- I agree with what you just
said. I'm just trying to get the commissioners a feel. If we're going to
go in and cut budgets, and we're going to get into -- you're going to
take projects out or you're going to do something and delay it, I need
to know from a manager perspective how long I can delay it. And if
my delay is a year, I can make some smart choices. If there's no end
in sight because the final --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's what it sounds like to me,
there's no end in sight.
MR. MUDD: I'm asking just a question about what's the final --
what's the final staffing. If you decided to staff the entire jail facility
and not zero -- and not zero staffing, okay, just in a normal staff, when
do we anticipate that that staffing would have to be full up, okay. And
then I need to know in digestible doses how many years that's going to
take so the board has an idea. Because I don't believe the board can
withstand a 125-person increase for the next three years.
Commissioners, you can say millage neutral for a long time, but I
promised you and I told you yesterday that November, I promise you,
nobody is not going to give themselves another $25,000 homestead
exemption. And that's going to cost you $9 million just off of our
monies that you're going to get cut that you don't have now coming in,
okay. So even though you have a higher assessed value, you're going
to take $9 million off the top in '06. And so I've got to get a handle --
I've got to look beyond that this year into subsequent years if we're
going to come in and give you that balanced budget that you're
looking for this year. And I need to know--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We might have a couple annexations
going on where that lops another few million off of the top as far as
our tax dollars.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we're getting to the point
Page 289
June 29, 2004
where we don't have much option. I think our sheriff is going to have
to go out there and start saying, guess what, we're going to have to
raise the millage. I don't think we've got much options. They either
come in line or else we're -- and are you going to put up with the
wrath of the citizens when they expect all of these items to be funded
and we're going to go out there and tell them no? The other option
you've got is to raise the millage. Even though we hate to do that, but
either somebody's got to come in compliance and tighten their budget,
their belt, or else we're in deep trouble.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that Commissioner Halas
has summed it up quite well. If we go ahead and we say at this point in
time we're not even going to consider increasing -- you know, we're
going to have a lot of input from the public at the public meeting. If
we go ahead and we say at this point in time that increased millage
because of the sheriffs department's budget is no longer an option,
then when the public comes in, they won't have that ability to be able
to comment one way or the other. There will only be one comment
and that's the, you know, the fact that we're going to have to cut. And
believe me, the sheriffs department is going to turn out a large crowd
in support of his budget.
I'm a little bit concerned, you know, where we're going with this
and where the end results are going to be.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So what is your suggestion, sir?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My suggestion is to play all our
cards. And make sure that we keep all our cards real close to us.
Even though when it comes down to the end in September, we can roll
the millage back any point we want to, we can't raise it. At that point
in time I would like to be able to lower it back to where it is now --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So are you saying raise taxes?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. I'm saying leave the
option open so that when the people come in for the public meeting,
Page 290
June 29, 2004
they have the ability to be able to react between their taxes being
raised or the sheriffs budget being in place.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, right now
the sheriff is anticipating 41.4 percent of the money pie, and from
what the deputies have been basically indicating to us, that we can
probably look at another increase next year and another increase the
following year from the sheriffs department.
MR. FREEMAN: No, that's not what I said, Commissioner. I'm
sorry if that was a misquote. The county manager asked me to phase
in, as the Vice Chair discussed. And we did with this program -- this
is a phase-in. It's to get to '06 budget. Now whatever the final
numbers are that the sheriff and command staff say this position is not
necessary or we have discovered that we don't need to staff this
position or this position is adequate with camera options, which we
can debate their usefulness at a different time. If command staff pares
down all these positions in the '06 budget, we present it to staff for
review. And as Mr. Mudd will tell you, we went over each position
that we're going to staff, each and every deputy sheriff and where
they're going to be. And I have no problem with doing that with each
of you in this budget year and next budget year. But it's not year after
year after year in reference to corrections. Now, whether there's
growth or not in the other areas of the sheriffs office, I can't speak to
you other than the fact that --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, that's what I'm talking about,
growth in the sheriffs office, not just in your particular area. The
trend of the sheriffs department has been growing at an exponential
rate the last three or four years, and we don't seem to get a handle, we
don't seem to see the light at the end of the tunnel. And I'm very
concerned, because next year we're going to have more schools
coming on line so that means you're going to have more staffing. And
there's no way that you people seem to be getting more efficient. And
if I look at the cost per individual in this county, it's escalating.
