Loading...
CCLAAC Subcommittee Minutes 04/29/2019Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee Referendum Language Task Force Summary Minutes Monday April 29, 2019 North Collier Regional Park, 15000 Livingston Rd., Room #C Task Force Members Staff Public/Other A cney Bill Poteet (BP)— Chair Summer Araque (SA) - CC Gladys Delgadillo (GD) — Conservancy of SW Florida Pat Sherry (PS) - Vice Chair Michelle D'Andrea - CC Meredith Budd (MB) — FL Wildlife Federation Susan Calkins (SC) Jennifer Belpedio (JB) - CAO Gary Bromley (GB) Carol Pratt — Absent Britt Patterson Weber - Absent The meeting commenced at 2:05. There was a consensus that Bill Poteet (BP) would chair the Task Force and Pat Shetty (PS) would be the vice chair. 1. Overview of Task Force Assignment. BP stated the purpose of this task force was to draft the language for the ballot, which will also include: the financial component of what will be voted on and whether there will be bonding. He explained that since the BCC has not given much direction for the Referendum the Task Force will have to go back to the BCC with questions and request feedback. Jennifer Belpedio (JB) suggested that someone from the finance department should be involved. 2. Election Requirements for all Ballot Initiatives — legal constraints and election filing dates — review Supervisor's information. Summer Araque (SA) reviewed the project management plan and timeline (attached). She stated that there is no cost to have something placed on the ballot, so long as it is a BCC directive. BP stated that one question to take before the BCC is whether they would be budgeting money to educate the public on this Referendum, since they have on other referendums in the past. BP proposed this information be requested of the BCC in the fall, not at the July BCC Meeting. SA reviewed the timeline for ballot submissions (attached). BP explained that the general election ballot would have a much higher turnout than the primaries. Independents will not be voting in the primaries. PS agreed that the general election would yield a much higher turnout. Gladys Delgadillo (GD) stated that she consulted with the Trust for Public Land and everyone agrees that there will be a higher turnout at the general election. There was a consensus that the recommendation to the CCLAAC would be for the zeneral election. 3. Timeline for Completing Assignment with tentative dates - our schedule with Commission Meeting schedule — go over calendar set target dates. BP suggested the following as a tentative timeline: 4 July BCC bring a list of all questions before the BCC • BCC responds to those questions in September or before • Task Force works on actual language in September and October • Deliver full report goes to BCC in October • If we don't make October deadline, we can still go to November meeting. Going to November, will still give the campaigns a full year to get their messages out to the public. JB suggested first checking with the County Manager to see if the questions can go on the July agenda. GD asked how the questions to the BCC would be presented and answered. SC suggested including pros and cons along with the questions for the BCC to consider. Meredith Budd (MB) stated that when presented with just questions, the BGC will then probably turn around and ask for recommendations. BP said that alternatives with pros and cons could be submitted to BCC. SA reviewed a suggested format for the Executive Summary that would go before the board. Action Item: Summer check with the Director and County Manager on whether the Task Force item can be scheduled for the July BCC meeting. The deadline to have everything done for the July 9th BCC meeting is June 18th. GD asked if the Acquisition Plan currently in progress would be done in time to assist this process with financial questions. SA reviewed the timeline for the Acquisition Plan. She advised that the Acquisition Plan would need full stakeholder participation and stakeholder meetings would not start until the fall. GD asked what kind of analysis would go into coming up with an amount for the Referendum. SC stated it would be mostly a historical analysis along with current management needs. BP said that we know what we need now and there will be a sunset provision included in the Referendum. If there is a sunset provision at the end of the term, it will re -analyze the needs of the program to see how much more is needed to complete the program. The sunset provision would have to be worded to allow the BCC to make decisions without going through another Referendum. JB stated that a referendum is only needed when there is bonding. MB asked if that language could be included in the Ordinance and not the actual Referendum language. JB stated that would require an ordinance amendment. MB asked how much the BCC spent on educating the public for the last referendum. BP said that we will have to research what the BCC spent on all referendums, not j ust Conservation Collier. 