Page 291
June 29, 2004
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Halas, maybe I can tell you. You
are absolutely right, when there's a new school built on line, we will
try to staff those. School safety is one of our primary focuses, and it
has been for quite some time. But remember, we are becoming more
efficient. Some of the high schools when they're first opened or first
start, they may start out at 700 students, 1,000 students. Our high
schools now are up over 2,200 students per, and we still have two
deputies in those high schools for that number of students. So they are
working harder. Their work loads are increasing.
When you see our investigative staff, their caseload is increasing.
We have tried to minimally look at each and every area and get that
across the board. But this has been an exponentially increasing
community that we've had to service. When our calls for service are
going up 27 percent in this last year, that's a huge increase, and that
requires a deputy response.
So we don't want to paint a picture of doom and gloom, and
we've tried to balance everything that we do within each of those areas
of response in the sheriffs office. But as we're a growing community
and we are a service agency, similar to some of your other service
agencies, without the ability to fee service, we will see larger budgets.
Those aren't out of the ordinary or out of the realm of reasonableness
when you do compare them to even the counties that you've selected
or when you compare them to the other sewer, wastewater,
stormwater, those type of areas in this type of growth community, the
budgets are going to increase. It's an unfortunate circumstance of our
growth.
But we do try to be very efficient in every area of the sheriffs
office. I have a terrible reputation within the sheriffs office of cut
this, cut that, do you really need this, making then defend it 100 ways
to Sunday as a budget monitor. So I want to try to give you some
comfort that we're not saying we're just out of control and we're going
to grow every year, but there is a reasonable level of growth
Page 292
June 29, 2004
expectation. This year you see a significant increase because we are
bringing on line a new jail. That will be over two years, at the board's
request, to phase that over those couple of years. So you will see an
increase. It's specifically associated with that jail opening. And we're
suffering from history.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I need to -- and again, I need
some guidance on how you want me to do this, and I heard a couple of
commissioners saying we're going to balance this budget no matter
what. I don't have a problem with that. I'm going to need a
submission or at least some sit-downs with the sheriffs office to figure
out where we can come to some middle ground and come to some
resolution by the 9th of July, because by the 15th you've got to submit
and I've got to be able to roll all that other stuff in.
At your discretion, what do you want us to do at this particular
juncture? We've got some requirements, we've got to submit a
balanced budget. I've either got to say in a notice by the end of the
month that a ceiling on the millage rate can be such and such and
that's a way to balance the budget, and then work through July and
August and into the first part of September in order to balance that
with the sheriff and everybody else that I need to contact, or we
basically say we're going to balance it no matter what and I'll just go
at it with a knife.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: County Manager Jim Mudd, what
do you, from the proceedings that we've had here today, what are we
going to incur in the next couple of years in regards to the sheriffs
budget and where it's going?
And if it keeps escalating, we have no other option than to raise
millage, if this keeps escalating the way it is.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm being honest with you.
Because we cut now, then the next year we're going to have to cut
Page 293
June 29, 2004
some more because that budget's going to go higher. And we're not
going to get to the UFRs that really are important in this county.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the Board of County
Commissioners has -- Commission has some tough decisions to make
over the next couple of years. And I don't mean to push the ball back
at you. I don't disagree with what you said. There's demands, ever
increasing demands on this particular community. We suffer from
some of the past decisions from previous boards in this county. And
in the -- there's more things being built right now because we had to
than I've ever seen before. And I mean, I've got people yelling at me
because they can't find a parking space on the campus. We're building
a garage over the sheriffs office, and as soon as we're done with that
garage, we're going to start another one right out here. We can't do
them all at the same time or nobody would have a place to park, but
we're going to try to phase that in on this particular campus. There's no
secret bullet here, as we do it. And one of the things we have to make
sure we're squared away on, and I'm going to ask the sheriff some hard
questions when we get out of this proceeding. We've got grant funded
positions. Grant funded positions don't necessarily have to be where
the grant money, where they sit, and some of them aren't mandated
that those particular jobs sustain (sic) within the county after the grant
ends, you know. Can those positions be moved over in expanded
positions? They probably can, and that's a hard decision that people
need to talk about.
We need to talk about, you know, people that are in schools and
sheriffs deputies that are in schools, you know, in order to do this
stuff. Plus you've got, you've got typical advisors in schools. And I'm
not trying to spite the school system, but the school system isn't in
session right now. So what's that deputy, or two or three deputies
doing when the school is out. I'm going to ask those kind of hard
questions. I'm going to ask questions like well, I understand people
take cars home and they're on patrol, and I understand that there's a
Page 294
June 29, 2004
benefit from cars being on patrol -- and I'm telling you everything I'm
going to ask you, Crystal, already -- cars on patrol and why they need
to be parked in the driveway. And there is a benefit to having that car
parked in the driveway, especially on a busy street. Several deputies
live on Lakewood, and every time I see that deputy, I watch cars slow
down because they see that car, and it's wonderful.
MS. KINZEL: And Mr. Mudd, we'll be glad to answer those.
I've answered then --
MR. MUDD: And I live in -- and I live in -- let me talk now,
Crystal, okay. And I live in a gated community, okay, and there's
police sedans parked in driveways in the gated community. And
every time I scratch my head when I go past that car, and say this is
the dumbest darn thing I've ever seen. Now, there might be some
ancillary things that transpire between that particular deputy -- and
you know where I live and that deputy will probably be mad at me --
but between going back and forth to the job. I don't know. But we're
going to ask all those particular questions and we're going to take a
look. We're going to take a look at -- you know, I don't like to get into
the benefit piece, okay, but this county and the county manager's staff
has taken a hell of a blow as far as benefits to its employees over the
last couple of years. There are some things that are done differently in
the sheriffs organization. All of those particular items open up when
we have this discussion. And I don't like going there because the
sheriff just went through this union piece just a little while ago and
was very successful in making that not happen, and I appreciate that.
But we'll take a look at all those particular items as we go through this.
But I need your direction. Do we want to increase -- and if you
talk about increasing the millage rate to make up for the $7 million,
it's about .146. If you're talking about making up a $5 million, it's less
than that, it's about .1. If you're telling me you want to take it out of
the unincorporated millage rate, you're talking about a quarter mill.
Because I've heard some comments from commissioners about that
Page 295
June 29, 2004
too. So I've got those particular numbers, if you need them.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We do have a long term problem
here. I'm not convinced that we solve it with property taxes. As much
as I've argued against adding additional impact fees in some cases, I
think that might be the most logical way to proceed for the long term,
because the sheriffs office has made the argument that his workload is
population driven, growth driven. And if that's the case, we've always
recognized in the past that impact fees are the way to deal with growth
driven issues. They certainly are not a property tax related issue. I
would sincerely doubt that most of the people in our jails pay property
taxes.
MR. FREEMAN: You'd be surprised, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then we ought to raise their
property taxes.
MR. FREEMAN: I agree, sir. We do have the highest collection
rate for inmate fees of, I think, any county in the state, if I'm not
mistaken. Our recovery rate for the charges that we charge inmates
that enter our j ails each and every time now.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand. I also understand
there's some flexibility to increase those to make them better and
higher. But we do have a long-term problem. But I would -- my
position is rather than even indicating that we're willing to increase
property taxes to deal with this problem, I would rather that we keep
our commitment, hold the line on property taxes, and we balance this
budget based upon what we -- upon that decision.
And then if we have to make some priority determinations in the
county as to what is more important to us as far as health, safety and
welfare, then we've got the flexibility to do that.
But I would not support providing for an adjustment in the
millage rates in July. I would not vote for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What -- is it a super majority or
Page 296
June 29, 2004
a simple majority on the millage rate?