4. Components of Ballot Initiative a. Commencement and Term of Acquisition Program -review former program success and look at other programs within the state. Commencement: January 1, 2021 if it passes in November 2020. There was discussion on the different types of taxes that could be used to collect funds. MB asked if there was documentation showing that the last tax for Conservation Collier was removed from the tax bills at the end of the term. BP said that to check this we would need to compare the millage charge on a tax bill from 2013 to a 2014 bill. Action Item: Summer will look into the millage rates for 2013 and 2014. BP reviewed a suggested formula that could be used to determine the term of the program. How much need to raise based on history and cycle 1-8 = a Typical amount of money raised in a year = b a divided by b= Term of program There was discussion on different factors that would affect amount needed to be raised. The formula and amount must be rational andjustifiable. There was discussion on what percentage of money needs to be in the management budget and how long current funds will last. SA asked if the Referendum could ask for a certain percentage for a certain amount of years for acquisitions and a much lesser amount in perpetuity for management. MB stated that the management fund should be earning interest, so a perpetual contribution is not needed. SA stated that the interest was not enough to sustain the management fund for any longer than 30 years. BP pointed out that the Referendum does not have any language as to the division of the funds. An ordinance amendment would have to address the division of the finds. `Term of the program' will be readdressed at the next meeting. b. Identify specific activity for acquisition - need clear language on the programs mission. BP said that the language must be clear as to what kind of properties we are buying. SC pointed out that the first Referendum did include types of properties. c. Projected amount wanted to be raised. Review past program and project for future needs. Need to insure method of collecting revenue is achievable and does not create other issues. Action Item: Pat Sherry will work with Summer to determine a projected amount. This will be addressed at the next meeting. it. Specific funding source - look at options on how to fund program. There was discussion on alternate revenue sources that could be used to collect funds. PS said that millage rates or sales tax would be better options than a bottle tax. She pointed out that a bottle tax would be extra work for the finance division. MB stated that alternate taxes; such as taxes on plastic bottles, is more burdensome on lower income households. There tvas a eeneral consensus that another soles tnx would not pass.. MB pointed out that sales taxes are not allowed to be used for management funds. BP stated that the last option would be ad valorem. The correct millage will need to be determined. In 2003 the rate was 0.25, but property taxes have increased since then. There will need to be a credible formula to present to the BCC. e. Bonding approval - do we want the ability to bond revenues from the program? If so, needs to be in ballot language. There was a general consensus that bonding be included GD asked if the bonding makes it binding that the money collected must go to Conservation Collier. JB replied affirmatively. BP said that the presentation to the BCC should say: the bonding provision was included to give the BCC flexibility on future finances. PS said that it should also say if bonding occurs, money collected will go to paying the bond. Action Item: JB clarified that the question she would be looking into is: If the bonding language says we may bond, but we chose not to bond, can the money collected, from whatever millage rate is selected, must that money exclusively be used for the program given that we chose not to bond. BP stated that whether to keep the bonding language should be one of the questions on the list for the BCC. There was discussion on the bonding and straw ballot language in both previous referendums. Action Item: SA will look into the language change from the 2002 to the 2006 referendums regarding bonding. (CCLAAC records for 2005). BP will also check his records. JB found a memo explaining the difference between the 2002 and 2006 referendum language regarding bonding. She will email the memo. Action Item: JB will still look into the question on whether the bond is binding. 5. Composition of the ballot language - 75 words or less. 6. Other items for discussion. SC asked if the Task Force would also have to write the ordinance. BP responded negatively. 7. Public Comment -Note: Public comments were given throughout the meeting as discussion occurred. S. Set next subcommittee meeting date and agenda There was discussion on dates available for the June Task Force meeting. A Doodle Poll will be sent. SA reviewed dates for the two May meetings. GD pointed out that a lot of the research needed to move forward may not be done by the next meeting, since the meetings were so close together. BP stated that whatever is not completed by the next meeting will just move on to the next agenda. He identified all the items on the agenda that need to move forward to the next agenda. GB asked if he could listen to the audio recording for the meetings he would miss. JB responded affirmatively. 9. Adjournment CityW:XTO Force: I r_1 / Bill Potent; Chair These minutes approved by the Task Force on as presented as amended