MR. SMYKOWSKI: It's a simple majority.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a simple majority. So I'm
with Commissioner Coyle, and it's up to Commissioner Fiala where
we go with the proceedings.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'm also with you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So we have a majority
saying that we want to stay millage neutral. Now in your discussion
with the sheriffs department, I think you need to bring in the other
constitutional officers at the same time. You know, is there -- is there
other ways to cut --
MR. MUDD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if I could add to that, I still
don't like the idea of each constitutional officer having their own
information technology departments and their own human resources
departments and all of the other kinds of departments that are
necessary for support. We might want to take a look at whether or not
there's any way to consolidate some of those, including finance
departments. I don't know why each constitutional officer has to have
a separate finance department. But we might find that out. But if
we're really getting serious about getting down to bare-bones issues,
we need to start looking at efficiencies like that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we going to break -- lunch
break?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We will. Commissioner Halas and
Crystal.
MS. KINZEL: Just one thing, since the county manager did
bring it up, and I have a pretty good perspective, I think, over the last
16 years.
We certainly want to sit down with the board. We're willing to
go over any of those issues, everything from the take home car plan,
on the road justification or why are these on the road when they're not
Page 297
June 29, 2004
in session. One of the reasons the bailiffs do have vehicles, they're on
the roads when they're not in session also. Over the course of my 16
years, we've been over most of those issues, I could probably answer
off the top of your head -- off of my head, but I can see that we're
closing the conversation right now.
I'm still a little concerned, however, if we go with the millage
rate that we're at, we're putting the county departments and the
constitutionals back in an adversarial position posturing for dollars.
The sheriff puts forward his budget as we think is efficient for the
operation of the sheriffs office. He was willing to put that budget
forward to this commission, knowing that it was not a painless
process, nor a painless procedure.
We would request, however, that you allow us the opportunity
for the public hearing, for the public input in September, to get the
information out over the next couple of months. If you set the millage
expecting a $7 million cut to the sheriffs office, I fear that some of
those proj ects that you do want to support on your unfunded list or
others, we then become adversarial in posturing for those same
dollars, when in fact they're all critical needs. The jail's obviously
been a critical need for some time. You have stormwater issues. All
of those issues are critical needs that we've put off and deferred.
And I would just request that you wait until the September
hearings to get the public input and allow us that opportunity to
convince the public that for our budget we're willing to defend it.
We're willing to defend these needs and do what it takes by September
to convince the public that we are efficient and sufficient.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That their taxes should be raised?
MS. KINZEL: We don't create the revenue, Commissioner, but
we certainly understand that if -- you know, in prior years the sheriffs
office budget has been considered 39 percent of the ad valorem tax
rate. We still remain about 11 or 12 percent of what county
government does in total. For public safety, services and entities, I
Page 298
June 29, 2004
think you'll find that's comparable to almost every other county. So
we think that we are doing a good job. We're keeping the crime rate
down. And the sheriff was willing to submit this budget knowing that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Crystal, would you -- I'd like to
give you this. This gives you an idea of what we're projecting here in
the next few years.
MS. KINZEL: I think I do have that from yesterday. We got it
from Mr. Smykowski. I have a copy of that. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I hope that gives you some
guidance in regards to where we're going and what we feel is the
growth rate here in Collier County. In other words, we're going to
figure out the best way to tighten our belts, okay.
MS. KINZEL: And we appreciate that. We do that routinely.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not trying to be pretentious
with you. We're just saying that everybody here has got to figure out
-- and I hope you come up with some creative financing.
MS. KINZEL: All right. Unfortunately, Commissioner, the
sheriffs office doesn't produce the fees, doesn't produce the revenues.
We purely are here. Other constitutionals have the opportunity with
some of the shifts to the state they had the opportunity to make some
huge changes in their budget. The sheriffs office is what it is in
activity and response to citizen needs in the community . We think
we've done that efficient job, but --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You do have user fees in tickets --
MS. KINZEL: And we do that. We wrote more tickets this year
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and in jails and confiscated goods. You
do have some other source of revenue.
MS. KINZEL: Well, we don't get the citation revenue,
Commissioner, that goes to the clerk of courts as part of your general
fund revenue allocation. And we did write more citations in the last
year than we ever have, over 40,000 citations. But those increases in
Page 299
June 29, 2004
revenues, if you know, on a ticket we get a minimal portion of that,
even back locally, because there are special fees assessed for programs
at state levels and that entire fine doesn't come back in its whole to
even the general fund, it is --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, I hate to interrupt
but --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I think we need to get to an
end of this hearing. You know, I don't know how to say this without
appearing contentious. But I think I'm probably your best friend on
this commission, and you seriously, seriously undermine your support
when you come before this commission and say that you have
evaluated every possible opportunity to find savings and greater
efficiency and there is no point in looking any further, and that's what
you continually tell us --
MS. KINZEL: No, I believe--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Excuse me, it's my time to talk,
okay. N ow I have talked with you about this before, and we go over
this time and time again. And quite frankly, I've been in enough
organizations to know that no perfect organization exists. There is
always a way to find solutions to a budget problem. It might not be
the complete solution, it might not be the best solution. There is a
way to find the solution. But all I get every time we sit here and talk
about this is oh, we've already done that, we can't do anything more,
so you have to take it, or we get into a confrontation about it. And
that is not the way that I think the sheriffs department creates the
working relationship with the Board of County Commissioners to get
this job done. And I apologize for my harshness.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, let me apologize.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've heard it. I don't want to talk
about this anymore, I really don't. You know, we've gone through this
process, I get the same answers every time. So I don't need those
answers anymore.
Page 300
June 29, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So Commissioners then, shall we ask Jim
Mudd to work with the sheriffs office and come up with, as he said,
he has many questions to ask, and see what can be done, and then
come back to us. You need a decision by July 15th, and we've already
given you direction that we want to keep the millage rate the same. So
then if we have the sheriff and the county manager talk with one
another, then they can come back to us in September. Does that sound
like what everybody has suggested we do?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Listen, when I brought this up
about the millage, I was opening it up for discussion. It doesn't mean I
was agreeable to not keeping the millage where it is. I want to make
that clear. We never actually took a vote on it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you very much. You're on
record.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Madam Chairman, what concerns
me is if the county manager doesn't come up with any way of
resolving this problem and we keep the millage as it is, what's going to
happen next year? In other words, if this continue -- if this budget
keeps accelerating the way it is right now, we're going to have to do
the same thing next year, and we're going to be beating up on the
constitutional officers, and we're going to end up to where we end up
with a huge budget increase by the sheriffs department and we don't
have the money to continue with all the other proj ects that need to be
addressed here in the county.
So maybe we ought to look at how we're going to cover our bases
without adding anything to ad valorem taxes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, one of the ways is an impact
fee. I mean, we've heard the sheriffs department say this is growth
related. And so maybe that gives us a year to deal with this. So
maybe we can find some ways to deal with it. Yeah, I know we're
Page 301
June 29, 2004
going to get some more increases next year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's going up at an exponential rate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, it's too rapid, I mean we
can't sustain it, otherwise all of the ad valorem taxes will one day be
sent to the sheriffs office and not to us. So we've got to deal with it.
But I'm saying that we don't need a tax increase this year to deal with
it. We can deal with it with priorities and then we've got a year to
work it out, hopefully not that long, but we can work it out from the
standpoint of impact fees or some other things --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just don't want to put us behind
the eight ball like we were the last couple of years. And we were just
getting our head above water where we were addressing a lot of the
issues that the citizens here in this county wanted us to take care of.
And now we're going to back pedal. It was like we took two steps
forward and now we're going back by one step.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: How do you -- I don't think we're going
back at all. I think we're moving forward. And yes, we're tightening.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If you start cutting the budget then
there are those items that --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're not cutting the budget, we're
keeping it millage neutral, right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In order to meet his demands,
you've got to take something out of ours.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I don't know that we have to do
that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think that the county --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You've got a checkbook.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, I understand that --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You've got so much money in the
checkbook.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right, so you don't write out as big a
Page 302
June 29, 2004
check if you don't have any more money than that, do you?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, but then you don't buy the
new dress --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. Exactly right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- or I don't buy the new slacks, or
the new tie.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think we're saying the same thing, yeah.
Right. Anyway.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me also help you a little bit as I
meet with folks and do that. And I'm going to take a look at what it's
going to look like next year. I really am. I'm really going to sit down
with the constitutionals. I'm really going to talk about merging
finance departments, merging HR departments, and I'm going to look
at one that's got the best one out there and say okay, and how much
would -- how many more people do you need in order to do it, how
many do we want to merge and how many people do we want to lay
off. We're going to need to do that. Because I don't believe based on
-- and I'm going to get some more facts. I don't believe -- next year
we're going to be sitting on this dais --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're going to go through the same
thing again.
MR. MUDD: -- we're going to be sitting in this room and we're
going to be hashing over the same thing, and I believe we're going to
have another nightmare. And I believe it's that homestead exemption
that's going to come kick us. And it's going to kick us in a way we
don't want to be kicked.
And plus you're going to get less revenue sharing out of the state
to make up for your interior counties. When that happens, I believe
you're going to have no new money, okay, and we're going to have
ourselves a precarious situation where people are actually going to cut
sheriffs deputies, going to cut county staff. And if that's where we
are, that's where we are, or you're going to have to raise the millage
Page 303
June 29, 2004
rate in order to come up with those shortfalls, and it's not going to be a
quarter of a mill.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But you're talking about next year.
MR. MUDD: I'm talking about next year, sir. And I'm going to
try -- and I'm going to look at that real hard as we go through this
process.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just hope we don't push this can
down the road so far that we end up we have to have a huge millage
increase later on.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You know, it's nice to give
medicine a little at a time. But I'm just very concerned of where we're
going with this budget, especially the sheriffs budget. And I'm not
trying to pick on the sheriff, I'm just -- every year I see the pie getting
bigger.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I think I have direction. Direction
is balance the budget with the millage that we have right now, get that
ready to go on the 15th of July and come back with a millage neutral
notice for the 27th on the agenda. And then get the TRIM notices to
specify that.
MR. SMYKOWSKI: The TRIM notices, just for your
edification, go out in late August as a prelude to the public hearings,
and they would be reflective of what each taxing jurisdiction sets as
their maximum millage rate prior to August 4th. So the public would
be aware, obviously, of the decisions of not only this governmental
unit but also the school board and the City of Naples and the other
independent fire districts.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In closing, I just want you, because
you're the person that represents the sheriffs department who worked
on that budget, I want you to work diligently and I want you to cut as
much money out of that as possible. And the bogie is 7.1 mill. But I
want you to cut bare bones in regards to trying to get to that point.
Page 304
June 29, 2004
MS. KINZEL: And I'll assure you, Commissioner, we will do
that. We always try to work with the board and we will look at where
we're able to cut down to that goal.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, I notice that a lot of people
have assembled here. We have some more budget hearings this
afternoon --
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, are you done with the sheriff?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm just asking you a question first.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, if you want to discuss UFRs, but I would
say --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's what I wanted to ask, this is all for
UFRs here? Okay.
So we've given the sheriffs office and you direction as to where
we want you to move forward or how we want you to move forward.
And now as long as these people are all here for UFRs, we better
break for lunch first, otherwise we won't be able to think.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I would suggest that I think there's no
point talking about --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's no funding to provide for
UFRs.
MR. MUDD: No, sir. No, ma'am. And what little we will have
in September, I think we can cover in the first board hearing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Then--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's what we call cutting to
the bone. There's not going to be a budget.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then this meeting is ended.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:22 p.m.
*****
Page 305
June 29, 2004
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTRO
~d~
IALA, Chairman
ATTEST:
DWIGH~f~;.~~OCK, CLERK
.~'>':'-"\i' . . .'''' ~:"A.
l )<", _ - .. _lo~
(1\ ,oJ " ~: ~:
i't,~::n. ',.::) .
These minutes (Budget Meeting June 29-30, 2004)
approved by the Board on '1,... ~ ,- oLf ,
as presented / or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY TERRI LEWIS AND CHERIE
NOTTINGHAM
Page 307