Loading...
BCC Minutes 09/07/2006 B (Budget) September 7, 2006 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, September 7, 2006 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 district as has been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 5:05 p.m., in BUDGET SESSION, in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Frank Halas Jim Coletta Fred W. Coyle Donna Fiala Tom Henning ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager David Weigel, County Attorney Page 1 September 7, 2006 MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, you have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager Mudd. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This is the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. We're now in session, and this is the first public hearing of the fiscal year '07 budget. And I'd ask all -- everybody in the audience; if you have a cell phone on, please turn it off or put it on vibrate. At this time, if we'd all rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe we're going to start off with the advertised public hearing of the Pelican Bay Services Division. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The agenda is on the visualizer. First item is the fiscal 2007 Pelican Bay Services Division budget. And we have a Mr. Chris Sukfin (phonetic) here from the Budget Committee, and Jim Burke that will basically talk about that particular item. Mr. Smykowski, if you want to bring anything up, please? MR. SMYKOWSKI: No. I'll turn it over to the Pelican Bay representatives, please. There is a resolution. The board will be adopting a special assessment roll this evening. But first I'll turn it over to the Pelican Bay representatives. MR. BURKE: Commissioners, good evening. My name is Jim Burke, and I'm the chairman of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board of Directors. And this evening Chris Sukfin, who is our -- chairs our budget committee, will present to you and discuss our fiscal budget. Chris? MR. SUKFIN: Thank you, Jim. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Page 2 September 7, 2006 my name is Chris Sukfin. I'm a member of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board and currently hold the positions of vice-chairman and chairman of the budget committee. My purpose here this evening is to request your approval of the fiscal 2007 budget for the services division and the ad valorem assessments necessary to fund that budget. Specifically we're requesting $346.04 for maintenance per residential unit, and $76.94 for capital reserves to fund capital projects. The maintenance assessment funds all normal operations and operating reserves for services provided by the Pelican Bay Services Division. The capital assessment provides funds for capital improvements. Key in the coming year are replacement of irrigation systems, some water management programs, and continued work in the area of mangrove restoration. The capital spending plans for next year are considerably below the current year. As you may recall, the Pelican Bay Services Division contributed significantly to the Collier County beach re- nourishment program. That is now behind us. This assessment has been advertised. It's been noticed. I'd like to mention that it reflects a return to more traditional levels of assessment. As you may recall, our assessments a year ago were artificially low due to a decision that was made to spend down reserves due to the uncertainty over annexation. That is now behind us. We are assessing at a rate which will continue now to build operating reserves. On a spending basis, our year-to-year budgeted spending is actually down from current year due to lower capital projects, and the discontinuation of our contract with the Collier County Sheriffs Department, which was -- which is no longer deemed necessary due to the reorganization that the sheriffs department implemented in mid Page 3 September 7, 2006 fiscal 2006. If there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are there any questions from the commissioners? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. MR. MUDD: Ms. Filson, do you have any speakers on this particular item? MS. FILSON: I don't believe I have any speakers on Pelican Bay, but you may want to check the audience. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are there any speakers here in regards to the approval of the Pelican Bay Municipal Taxing Fund Budget? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. Very excellent report. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coyle to approve the Pelican Bay -- Pelican Bay Services Municipal Fund. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this is a -- this is the Board of County Commissioners to adopt the resolution approving the special assessment roll -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, adopt. MR. MUDD: -- and levying the special assessment against the benefited properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Services Taxing and Benefit Unit. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you. MR. BURKE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Page 4 September 7, 2006 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Thank you very much. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to the next element on your agenda, and that is public comment about the -- about the budget of these proceedings. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have six speakers. The first one is Georgia Cowan. MR. MUDD: No, excuse me, excuse me. I'm wrong. That was a Pelican Bay sheet. My apologies. So, ma'am, if you could just wait just a second. MS. COWAN: Okay. MR. MUDD: Okay? I was a little bit premature. I'm sorry. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I'll take it from here. Michael Smykowski, the Collier County O&B director. First and foremost, I'd like to welcome you. This is the first of two public hearings on the fiscal year 2007 Collier County government budget. And this is the opportunity where the board seeks public input prior to making final decisions on September 21 st, two weeks from tonight, on the final tax rates, the -- and the budget for fiscal year 2007, which begins on October 1 st. Just to clarify a few administrative issues. There are speaker sign-up slips in the hallway, as well as agendas for tonight's budget hearing. So if you are interested in speaking tonight on any matter relating to the Collier County budget, there are speaker forms in the hallway. And if you would please provide them to Ms. Filson. Page 5 September 7, 2006 And Sue, if you could just raise your hand so folks will know where to turn those in. And she will call the speakers at the appropriate time. The notice for this meeting was the TRIM notice that was provided -- prepared by the property appraiser and mailed to each property owner in Collier County. F or the final hearing, there will be a separate newspaper advertisement that will serve as the legal notice for the final hearing. Again, that is two weeks from tonight. The first substantive issues to be discussed are the tentative tax rates and the increase over the rolled back rate funding the budget, and that's on -- in your agenda, item lA, page 1. That shows the list of the various millages that the board tentatively adopted on July 25th as the worst-case scenario and for purposes of developing the TRIM notice. For the benefit of the public or folks in attendance, the rolled back millage rate is defined as -- it's the tax rate that generates the same amount of tax revenue as levied in the previous fiscal year exclusive of new construction. With that, the county levies a whole series of various millage rates. There are a number of municipal services taxing units in addition to our major operating funds, the first of which is the general fund. The FY-'06 tax rate was 3.8772 mills. I'll translate. That means for every $100,000 of property value, you would have paid $387.72. The tentatively adopted FY -'07 millage rate adopted by the board on July 25th was 3.579 mills or $357.90 per $100,000. That's a savings of$29.82 per $100,000 of value or a percentage decrease of 7.7 percent. Now, as a function of the rolled back millage rate, which -- by statute in the hearings we are -- we express the proposed tax rate as a function of that rolled back rate -- it is an increase of 12.7 percent. But compared -- the actual millage levy itself though is a decrease of Page 6 September 7, 2006 7.7 percent. Just like most folks in the community, the county is faced with similar issues in terms of increases in allocated insurance premiums, fuel expenses, many of the county operations such as -- such as the sheriff and EMS, our 24-hour operations. Within our facilities management we have a whole host of new buildings and facilities on-line for the fiscal year. You have the second half of the sheriff jail operation. We had a major jail expansion in fiscal year 2006. The sheriff also had a major pay plan adjustment, obviously facing recruitment issues and loss of personnel to other agencies. He gave an across-the-board increase this year in an effort to maintain personnel and safety within the community. We're also adding four additional EMS units to improve response times within the community. The water pollution control fund millage, the millage change is a decrease from last year of 7.8 percent. Again, though, as a function of the rolled back rate, it's an increase of 12.7 percent. And we are budgeting and reserving for replacing major lab equipment. In addition, we added a chemist and environmental specialist position to maintain our currency with Florida law relative to maintaining a safe water supply in the community. The unincorporated area general fund is next. The tax rate is proposed at the same level as that levied in fiscal year 2006 at .8069 mills or $80.60 per $100,000 of taxable value. That is an increase above the rolled back rate of 22.7 percent. The unincorporated area general fund. There are only three municipalities within Collier County; Everglades City, the City of Naples and Marco Island. So the bulk of the population, probably 300- of the 330- to 340,000 people in Collier County at this point. The de facto, the municipal services provider becomes the county because it is a largely unincorporated body. The Golden Gate Community Center MSTU millage is a Page 7 September 7, 2006 decrease of one-tenth of 1 percent below the rolled back rate. The proposed millage rate is .1815, comparing to .2337 in the fiscal year 2006. The bulk of the remaining millages are either voter-approved -- and I am planning on walking through them quickly. They're either voter-approved or in a lot of cases they are -- they're our citizen advisory committees relative to beautification districts and landscaping beautification MS TU s that make advisory recommendations to the board relative to the tax rate each year. Naples Park drainage is an increase of 14.9 percent above the rolled back rate. It amounts to $1,700 increase in the tax levy for the maintenance of the stormwater system within the boundaries of that MSTU. The Pine Ridge industrial park is a decrease of 32.1 percent below the rolled back rate. It's a $5,000 tax levy for maintenance for, principally for mowing and litter control within the industrial park itself. Victoria Park drainage, it's an increase of9.6 percent above the rolled back rate, but the actual millage decreased 11.3 percent when compared to the millage levied in fiscal year 2006. It's for the maintenance of a stormwater system within Victoria Park and to fund replacement pumps and an electrical panel within that system. Golden Gate beautification MSTU, there's a constant half mill tax levy for median beautification within the boundaries of that district as recommended by the advisory committee. That's an increase of29.3 percent above the rolled back rate. Naples Production Park maintenance is a decrease of 1.4 percent below the rolled back rate, and that's for roadway maintenance within the production park. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU is an increase of 17.8 percent above the rolled back rate. That's a constant half mill tax levy as recommended by the advisory committee. The plan there for major capital Page 8 September 7, 2006 improvements is to bury overhead power lines within the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU boundaries. The Isles of Capri Fire Department levies 1.5 mills annually as per the recommendation of the advisory committee to fund operational costs of that fire service provided on the Isles of Capri. It's also funding three expanded positions; an administrative assistant, a firefighter and a lieutenant position. Within the Ochopee Fire Control, there's an increase of 32.3 percent above the rolled back rate. That is a constant 4 mill tax levy for fire control services in the rural area of Collier County. Collier County fire MSTU is an increase of 33.9 percent above the rolled back rate. That is a 2 mill tax levy for areas that are outside the boundaries of fire district providers, and funds that are collected are distributed to contract service providers. It's split between East Naples, Golden Gate, and Ochopee and Isles of Capri. The GoodlandlHorr's Island Fire MSTU is a decrease of9.9 percent below the rolled back millage rate. It's for fire protection provided by the City of Marco Island via contract to Goodland residents. That was a change that resulted from the Marco Island incorporation. Radio Road beautification is levying a quarter of mill as recommended by the advisory committee. That's an increase of24.8 percent above the rolled back rate for median improvements, curbing and maintenance of landscape beautification. The Sabal Palm Road MSTU is a -- there's a major decrease in the millage. It was 1.9881 mills. The proposed millage is .9975. That's no -- no increase above the rolled back rate, and that's for roadway maintenance within that rural MSTU. Lely Golf Estates beautification, it's an increase of 24.6 percent. There's a 2 percent tax levy recommended by the advisory committee. They're proposing to do landscaping improvements in Lely, the phase II, as well as on Augusta Boulevard within the boundaries of the Page 9 September 7, 2006 beautification MSTU. The Hawksridge stormwater pumping MSTU is a decrease of 4.6 percent below the rolled back rate. It's a $300 decrease in the tax levy, and that's for stormwater pumping. That's within the Hawksridge development along Airport Road. Forest Lakes roadway and drainage MSTU levies 4 mills to continue capital improvement within that district. They've been -- they increased their millage, I believe two years ago, in an effort to accelerate the construction of the capital improvements. They're doing stormwater management work, roadway resurfacing. Immokalee beautification. That's a 1 mill tax levy to fund maintenance and capital improvements within the beautification MSTU boundaries. That's an increase of 23.2 percent. Bayshore Avalon beautification. That's 1.75 mills. That's an increase of 32.5 percent above the rolled back rate for phase II capital improvements along Bayshore Drive and -- as well as landscape maintenance of existing improvements that have been made. Conservation Collier, we levy a constant .25 mill tax levy. That was for the acquisition of environmentally sensitive lands in Collier County, and that was approved by voter referendum, as was the Caribbean Gardens. That was .15 mills for the acquisition of the Caribbean Gardens properties. That, again, was approved by voter referendum. The Collier County lighting district is an increase of 55.3 percent above the rolled back rate, but the impact per 100,000 of taxable value is an increase of 1.86. There's a repayment of an advance from fiscal year '06 as well as increased costs of electricity, as we've all experienced in our personal lives as well. Pelican Bay MSTU. There is no recommended tax levy. That's a decrease of 100 percent below the rolled back rate. I think there was a change in sheriff policing methods. That resulted in the elimination of the contract service for auxiliary deputy patrols paid for by -- Page 10 September 7, 2006 exclusively by Pelican Bay residents. And that concludes item 1A. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Item 1B is a summary of changes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Oh, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think we have one question, MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: The fund 220, Caribbean Gardens. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We collected $9 million last year, previous year, for the acquisition of that property? Is that how I read what's in our executive summary, page 2? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: When did we start paying that note? Was that -- that was this year, correct? MR. SMYKOWSKI: This year. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. The initial budget for the Caribbean Gardens bond repayment was part of the adopted '06 budget. So this would be the second year of tax collections towards the repayment of that debt. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So the first payment of that debt was $9 million and change? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's no carryforward on that? MR. MUDD: No, sir. What we did with that $9 million is we basically took it off the top of the note. In other words, there was $40 million that we were going to borrow, we got 9 million, so we only Page 11 September 7, 2006 borrowed the 30-, 31- or $32 million that's sitting there so we didn't have as big of a loan because of it. So there was an initial slash of the loan amount. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I'm sorry for all the questions. I just can't remember all this. MR. MUDD: And the good news is, based on -- based on the assessed values that we're getting in that return, we'll have this debt paid off with this year and I figure two and a half years more. The assessment in this loan will be paid off, so that's very good news. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the bond is for how many years? How much -- how many years was the bond? MR. MUDD: We took commercial paper. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. That was commercial paper rather than a long-term bond because of -- the commercial paper is flexible. It allows early payments, and with the changes in taxable value, that will afford us the ability to pay it off much more quickly and save a major amount in interest expense versus -- MR. MUDD: One of the other things we were looking for, Commissioner, if you remember, we basically decided -- we, the Board of County Commissioners, decided to make the purchase, I guess it was the end of November, first part of December of2005. We had a lot -- we had a Blue Ribbon Committee out there that was talking about additional monies that were going to come in. One of the decisions we made, I made as the county manager, was to make the first year go commercial paper, and if we had any of those proceeds before we had to go to along-term bond item, which would have set us into interest payments over a longer period of time to see if we received any of those pledges that were going to come in as far as the property is concerned. We have received no pledge money that has come in on that particular purchase. We have submitted a Florida Community Trust grant application package, but we have not received word as far as the amount of those Page 12 September 7, 2006 dollars that we should be receiving. But we did score very well on our application packet. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And please refresh my memory on the ballot question. Was it up to $40 million or was it a millage like the Conservation Collier? Wasn't it a purchase price of up to? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It had $40 million on it, but I believe it also had a millage assessment against it, which was -- which was a quarter of a mill. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. MUDD: But as soon as -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Up to a quarter of a mill, not to exceed? MR. MUDD: Forty million, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Forty million, all right. I was just looking at my own personal tax bill and seeing that I'm -- we're paying more and recognizing that it's $2 million more than -- more than $2 million that we're anticipating from that. Is there good reason to roll that back? MR. MUDD: Sir, I'd have to take a look -- I'd have to take a look at exactly what the referendum language had to say. But those two figures -- I remember a quarter of a mill and I remember the 40 million. And I'm going to ask legal as we take a look at that particular Issue. You can, but then you're going to have longer interest payments. Ifwe -- if we make the determination that if you get a -- let's say we get $10 million this year for the proceeds on that particular item, you have no penalties in commercial paper in order to pay that amount off, so you decrease. We wish all home loans were like this. You can decrease the amount of principal based on an overpayment of principal and, therefore, decrease your interest payments in the commercial paper. That's the beauty of it. Plus it isn't set on a fixed term where you're stuck and locked into that interest Page 13 September 7, 2006 payment. So if we got $10 million this year with what we paid off last year, we would be around 18 to $19 million paid off as far as that $40 million, and then you'd only have about $22 million left on the loan paper. And within two years, two and a half years, you'll have that completely paid off. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it might not be a financially feasible thing to do to do rollback, but I'd like to have some kind of answer whether it's a good financially feasible thing to roll it back or not. MR. MUDD: Sir, can I get back to you at the next meeting on that particular item? And we'll do some research on it and we'll have that fully staffed and give you all the information you need. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other questions? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there is some other questions on the unincorporated and the incorporated millage or proposals, and we know some of that is a -- nonrecurring monies; is that correct? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Some of the capital improvements that we're doing -- and they're just all over the board -- it's coming from either one of those funds -- are reoccurring funds, correct? Example would be ad valorem, Sugden Park, $325,000. That would be reoccurring dollars, but -- and that's -- let's see. Roofing cover over amphitheater. Well, that's a one-time thing. But yet if it's recurring dollars, then we continue to collect that year after year. And I know that we have some nonrecurring dollars. Should we take those nonrecurring dollars and apply them to those one-time repairs or capital improvements and only make it a one-time instead of Page 14 September 7, 2006 constantly taking that amount of money from 111 or 101 ? I could give you maybe some more details about some other things even on the sheriffs capital improvement plan. Loan from general fund 101 to 384 for capital improvements of $1.7 million. Now, I think that all the sheriffs capital improvements are a one-time. MR. MUDD: No, sir, not in this particular case. If you remember correctly, at the budget meetings last year in order to build the sheriffs special operations facility on the Naples Airport property, it was -- it was estimated that we would need around 18 or $19 million. Last year during the UFR list on reoccurring dollars, we tried to get that particular project started. In the sheriffs budget, he delegated $1.7 million on reoccurring in order to make the payment over a 10-year period of time. And as the manager, I basically found in the capital fund millage -- or the capital fund, that third of a mill that I have, I found another $540,000 plus on -- for every year for the next years to pay that debt off. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And -- okay. Thanks for the clarification. I thought it was capital improvement that we were going to make this year, this coming fiscal year. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We're building it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's building it up to make that expense. But there are some all over the different departments of using ad valorem dollars reoccurring for capital-- one-time expenses. And I'm just saying, why don't we use the non-reoccurring for those? MR. MUDD: Sir, I'll take a look -- I'll take a look at that, and -- for the 21 st and give you an item-by item blow on that one. What you basically have when you -- if you bring in a facility, and let's say we build it, there's normally a loan payment for it because we never have the monies up front in order to get that done. Page 15 September 7, 2006 If you -- if you remember correctly last year when the board made the decision to go, at staffs recommendation, to build three floors of the annex, which is under construction -- we're doing some of the subgrade work now -- there was a $13 million price tag. That's to be loaned and budgeted on that capital budget that I basically have over a long period of time. So that was $13 million that wasn't budgeted except as a loan payment that will come out of debt proceeds on that particular issue. But I'll go -- and we'll break down every one of those particular issues. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, and just one final point, and we'll let this go. I took the budget book and compared it to the AUIR and what was allocated for those funds for this coming year, and it matched. Fund per fund, it matched. And what's in our budget book is the same thing. So those funds that I have recognized out of 101 and 111 looks to me like reoccurring dollars. So I understand what you're saying about bonding it out and paying it back, but that isn't what some of these items are saying in our budget book. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I'll go over there and itemize every one of them for you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other questions? Mike, would you please continue? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Sure, thank you. That brings us to item 1 B on the agenda, which is summary of changes that have occurred since we released the tentative budget in mid -- mid July. Item 1B, page one, begins through page 3, there's a summary. The net change to all the funds is a mill -- an increase of a $1,245,100 and that revolves principally around a few major items. We did receive the tax collector's budget. His budget is not due statutorily until August 1 st. Page 16 September 7, 2006 Within the general fund the decrease is approximately a half million dollars, and that reflects recent policy decisions that the board has made at recent board meetings where you've approved items such as the contribution to the Expressway Authority and the like. Obviously we've incorporated those into the budget. Both the Immokalee CRA and the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA changed but -- made recommended changes to their budgets, both Mr. Jackson and staff. Up to and including, we have a new debt service fund set up for the loan that was recently approved for the property acquisition along Bayshore Drive. You recall that was approved at a recent board meeting. Obviously there's an associated debt service payment with that. So with the board's approval of the property acquisition itself, we had to establish the mechanism to repay that loan. And then within the capital project funds, an annual reconciliation we do in late August is updating capital revenue forecasts for impact fees fund by fund as well as recognizing projects that the board has approved via contract. Those are summarized on pages 2 and 3. In addition, at the top of page 3, the county water/sewer district operating fund. The board, on July 25th, approved 10 positions that were on the unfinanced requirement list but that did have a positive change in that we're spending about a half million -- or $600,000, but there was a corresponding reduction in contractual services of approximately $1.2 million as a result of being able to do those activities in-house. Mr. DeLony brought that to the board for their consideration on July 25th, and that was approved. That concludes item lB. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I believe we have some questions on that. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Page 1 7 September 7,2006 The tax collector's budget, it gives a slight summary of why his budget is coming from the general fund budget, and that includes 900,000 in excess fees and 12 new positions to extend the existing satellite office. Is that above and beyond what he got last year? MR. SMYKOWSKI: The 12 new positions are above and beyond. He is a fee officer. The $9.4 million in excess fees are the revenues he collects for -- he receives fees, a percentage of the ad valorem taxes he collects, as well as registration fees for vehicles and issuing the various licenses, fishing licenses, hunting licenses and the like. So he has a revenue-positive budget to the tune of $9.4 million, and by law his excess fees are distributed back to the taxing jurisdictions in proportion to which the collections were made initially. So on an annual basis we get a major, what we call, tumback from the tax collector which is the distribution of those excess fees that he collects above and beyond the cost of his operation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is his operating budget. You also need to understand that in the general fund, there is a line called tax collector. By Florida Statute, the counties are forced to pay the ad valorem fees, the tax collector fees, for the taxes levied by the school board, all of the municipalities in Collier County, as well as the county . So the bulk of that -- oh, let's see what the expense amounts to. It's almost $14 and a half million in the general fund, and those are for tax collection services for the ad valorem levied not only by the county, but we are forced by statute to pay for the school board, the collection of the school board taxes, as well as the municipal tax levies for the City of Naples, City of Marco Island and Everglades City. There are kind of two components to that. The piecing the general fund -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Page 18 September 7, 2006 MR. SMYKOWSKI: -- are the fees for the ad valorem levied by the various governmental bodies, and then his actual budget itself is heavily fee driven and includes that $9.4 million excess fee distribution back to the taxing district. MR. MUDD: Now, what Michael does, Commissioner, in your budget, is he goes to each one of the constitutionals and he asks them -- constitutional officers -- and asks them what their turnback is going to be for '07, and he comes up with -- they give him an estimate, and he basically takes that turnback money and puts it in as a revenue. So those estimates are already in as revenue. Now, after October 30th -- and that's by statute -- they have to give us the turnback money. And sometimes you get -- the tax collector comes in with a check and sometimes you get constitutionals that will come in and give a check to the county. If it's above that estimate that's in your '07 budget, we normally go down and itemize that and tell you how much over it is. If you remember last year, the turnback was about $5 million more than we had in the '06 budget. And the recommendation to the board at the time when we got those monies -- and if you remember, we were recovering from Hurricane Wilma -- was to put that money into reserves because there would be a county cost to recover from Wilma because we would have to pay 12 percent. FEMA pays 75 and the state would pay another 12 and a half. And so far our payments have been about $5 million, so the estimate was pretty close as we still are working on vouchers and trying to get reimbursement for the work that was performed. That's what we normally do, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that leads me to my next question. What was the anticipated turnback from the tax collector and how did you summarize it to the Board of Commissioners during our preliminary budget workshop in June? And the bottom line is, according to this, you're looking at $9 Page 19 September 7, 2006 million -- almost $9.5 million turnback. Now, is that above what we anticipated during the preliminary budget? MR. SMYKOWSKI: In the general fund we have budgeted $5 and a half million as turnback revenue in the general fund from the tax collector. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And now we're looking at almost $9.5 million? MR. MUDD: No, sir. Mr. Smykowski explained that the return from the tax collector is based on the taxes that he collects from each one of the entities. So if it's money from MSTUs-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. MR. MUDD: -- if it's money -- and so the return would -- some of it would be unincorporated, some of it would go to the fire districts, depending on what he picked up and the percentages that he picked up. So it would -- our turnback is going to be less than $9.4 million. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That's his initial budget estimates. He does have the latitude to make budget amendments during the course of the year. In the past he has done that. I will also caution the board, it was not too many years ago when the tax collector built the driver's license facility on Airport -- that currently exists, the new facility on Airport Road. We were banking on the turnback revenue, and a portion of his fees went to the construction of that facility, and we were banking on, I think, 3 and a half or $4 million that year and got a million dollars. So Mr. Carlton is very cautious every year of, don't depend on that money, don't get crazy with that because, you know, by year end COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: -- if I have unusual expenses that crop up, machinery that fails in one of his operations and he has to replace it, he will do a budget amendment mid year, and the state Department of Revenue approves that, and the funding source for that is a reduction Page 20 September 7, 2006 in his excess fee distribution. So we need to be judicious. And at 5 and a half million, we're -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: The bottom line is, don't count on it, so let it go and let's move on. MR. MUDD: But we are counting on 5.5 million, because that's in your budget as revenue. If he comes in with something less than that, we just had a budget cut. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ifnot, continue on, Mike. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Okay. Item 1C is the next item on public comments and questions. I do have for the record six letters that I'll provide to the court reporter for purposes of the record from out-of-state property owners that did not have homestead exemption. Their properties were typical for non-homesteaded property based on market activity in calendar year 2005, which experienced, you know, major changes in the value of property and raw land in Collier County . And obviously, they wrote in that they were unhappy with the magnitude of the increase in their respective proposed tax bills. Before we turn it over to the public, if Mr. Mudd would just put this on the visualizer. If you could pop it up on your screen. MR. MUDD: Sure, I could. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I'll just try to address up front some of the issues. Relative to property valuation, the property appraiser is required by law to assess all properties at 100 percent of market value. But how is market value determined? The best indication of market value is the value of similar properties that sold prior to January 1, 2006. And the emphasis is on January 1,2006. That is the cutoff date that the property appraiser uses for comparable sales. Page 21 September 7,2006 I can't read that well from a distance, so I'll stand here. Again, it reflects calendar year 2005 market activity which, again, was the peak of the local real estate market. Market conditions after January 1, 2006, would be reflected in next year's valuation. I've had that question posed to me from some folks who had called in. Well, you know, my valuation as it was based on market activity by recent sales are significantly less than that. Well, that would be accounted for in their next year's tax bill and TRIM notice because, again, the statutory cutoff date for the property appraiser in determining the valuation of property for this year is comparable sales that occurred prior to January 1, 2006. If there are questions regarding property values itself, as noted at the bottom of your TRIM notice, you can contact the Property Appraiser's Office at 774-8481. That is your first recommended course if you had a major change in the valuation of your property. And if you're interested in how they arrived at that value, you would want to talk to the staff within the Property Appraiser's Office. Should any taxpayer contact the Property Appraiser's Officer and they feel the valuation of their property is still incorrect and they can't rectify this situation, you can appeal the valuation of your property by filing a petition with the Value Adjustment Board, or V AB. As noted in bold, the deadline is Friday, September 8, 2006, which is tomorrow. So if you plan on contesting the value, we want to be sure that you're aware that the deadline for filing that petition is tomorrow. The filing fee is $15 per property. The burden of proof is on the property owner to show facts such as comparable sales to show that the property appraiser's valuation is too high. You can't just, you know, walk in and say, this value's too high. You have to have a rational basis to show why you believe the property appraiser's valuation on your property is too high. Comparable sales are typically the best measure of that. And we do Page 22 September 7, 2006 have Value Adjustment Board application forms available in the hallway for anyone who may be interested. Obviously your first recourse, again, is calling the Property Appraiser's Office to address any changes in valuation, but we wanted to be sure that if folks were interested in exercising that option to file with the V AB, that they were aware of the cost and burden of proof and the like as well as being aware that the deadline for filing is tomorrow if they are interested in pursuing that further. So I just wanted to get that on the record and just to clarify before we heard from members of the public tonight speaking. A lot of the calls we took in the budget office that were either direct calls or transfers from the Property Appraiser's Office had to deal with folks who did not have homestead and had a very large increase in the valuation of their property from the previous fiscal year. And with that, Ms. Filson, I think we'll -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: We've got a couple of questions before, Mike. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Oh, sure. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, just a fast one. You noted that you had received six letters. Well, I received dozens. Were we supposed to submit them to you? MR. SMYKOWSKI: The ones I received specifically said, you know, I cannot attend the public hearing but I would like this to be a part of the record, so I wanted to be sure to -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see. MR. SMYKOWSKI: -- provide those to the court reporter, and they were provided in your budget package as well so you were aware of the content of those letters that I received directly. MR. MUDD: And there was one -- and that -- Mr. Smykowski mentioned there were six or seven. And if you count the numbers there, it gets out to be about 12, but it was one letter in the back that Page 23 September 7, 2006 was addressed to about seven different people, so it's basically one letter. All seven different addressees I handed over to the court reporter. So, in essence, you basically only have -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: Mike, before I turn this over to Commissioner Coletta, we also have Save Our Homes, is that correct, that ability to save additional funds as far as taxes? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. If you declare Florida as your principal residence, living here six months or more out of the year and declaring it as your principal residence, you are eligible for homestead exemption, and that provides you with a savings of $25,000 off the taxable value of your property, but, perhaps, more importantly over time, as we've seen the significance of the Save Our Homes protection, if you have homestead protection, the year after you receive the homestead exemption you also are protected via the Save Our Homes cap. And the Save Our Homes was initiated via a constitutional amendment approved by the voters of the State of Florida which limits the increasing in the taxable value of your property to 3 percent or CPI, the consumer price index, whichever is less in a given year. And that has proven to be quite valuable given the recent market conditions in the State of Florida. It's not unique to Collier County. If you see any of the Florida Association of Counties bulletins, the increase, major changes in valuation of property is not unique is Collier County. It's a widespread issue. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Mike, I'm sure my fellow commissioners are also affected by some of the increases of valuation. I have a commercial property, and I've seen it raised about 40 percent in its value in the past year, and I realize that it went up because of the increased valuation, and I own several properties outside of Collier County, home lots, and seen an increase of over 100 Page 24 September 7, 2006 percent in some of them. Now, I guess the question is to put everything in perspective of what we're dealing with. I mean, the tax that the Collier County Commission is dealing with, what percentage of the whole thing do we have leverage over? I mean, forget the fact that we might need some essential services. I know there's some things as the -- we see the numbers in here for such things as sewer and water. Of course they're a self-generated fund. We see MSTU s, which are generally decided by people that live in the area that are affected. You separate all that from the budget and you get down to the discretionary money, what do you have? I know that you start off with a tax bill that includes everything from school taxes right on through. Could you give me some sort of breakdown of what the tax bill actually entails and what the Collier County Commission has power over? MR. SMYKOWSKI: This was a typical fiscal year 2006 unincorporated area resident tax bill, and unincorporated area is someone who does not live within the boundaries of a municipality, either Everglades City, City of Naples or City of Marco Island. You can see the largest component in fiscal year 2006 of the tax bill was the school board at 44.8 percent. The county general fund, 29.1 percent. MSTU's, which would include the unincorporated area general fund, 7.1 percent. The voter approved millage is 3.3 percent. Independent fire districts at 11.2 percent. Mosquito Control is 6.6, a very small millage, six-tenths of 1 percent. And between the South Florida Water Management District and Big Cypress Basin, 3.9 percent. So the county general fund, which is the principal ad valorem tax levy of the Board of County Commissioners represented, you know, roughly 30 percent of the total. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But out of that 30 percent, how Page 25 September 7, 2006 much of it goes to the sheriffs department and the constitutional officers? I'm trying to get down to what it is that Collier County, as commissioners, really have discretion over. MR. SMYKOWSKI: The 29.1 percent represented the county FY-'06 general fund, the 29. -- this exploded piece of this pie chart. And then the further breakdown shows that the sheriffs office represented 39.6 percent; obviously public safety being an important element. The county manager at 26.2 percent for the major operations within his agency. Capital projects, approximately 10 percent. Reserves, 3.8. The road program last year was 11 percent. And then the rest are relatively small. Most of them in the 1 percent, 2 percent range. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Out of the county manager's portion of the whole budget and the -- well, I guess everything in the brown -- am I identifying the color correctly? I believe I am -- in the brown part there, how much of that is for debt service and all that? I don't think we're at the final number that we have to deal with. And the final question is going to be the killer. MR. SMYKOWSKI: This piece does not include debt. That would include -- you know, you're talking about major park operations, library options, facilities management throughout the county, general overhead for things like purchasing the budget office, support of road and bridge maintenance operations. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Going -- this is the final part of the question. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I don't know if there's really an answer for this. But my property tax went up 40 percent on my commercial property. In order for Collier County to be able to make me whole, how much would you have to reduce the Collier County's portion of it, the part that we have in the brown section there, Page 26 September 7, 2006 to be able to make me whole, regardless of the other parts I'm paying the taxes on, in other words, the sheriffs department, all the other entities that are out there, Mosquito Control, right on through? How much would it take to be able to reduce that 40 percent? It would be a large portion of that? COMMISSIONER COYLE: It would be all the -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Forty percent reduction in the millage. And, again, not only the -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would only take care of the 40 percent on the county's part. I'm talking about the school and everything else that we have no control over. In other words, if the taxes went from 2,000 to 4,000, you got a $2,000 bill that's more this year, the part that we have control over, how much would we have to reduce our end of it to be able to make the loss up for everything across the board? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think you would have to completely eliminate the entire county budget. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: You would decimate services that are currently provided. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's the point I wanted to make. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's a very, very good point, and it can be emphasized if you go back to the one that shows the total, the total -- the pie chart shows the total, but that's a really, really good point, Commissioner Coletta. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if you -- if I could get your question. And I just -- you said 40 percent increase, so you've got to reduce it. And let's say your total bill was based on 14 mills, okay. It was 3.5 for us. And Mike, I don't know if you've got a millage -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: Five point nine. MR. MUDD: -- chart or not, the typical millage piece, but let's Page 27 September 7, 2006 say it's 14 mills, it's pretty close. I've seen 13.5, you get out to Immokalee, it could be up to 16 mills. You take 14 mills times .4 of 40 percent, and that's the reduction you're looking for, your tax bill would have to be reduced 5.6 mills. The county's general fund millage is only 3.8772 -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you owe me money. MR. MUDD: So I'd be in the hole. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But we have no jurisdiction over the school board or any of the other entities out there. MR. MUDD: No, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I mean, whatever the millage has been set for them is it? Okay, fine. That's all I wanted to know. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. Their July millage would have been the maximum that they can levy, just as your July 25th proposed millage was the maximum that you as a board could levy. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's follow that for just one more moment on this chart. We can see that Collier County general fund represents only 29.1 percent of all of the taxes collected in Collier County. The rest of the taxes go to other agencies over which we have no control. Now, of the 29.1 percent that the Collier County government gets, we're obligated by law to turn 50 percent of that over to more agencies that we can't control. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Unfunded mandates. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, no. The sheriffs department, tax collector, property appraiser, clerk of courts, elections office. Roughly 50 percent of all of the remaining money that we get goes to other agencies that we have no control over, and we're obligated by law to return it -- turn it over to them. So out of the entire budget, all of the taxes that are collected in Collier County, these commissioners have an opportunity to control only about 14 percent of it. The rest of it goes to agencies that are Page 28 September 7, 2006 separate over which we have absolutely no control. So it is -- Commissioner Coletta is absolutely right. There is no way that the Collier County commissioners can reduce the budget anywhere near enough to offset these gains in valuation because that money's going to other people, and we don't have the right to cut it. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Mike, do you have any numbers handy in regards to the increase each year of unfunded mandates that are being passed down from (sic) us from the state? That's another thing that we do not have control over, and a lot of this stuff is passed up in Tallahassee and that's pushed down to us as far as taking care of that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would be the whole social service budget. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yeah. There have been major changes, too, to the revenue sharing and sales tax programs where the state has siphoned off money in the sales tax program that would previously have come to Collier County and the other 66 remaining counties, and instead, that has been redirected to state general fund dollars. One thing that immediately comes to mind, you have a $2 million budgeted item for Division of Juvenile Justice for housing juvenile offenders. That's Collier County's share. That was an unfunded mandate that was passed down from the State of Florida that we inherited that swallows $2 million of your available general fund dollars for something that you had no control over whatsoever. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could you send us a copy of those pies? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Anything else, Mike, before we open this up for public comment? MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, sir. I think we're ready. There are members of the public -- Ms. Filson has slips, I believe. And if -- anyone else who may have arrived later, there are slips available in the Page 29 September 7, 2006 hallway. If you're interested in speaking, if you would fill one of those out please and provide it to Ms. Filson up front, and then she'll call speakers one at a time, and you can use one of either of the two available microphones. Thank you. MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have eight speakers. The first one is Georgia Cowan. She'll be followed by Neomi Rakow. CHAIRMAN HALAS: And we do have a three-minute time limit so-- , MS. COWAN: Good evening. My name is Georgia Cowan, and I have 4.77 acres, and it's out in the woods. I've always referred to it as the woods. You probable know Rock Road better than -- I see Mr. Coletta's nodding his head. Everybody's wondering why everybody's flooding out there. I bought the first property that we have a house on in '75 and never had any standing water until they built -- put the big conduits under Immokalee Road, which Twin Eagles had agreed with the Conservancy and the Audubon Society to flood their property south of Immokalee Road so they have the ducks in there, and that's why we're all getting wet. My property does tend to be high, but I have puddles now. And the basic thing I'm here for is to complain about a double, more than 100 percent raise. It went from $1,817 to $3,701. That's over $300 a month. I get a pension from the schools, so -- I worked there for 23 years. I can't really complain about the school taxes, which you say you have no control over. But, Mr. Coletta, can you tell me what else I get there out in -- on Rock Road from the county? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Immokalee Road itself being -- MS. COWAN: No, I know that. We own it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And there's parks going into place, a big one down at Orangetree, numerous other parks being located off Wilson. There's a lot of amenities that weren't there before Page 30 September 7, 2006 that are coming into place. MS. COWAN: I could get a few goats and put it under agriculture assessment, and it would go way down. But I'll be 75 next week, and I really don't feel like I'm up to chasing goats around. To me it's a conservation area. You've dug up Immokalee Road and all the animals that were disturbed there. Now, maybe you could answer this question. There's a big conduit that goes under the road, and it's located directly adjacent to the canal that goes around Twin Eagles. Can you explain why -- did they expect the animals to swim across the road or under the road? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's supposed to be an animal crossing down there by Twin Eagles. MS. CO WAN: Well, the next time you're out there -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Or it's in the process of being built. But if I may, I don't have the answer for you on that, but I'll tell you what, I will have it for you in short order. MS. COWAN: Okay. But it's right adjacent to the canal. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I address a couple of issues very shortly? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't mean to tie up. There's one thing. You mentioned the flooding. I'll tell you, that has probably been the most traumatic thing I've been through as a commissioner in the five and a half years or six years -- almost six years now that I've been a commissioner. Unbelievable amount of emails, phone calls. I've been trying to return them all. I'm still a little bit behind. I apologize for it. I've been on the phone almost continuously, and I think Jim Mudd has, too, trying to keep up with it. One of the things that's going to take place, there's a lot of questions people have about the flooding that's taking place out there. After this is all over with in November, we're going to be planning some community meetings in the county, water management and all Page 31 September 7, 2006 the different entities to come in and discuss what happened, why it happened, and what we might be able to do to alleviate it in the future. As far as the valuation of your property, I think it's already been explained, but what it is -- MS. COWAN: Yeah. I can't complain about that. I'm flattered that they would say it's worth $310,000. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I am too. I just hate to pay the taxes. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ma'am, do you have homestead? MS. COWAN: I don't want to sell it though. I want to live there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I understand. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ma'am, can I ask you a question? Do you have it homesteaded? MS. COWAN: I do on the two acres that I have my house on. This is behind it. And as I say, to me it's a conservation area. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MS. COWAN: You know, for the taxes to double, more than double, in one year -- they were $48 in 1982, so -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: But what I'm getting at, is this piece of property -- MS. COWAN: No. CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- that you're referring to -- MS. COWAN: Now, if I were to sell it-- CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's separate from the house. MS. COWAN: -- IRS says, if you have two adjoining properties, that you could consider it as all your homestead, but I can't -- here it's two different parcels. CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have no control over that. MS. COWAN: You can't lower the millage? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, what you can do is you can take this to the evaluation board. MS. COWAN: I have. I mean, I've got the form. Page 32 f'.. ~ .... ..,______>_...,~.,.,"",._..""~__..._._"_."'__~.~_...,_.._~,._~,..,.~"..~~~'.-,"''''-- September 7, 2006 CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you. MS. COWAN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Neomi Rakow. She'll be followed by Kaethe Tomlo. MS. RAKOW: Testing? Thanks. Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Neomi Rakow. My husband and I relocated from Fort Lauderdale last year. I'm a schoolteacher, and he's a Collier sheriff. We are what you call essential workers. In 2004 we moved to Golden Gate Estates because it was affordable for us. The taxes, insurance were lower than what we were paying in Fort Lauderdale. Since arriving last year -- we're now full-time residents -- our taxes and insurance have increased dramatically, last year. This year, of course, it is now -- we're facing now another 113,000 tax increase. I have homestead exemption, I filed for it; however, as you said, the SOH doesn't kick in until the following year, so I have no SOH on my property. Upon calling the Property Appraiser's Office, I was informed that the assessments were based on 2005 sales. As everyone knows, 2005 sales were a very abnormal sale year. The frenzy that existed in 2005 drove the prices sky high. I feel that using the 100 percent value of an over-inflated year is unfair to homeowners. We all heard the news constantly about how Naples was the most over-inflated market in the country. This is 2006 now and sales are dropping, okay? They have dropped 40 to 50 percent. Prices have dropped 20 to 30 percent, especially in Golden Gate Estates, and some even more. Your budget last year existed without this potential 50 to 100 percent increase in property value. 2005, we didn't have the amount of money that you're expecting. Page 33 September 7, 2006 Does this budget really need the amount of revenue that these new assessments will bring? Homeowners are already strapped with huge mortgages, rising insurance costs, and huge impact fees in this county to build, which are the highest in the State of Florida. This county's reputation's on the line. We're already struggling to find affordable housing for essential workers to live here. Many are already talking about leaving this county. A tax hike of this proportion will surely make more of them leave. I ask you to please consider the impact of these proposed assessments on homeowners that are just trying to keep a roof over their heads and a small piece of the American Dream. Looking over the budget, there are five beautification projects on here that are expecting an increase of 537 thousand million (sic), okay? Now, that's a lot of increase. That's over a half a million dollars. That certainly could take in some reconsideration in helping us, the homeowners. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, ma'am. MS. RAKOW: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you have a question? COMMISSIONER FIALA: You were talking about MSTUs? I mean, they don't have to pay the MSTU s. MR. SMYKOWSKI: The beautification MSTUs, I don't believe there are any in the Estates. Those are Radio Road, Lely, Immokalee. MS. RAKOW: Right, not in the Estates. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't -- no, you don't have to. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You don't pay a penny. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's where I was going. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You don't pay for sewer or water either. COMMISSIONER FIALA: On all of those special things that you probably have on that list -- and it talks about Bayshore and it Page 34 September 7, 2006 talks about Golden Gate beatification and so forth, they pay for that themselves. And I'm going to give you just a for-instance on Bayshore, because I know that the best. And that is, the people there decided they wanted to make their properties look better and -- on their street, so they had to poll one another in a certain particular area, would you pay a little percent more to make our area look beautiful? They said yes, so that particular area only -- MS. RAKOW: -- pays for that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pays for that. Nobody else has to pay for that. MS. RAKOW: Their extra millage, okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And so those are what those beautifications are, just for those particular people. MS. RAKOW: So the only area would be the general fund then, would be -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kaethe Tomlo. She'll be followed by Patricia Huff. MS. TOMLO: Good evening again. I'm Kaethe Tomlo. Throwing all these millions around makes me look like a little peanut. But I own a modular home. I live in Tall Oaks. And my taxes on my garage and my lanai go up every year. Two hundred forty-one dollars for a garage and a lanai, and I don't own the property. And I'd like to know why. I went to the tax collector. They said they cannot help me. I have to come here, and I did. I had the same thing last year. They sent me seven different places. I never got no answer from anybody. And why is it set so high for an addition for a garage and the lanai? I don't understand it. And nobody cannot (sic) give me any answers. Two hundred forty-one dollars for an addition on the garage and the lanai. I think that's high when I don't own the property. I pay Page 35 September 7, 2006 a lot of rent. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Do you have your tax notice with you? MS. TOMLO: Yes, right here. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think we understand it either. CHAIRMAN HALAS: I would think that would be maybe the rental. MS. TOMLO: No. It's not the rent. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ma'am, have you signed up for the Value Adjustment Board? If you haven't, I would recommend that you do. I think you might have a good case there, but we'll find out here. Mike, can you put some light on this? MR. SMYKOWSKI: The taxes on this property last year were $207.81. The taxes proposed would be 241.63. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But she doesn't own the property. MS. TOMLO: No. And that's just for the addition of the garage and the lanai. That's what it's taxed on. I own a modular home. You know, it's a gated community, and I don't understand it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't own the land underneath? MS. TOMLO: No, I don't own the land. I pay lot rent. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You pay rent? MS. TOMLO: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: For the land underneath? MS. TOMLO: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is it a condominium? MR. SMYKOWSKI: But you also pay for tangible personal property . MS. TOMLO: Pardon me? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is it a condominium? MS. TOMLO: No, it's a modular home. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. But do you -- do you Page 36 September 7, 2006 actually like have title like to the whole property and everybody shares it? MS. TOMLO: No. Just is my home. This is my modular home. I don't own the property. MR. SMYKOWSKI: In addition to land and improvements, there are taxes on tangible personal property. My guess is on the mobile home that you're paying on the value of the mobile home, and if you added -- the value went from 15,742 to 19,428, the Property Appraiser's Office probably would have -- did you make improvements to it in the last year? MS. TOMLO: No, nothing. I didn't put no gold, nothing, in my garage door, that's for sure. COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is a problem that can only be answered by the tax assessor. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. We can't answer that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we can't answer that question. MS. TOMLO: Well, I was there with this letter here two days ago, and the lady very rude to me and she says, there's nothing we can do. There's a meeting on September the 7th, you have to go there, and here I am. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm glad you're here. MS. TOMLO: Yeah, me too. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I don't know why they would have done this because -- MS. TOMLO: That's what she said. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- the tax assessor is a separate, independent constitutional officer. We have no control over what he does and how he does it. He has to do things in accordance with state law. And none of us are qualified to advise you as to why your property was assessed in the way it was. MS. TOMLO: I have no idea. MR. MUDD: Ms. Tomlo? Page 37 September 7, 2006 MS. TOMLO: Yes. MR. MUDD: If -- it would help the commissioners just a little bit. Ma'am, I'm right here. MS. TOMLO: Oh. MR. MUDD: I'm sorry. If you could -- if we could get your name and get your phone number, Mr. Smykowski will take your-- will get a copy of this tonight, and he will walk over to the tax collector tomorrow and figure out what you're being taxed on, number one, because I can't tell. It just says a lot on it, and I don't have the specifics. And then if he needs any additional information from you while he's in that discussion, he'll give you a call. MS. TOMLO: Sure. MR. MUDD: And then once he has an answer, he'll get back with you. MS. TOMLO: Okay. Thank you very much. MR. MUDD: Does that help? MS. TOMLO: Sure. MR. MUDD: Thank you. MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Patricia Huff. She'll be followed by Glenda Beardsley. MS. HUFF: Good afternoon. My name is Patty Huff, and I'm a resident of Everglades City. And I'm not here to speak about my property taxes going up. My property value did go up, but fortunately I became a full-time resident of Collier County 10 years ago. And when they wanted to increase my taxes at that time, I did appeal to the tax appraisers, and I did win. So I encourage all of these people to go. And if you feel like you have a legitimate reason, then you should try to question it because I did, and I did -- they did reduce mine. But I'm fortunate now that I'm locked in and it doesn't go up more than 3 percent a year. But I am here today to ask you about the unfunded request list and ask you to vote favorably on the county museums' request to pay Page 38 September 7, 2006 the remaining balance of the Rob Storter collection, which represents over 300 items of the early pioneer history of Collier County. The Friends of the Museum of the Everglades have worked so hard over the past two years to purchase this collection. We've sold over 165 books that were written by Rob Storter and 100 prints. We -- people have come from all over the state to see our exhibits and they appreciate the unique style of Rob Storter in documenting the history of Collier County. And the Friends of the Museum feel that the county museum should own and be the caretakers of this wonderful collection of art, photos, and wood carvings. There were no digital cameras or videos 100 years ago. Rob Storter captured the life and the changes that were going on in Southwest Florida, which at that time was part of Lee County, and it was just the beginning of Collier County. And he captured these in his drawings and in his words, and they're the best example of our early -- of our early history here in Collier County. And we feel like they need to be preserved forever here. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are there any questions? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I saw it and it was wonderful. I was spellbound. I had to read everything. It was so good. MS. HUFF: Well, thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It is very important that you come back in the next budget hearing meeting. That's where we're going to be discussing the unfunded -- MS. HUFF: Okay. Unfortunately I will be out of town, but I will write a letter on September the 21 st though. I will write it at that time. And this Wednesday, I met with a reporter this week with the Fort Myers News-Press, and there's going to be a special article. He called me out of the blue and said they wanted to do a story on the Page 39 September 7, 2006 Rob Storter collection. So it will be in the Wednesday Fort Myers News-Press. Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Glenda Beardsley. She'll be followed by Maria Santos. MS. BEARDSLEY: Hello. My name is Glenda Beardsley, and my reason for coming before you today is to ask you to readdress these taxes that are proposed for 2006. Now, I've listened very carefully to this discussion, and I understand now that you only have jurisdiction over a small portion of these taxes, approximately 14 percent, as I understand. I guess my question first is, who do we appeal to? Because let me tell you what my situation is, and then, perhaps, you can give me some information on this. I have just a sampling here of some properties that I own in Golden Gate Estates. Now, it seems like Golden Gate Estates may be hit much harder, may have been hit much harder on these taxes than other parts of the county. I don't know that. But I know this, that the taxes last year on these properties were $3,700. The proposed taxes for this next year is $9,249. Now, that is an awful lot. The -- the lowest increase is 134 percent. The highest increase is 158 percent. Now, who is getting all of this money? And why do you need that much more money in one year's time? I don't understand that. Now -- and I have a handout here that I'd be happy to give you so that you can look at these parcel ID numbers, and it would be very easy for you to check this. I mean, but to me, I don't understand how people are going to be able to live in this county with those kind of increases. Now, understand, I have no complaint with the homesteaded property because the state legislators, in their wisdom, put a cap on that. But now who is helping to put a cap on these other properties? Now, you know, people -- they can't pay the taxes, that means Page 40 September 7, 2006 they're going to have to sell the property, that means the prices are going to go down. What's going to happen to the economy? I don't think it's good for the economy. It's certainly not good for the citizens of this county. Do you have any answers for me? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ma'am, when did you buy the properties? MS. BEARDSLEY: A number of years ago. CHAIRMAN HALAS: And what did you pay for them at that time? MS. BEARDSLEY: Well, is that relevant? I don't know. I don't have that information right here in front of me. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, what are they valued at today? MS. BEARDSLEY: Oh, let me just preface this. I have no complaint with the increase in property value. Let me say that right off. No complaint there, okay? Because they are valued at that, and I understand how that -- it is determined, and I'm sure that that's proper. So I have no complaint about that. What I'm complaining about is the increase -- not the increase, but the total amount of increase in tax dollars. And the only way that I understand that you can reduce those tax dollars is reducing the millage rate. Now, you've already told me as well as everyone else that you can't do that. You only have control over 14 percent. Who do the people, who do the citizens of this county go to to appeal for lower taxes? CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's why you go to the Value Adjustment Board, ma'am. MS. BEARDSLEY: No, no. I'm not talking about that. The Value Adjustment Board would be if I felt that the assessed value is incorrect; is that right? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. If you feel that-- Page 41 September 7, 2006 MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. I do not feel that the assessed value is incorrect. What I'm saying is that the millage rate is too high on those properties. Now, how is the -- the county able to operate last year with so many fewer dollars than they are proposing to collect for the year 2006? COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want me to try that? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, go ahead. COMMISSIONER COYLE: First of all, let me give you the bad news. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. I've had plenty of that, so I can take some more. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want to know who you can go to in government to solve these problems -- MS. BEARDSLEY: Yes, sir, COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and I'm going to tell you, there's nobody in charge. The government -- MS. BEARDSLEY: That really is bad news. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It is bad news, and it bothers us a lot, too. But there is no single agency in Collier County that you or anybody else can go to to address an issue like that. The school board sets their rates, the sheriffs office sets his costs, that translates into millage. We don't really have a lot of authority to tell those people what they should be collecting. We can discuss and act on those dollars that we spend. And, in fact, we have reduced the tax rate. MS. BEARDSLEY: I understand you've reduced it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we only have a small portion of the budget, so -- MS. BEARDSLEY: Yeah, I understand that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you can't expect us to reduce Page 42 September 7, 2006 our portion of the budget by the same percentage. MS. BEARDSLEY: No, to cover everyone else. No, I understand that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's no way to do that. So we have made the effort to reduce the cost. We don't have the power to cut them enough to compensate you for the kinds of things that you're discussing. But let me try to explain. Your property values have increased. MS. BEARDSLEY: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: They've been increasing probably 15 to 22 percent for the past four or five years. MS. BEARDSLEY: Yes. And I have no complaint about that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And when it comes time for the Collier County government to build a road or a water retention pond, we have to buy property, and we have to pay those inflated costs. MS. BEARDSLEY: That's right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So our cost to do the things that you and others demand goes up very, very dramatically every year. The cost of labor, the contractors who build roads, as an example, or parks or libraries, all go up very dramatically. The cost of materials have increased in some cases 15 to 20 percent alone in Collier County. So that's what happens to us. Just as your properties increase in value, so do ours. And when we have to buy that property to perform our duties, our costs go up, our insurance costs go up. We had major costs from Hurricane Wilma last year. So there are a lot of reasons why we made more money this year than we did last year. It gets a lot more complex than that. But you've heard us talk about unfunded mandates and other things that -- MS. BEARDSLEY: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- you know, we don't have any control over. Page 43 September 7, 2006 Let me give you one final example. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You have a major criminal trial here in Collier County and you need expert witnesses. Guess who pays for those? We don't budget for them. We don't know that they're even coming, but we pay for things like that. It is a very, very difficult situation, and quite frankly, we can't solve that problem. There's no single agency in Collier County who can address that issue for you. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. So you're saying that -- I mean, it seems like that this year all of the various taxing authorities have gone up. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And they really haven't. MS. BEARDSLEY: You know, I go through my TRIM notice here, and it's not just the -- it's not just the county fund. I mean, it's the South Florida Water Management that went -- last year they operated on $11.40 on this piece of property. This next year they're going to get $28.81 under the proposed. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it because of the valuation or the millage rate? MS. BEARDSLEY: Well, I think it must be the millage rate. I mean, certainly -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't think so. MS. BEARDSLEY: Well, certainly I understand that the property has gone up; the value of the property's gone up. But when you -- when the property goes up and you attach the same millage rate to it as you did last year, then that results in two to three times as much money that is collected from the property owner. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then that's why we've reduced the millage rate to try to compensate for that. But our ability to reduce the millage rate to the amount you're asking is absolutely impossible. As a matter of fact, the staff has just put up on the board a chart Page 44 September 7, 2006 that shows that the unincorporated area tax bill millage has gone down. The Mosquito Control has reduced their tax rate by 18 percent. The school has reduced their tax rate by 12 percent. MS. BEARDSLEY: No. I understand that. But what I'm saying is, because the value of the property has gone up, which again, it truly has -- I have no complaint about that -- it means more dollars are being collected. That's what I'm saying. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it means more dollars are being spent. MS. BEARDSLEY: That's right. But do you actually need two or three times the amount of money that you operated on last year? And when I say you, I mean all of the taxing authorities. COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't have two or three times the money we had last year. MS. BEARDSLEY : Well, yours is -- yours last year -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nowhere near it. MS. BEARDSLEY: -- on this property, I paid $90.15, but this next year you're wanting me to pay $211. Now, that's a pretty big increase. That's more than 100-percent increase. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. But we can't take your property tax increase and translate that into a total budget for the entire county because much of the county is capped at 3 percent. MS. BEARDSLEY: You're right, you're right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay? MS. BEARDSLEY: And that's why I'm saying that I think the people who own vacant property are being the cash cows out there. You know, you can't get it -- you know you can't get it from the homesteaded properties, so where do you go? You go to those vacant properties. Now, what are the people going to do? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, first of all, we're not going there. That's the state law. That is a constitutional amendment. That's the way it works. We can't -- Page 45 September 7, 2006 MS. BEARDSLEY: No, I understand that you have a cap of 3 percent. But then you have to -- I mean, I'm sure you all say, well, gosh, we can't get it from the homesteaded property. What do we do? Well, how about those that are not homesteaded? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. MS. BEARDSLEY: No? COMMISSIONER COYLE: The state law prescribes how those are taxed. Not us, okay? MS. BEARDSLEY: The state law decides how you tax vacant land? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Exactly. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Exactly, ma'am. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. Is that -- are there any restrictions on taxes on vacant lands? So in other words, they say, you can just tax it at whatever level you want to tax it? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. It's taxed at 100 percent of its assessed value in accordance with state law. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. But do they tell you how much millage you have to attach to that? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's why we've reduced the millage. MS. BEARDSLEY: But how much have you reduced it? What was the reduction? What is the reduction in that millage? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. We're not getting anywhere. MR. MUDD: It's on -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: It's on the first line. MR. MUDD: The first line. It reduced -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: There you go, ma'am, MR. MUDD: -- close to a third ofa mill. It was a 7.7 percent reduction on the general fund. That was about a $30 per 100,000 in Page 46 September 7,2006 value reduction. If you're at a homestead exemption, okay, and it's your home that you're living on and you had a 3 percent increase cap, you had a total of a 4.7 percent reduction in your taxes on the general fund. Thirty percent of the general fund money comes from homesteaded properties. So where you're talking about investment properties that went up and you're paying the full -- you're paying the full burden of that because it's not homesteaded and it can't be homesteaded -- MS. BEARDSLEY: Right. MR. MUDD: -- there's 30 percent of the homesteaded of the general fund that actually received a 4.7 percent reduction in their taxes on the general fund side of the house on that first line. So you're right, ma'am, the Florida taxing laws are not fair because they have Save Our Homes and homestead. MS. BEARDSLEY: That's right. MR. MUDD: And that was done so that some of our senior population didn't lose their homes because of increased -- escalating increased prices in land. Just like what you're talking about, the legislature -- well, the voters decided that they wanted to pass the homestead exemption in the Save Our Homes process. And it is something that this state is going to have to take a look at. The governor of this state has formed a special committee to take a look at ad valorem taxes and get at those particular issues that you're talking about because it's just not Collier County -- well, maybe Collier County's a little bit better than some of the counties because your property has appreciated a lot more. Four years ago out in the Estates, $20,000 an acre out in the Estates, for an acre. Now, you're getting it for about $100,000 an acre, so your investment has done quite well over the last four years. MS. BEARDSLEY: It has, and I have no complaint about that. MR. MUDD: And so -- and when you -- and when you sell that Page 47 September 7, 2006 property, you will also benefit from that increase as far as that investment. It was a very good one. But the governor is going to take a look at this because it is having adverse impacts not only on personal investments as far as you're concerned, but businesses are being assessed at the full burden, plus they're paying the full millage because they're not homesteaded either, and that's becoming an issue for businesses and the ability to attract great businesses to the State of Florida because of the inequities in the tax. MS. BEARDSLEY: Yeah. I noticed Mr. Coletta said his taxes went up 40 percent, and that's a big income -- big increase, but it's not anything like 158 percent. MR. MUDD: Mine went up 100 percent on the two lots that I have in Charlotte County this year, so I'm having the same problem, but it's an investment income, and taxes are -- our income tax -- you can deduct those on your income tax or you can hold those taxes and add them to your bases so that you can pay less of a capital gain when you finally sell your investment. MS. BEARDSLEY: Yeah, but I-- MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I'm not going to get into that. That's something you can talk to your tax advisor about. MS. BEARDSLEY: I really don't need to get into all that right now but I -- , CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning, did you have a question? MS. BEARDSLEY: -- You're allowing me to come before you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I just want to -- MS. BEARDSLEY: And I really would like for you to -- go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't want to go back and forth like has happened, so I appreciate what you had to say. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. Page 48 September 7, 2006 COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we got a lot more time than three minutes, okay? MS. BEARDSLEY: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I do want to say, one thing you're not being told -- and again, we got more than three minutes -- MS. BEARDSLEY: Yep. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- is $28.5 million that can be given back to the public is not going to be discussed here tonight. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that is a shame, because you were notified through your TRIM notice that we're going to meet tonight. It's -- the actual adoption that somebody decided -- and it wasn't me -- that we're not going to talk about that $28.5 million. MS. BEARDSLEY: That is kind of discretionary that says it's a possibility . COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's very discretionary. It's above and beyond what the county manager asked the board of what he's going to need to run the county. Those are monies that we can return. And I think it's a shame of government to do that. But I also want to say we do have input of the sheriffs budget and the Clerk of Court, and the Supervisor of Elections, we do. It's right here. It's in our budget book. So I just wanted to tell you those facts. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And a very important statement that you made was the concern of what's going to happen when people can't pay their taxes. MS. BEARDSLEY: That's right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's going to happen is -- and I hope it doesn't happen. When people say enough is enough, they're going to take their non-homesteaded property, whether it be a condo, a Page 49 September 7, 2006 house or a vacant piece of property in Golden Gate Estates and say, I'm not going to do it anymore. I'm going to put it on the market. MS. BEARDSLEY: That's right, that's right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to have to go someplace else -- MS. BEARDSLEY: It's going to -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ma'am, we're all done. We're all done. MS. BEARDSLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- not here in Collier County, not here in the State of Florida. And in turn, what's going to happen, the benefit that I have had because of the increased valuation, is going to start going down. And if you've seen 100 percent in Golden Gate Estates, that is the real working people here in Collier County. MS. BEARDSLEY: That's right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And when their properties take a dump, I don't know what we're going to do. So I understand what you're saying, at least one of us does, and I have a real concern. And if that happens, God forbid what happens in another two years when reelection comes. MS. BEARDSLEY: You got it. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Next speaker, please. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Maria Santos. She'll be followed by Nicole Ryan. MS. SANTOS: My name is Maria Santos, Maria Luno Santos, and I own some property in -- off of Livingston Road, and it's considered agriculture. I bought it long time ago. And it's in -- and it's being built by already houses and condominiums there. And I know it's worth a lot, but I mean, I figure -- I -- since it's agriculture -- and they built Livingston. They didn't even built the road there where I have my property. There's a house right next to Page 50 September 7, 2006 me. And why are they taxing me so much if they didn't even build the road there? There's no way that you can get out on the road and make a turn. They made a turn so that the condominium, Pazzitano (phonetic), or something like that -- they can come in and out and go -- turn this way or turn this way. And that little road, you cannot turn going toward parkway. You can turn going toward Pine Ridge. But they made a lot of things like that there, a lot of things. And then they're taxing me a lot there, too. Last year they taxed me 3,800, and now they want 5,966. It's -- I think it's a lot of -- I think it's just -- it's agriculture. Should I put goats or pigs or what so that I can have agriculture and not be taxed so much? I got two sets of two acres there, and both of them are that same price. I think it's way, way too much. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MS. SANTOS: If I sell it, I have to give it to Uncle Sam. So either way, I get a slap here, a slap here, right? So yes, I know -- I know all the explanations that you gave on the taxes, yes. Now, how are the people who are working going to be making the money to buy a house or to be living? Only the rich people are going to be coming and making -- the poor people. I bought this property for around 11,000 a long time ago, and I've been paying tax. And all of a sudden, the tax doubled and doubled and doubled, almost doubled, because right there, here is from 3,600 or 3,800 to 5,900. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, ma'am. MS. SANTOS: It's much, much, much too much. MS. FILSON: Next speaker-- CHAIRMAN HALAS: There's some options there for you that we've already mentioned, the valuation board, and I think that's where -- you know, if you have concerns, that's where it needs to go, ma'am. Page 51 September 7, 2006 MS. SANTOS: Yes, yes, but I have to pay another certain amount for them to hear me. I was over in there in that other place, next -- across, and they send me here, and today's the last day -- and tomorrow's the last day? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, ma'am. MS. SANTOS: But anyway, I have to payor else they'll sell it in auction or whatever they do for the city, right? CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have no control over that. We pretty much made that pretty clear. Thank you very much. MS. SANTOS: Okay. MS. FILSON: The next speaker's Nicole Ryan. She'll be followed by Roy Barnhart. MS. RYAN: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, Nicole Ryan here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. And we submitted written comments to you at the initial budgetary meetings, but I'm here tonight to again ask that the proposed $2 million be allocated for watershed management plans. As you know, watershed management plans are required by objective 2.1 in the conservation and coastal management element of the growth plan. They are six years overdue now. And through the EAR-based amendment process, Collier County has made the new designation of 20 1 0 as the completion date for these plans. Watershed management plan funding is one of the unfunded requirements in the community development/environmental services budget. As you know, the transmitted EAR-based growth plan amendment states very clearly, a funding schedule shall be established to ensure that all watershed management plans will be completed by 2010. This completion date of 2010 simply cannot be met unless this first allocation of $2 million goes into the FY -'06/'07 budget year. Also, the Department of Community Affairs, in their objections, recommendations, and comments report, stated very clearly they're Page 52 September 7, 2006 concerned about the missed deadline of 2000, and they've also stated that there needs to be some interim guidelines and standards to be put in place until the 2010 deadline of watershed plan completion has been met. So these need to be done, and the county has to have the funding to go forward and proceed with them. So we're asking again that the initial $2 million be placed into the budget for FY-'06/'07 and that the $2 million for the subsequent two years be placed into a more secure spot in those budgets so that we don't have to fight over it from the unfunded requirements where there may be lots of projects and not enough funding. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Roy Barnhart. He'll be followed by Mike Arguez. MR. BARNHART: Yeah, hi. I've been living in 205 Benson Street since 1995. MR. MUDD: State your name. MR. BARNHART: Oh, Roy Barnhart -- since 1995 initially, and the problem I've run into is initially I put in for homestead, and something happened along the way. I refinanced a couple times and I didn't notice it until recently all of a sudden everything went up real high on me. They have no record of my homestead. When I discussed it, I was wondering if there was a way I could prove, you know, that I've been living there all the time, you know, like from the mortgage company, from the Department of Motor Vehicles, from the electrical company, if I can get to the starting point to when those bills came. It was mentioned to me that that doesn't prove anything. That don't prove I lived there during that period. So, you know, I feel bad about it because of all these taxes going up on all the other people along with the insurance and everything, but mistakes are made. I didn't save my paperwork from 12 years ago. You know, after a certain period of time, we all get rid of paperwork, Page 53 September 7, 2006 and that's pretty much what happened. I refinanced so I didn't notice things, until all of a sudden this past time when things skyrocketed, you know, on me. You know, but I come from the Department of Motor Vehicles and stuff, and, you know, I've been living there. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, you can go to the Value Adjustment Board on homestead exemptions. And the way the state statutes read, they can -- if a mistake has been made, they can go back two years prior. But, you know, again, the burden of proof is on you to provide that information. MR. BARNHART: Well, what information would prove this? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I thing you need to walk over to the Property Appraiser's Office and ask them what kind of proof you need -- MR. BARNHART: Because like I -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and you can sign up to speak before the Value Adjustment Board and plead your case. MR. BARNHART: Okay. I need to go to the Property Appraiser's Office? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir. MR. BARNHART: See, and they didn't even give me that information. They just told me, well that don't prove nothing, you know. I didn't really get that sort of assistance. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know if it is or not, but I'm sure the V AB could figure that out, can answer those questions under the guidelines of the law, okay? MR. MUDD: Sir, in your old tax -- in your old -- there's a couple places that you might have the information that you might not be aware of. First of all, in all your old tax bills that you have, there's a place at the bottom of the tax bill that says, homestead exemption minus $25,000, and it takes that off your appraised value. MR. BARNHART: I just reapplied for homestead even though I Page 54 September 7, 2006 thought I had it all those years because I did put in the paperwork. MR. MUDD: So you didn't put in the paperwork years ago? MR. BARNHART: Oh, yes, I -- yes, I did, but something happened where it got lost. MR. MUDD: Do you have those tax bills that you had from prior years? Because-- MR. BARNHART: I'd have to get that through my mortgage company, because I pay -- MR. MUDD: Okay. MR. BARNHART: -- I pay through escrow. MR. MUDD: You have an escrow. There's another place where they have it, because there's a place on your tax bill that says you got homestead. That's one place that might help you, okay, in order to -- so that you don't have to go through so much proof. The other piece is MR. BARNHART: Well, how would they know I have homestead if the county's saying I don't have homestead? MR. MUDD: Sir, if it wasn't on your tax bill then you never had it. And that's what I'm trying -- and that's what I'm trying to get at. The other thing is, every year you get a letter from the tax collector that basically says you're homesteaded for this blankety-blank year, and it's a separate sheet of paper that you get. MR. BARNHART: Well, actually I got nothing because they were mailing to the address I lived in before I lived in the house, which was on Shoreview Drive. MR. MUDD: And then another way that you can prove that you were there is to basically bring your mortgage paperwork in with that address on it, your old mortgages with your refinances so people can see that you've been there and that you've lived in that particular -- MR. BARNHART: Well, I mentioned that when I called up, but I was told that doesn't prove anything. But I could use that? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I would get that Value Adjustment Page 55 September 7, 2006 Board paperwork and I would fill it out, and when they have the Value Adjustment Board, I would show up with those particular items in hand, and the board will make the decision if you have it or not. And Commissioner Henning mentioned to you that the board has the ability to go back two years in homestead. He can't take you all the way back 14 years, but he can do it at least two years. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The way I understand it though, no matter how long you lived in the house, if you haven't applied for homestead exemption -- my daughter's lived in the same house for 18 years. She's moved -- we moved here when she was 12. Lived in the same house for 18 years. She thought -- because it's in her husband's name. She thought her husband had applied for homestead exemption. Last year when her taxes went up so tremendously, she said, how come we're not getting this homestead exemption? Well, apparently he didn't file, even though she's lived there 18 years. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are they still married? MR. BARNHART: Well, that's what I discovered, because I refinanced. CHAIRMAN HALAS: I really don't think we're going to get anywhere with this. I think -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: So just because you live there -- my point is, just because you live there doesn't mean that you're homesteaded. CHAIRMAN HALAS: This isn't the area to bring this up. What you need to do is go to the Value Adjustment Board, and I think you might get some help there. MR. BARNHART: And where would that be? CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's going to be tomorrow. You have to get some paperwork and fill it out and make sure that -- I think it's $15. MS. FILSON: They have the paperwork out in the hallway. Page 56 September 7, 2006 CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, great. MS. FILSON: But it has to be filed upstairs on the fourth floor with minutes and records by tomorrow at five o'clock. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We're going to take a 10-minute break for our court reporter, and then we'll be back in session again. Thank you very much. (A brief recess was had.) MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, could you please take your seats. Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager. We're back from recess and we're to continue -- I believe we're waiting for Ms. Sue Filson. I think she's got some more speaker slips. MR. PETTIT: There's only two left, it looks like. You want me to go ahead and read them? If you'd like, Commissioner Halas, I can proceed. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. Please do. Call the next one. MR. PETTIT: The next speaker would be Glenda Roberts. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, I believe that gentleman might have been next. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yeah. Mike Arguez, I believe, Ms. Filson had called. MR. PETTIT: Oh, okay. Sorry. That is the next one. MS. FILSON: Mike Arguez? MR. ARGUEZ: Yes, ma'am. Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Mike Arguez. I live in Broward County. And for the past 20 years I've been trying to buy a piece of vacant lot here -- and I have many friends and also my brother lives in Fort Myers. And we wanted to buy a piece of land where we can build and live here and have a good time in Naples. We always love Naples. We come here to the beach from Fort Lauderdale, even though we Page 57 September 7, 2006 have a good, beautiful beach over there. But to tell you the truth, I'm really outraged with the taxes going on here. My taxes have doubled. I have a vacant lot in Golden Gate. And last year -- I bought the lot back in 2004. Last year we paid 1,066.04. This year they plan to charge me $1,942. My home taxes in Fort Lauderdale -- which I live in prime location in Sawgrass, right across the street from Sawgrass Mall -- I'm going to be paying $300 less from last year on my -- on the proposed tax from Broward County, and here they're increasing me double. And I want to live in Naples like everybody else. They love Naples, and I believe it's a beautiful city. It's an old city, and I think we can make a beautiful place here in Naples. But the way I see things and the way I see everybody here talking, outraged with the taxes -- and I said to myself, what's going to happen to me and my family? I want to build a home here in Naples, and one year later I'm going to have to sell because I won't be able to forward it. And I think that's outrage (sic). I don't know who's taking care of what. Who's supposed to reduce the taxes, or maybe the people should scream to Tallahassee. Maybe this is a tea party, Boston Tea Party. We left England because we wouldn't -- you know, we don't want to pay the taxes but -- paying taxes in England. Here, the same things happening. We're going back to the old thing. We're going to have to get up in arms and say, hey, we're tired of taxes. And I don't know who we're going to have to talk to, either to J eb Bush, or maybe the commission here or maybe the Broward County or Collier County supposed to maybe help us. I mean, you know, who's going to be able to pay all these taxes? Are we going to lose our land just because we cannot afford pretty soon to -- not be able to pay for it? It's outrage (sic). I think, you know, you people can do something. I think Page 58 September 7,2006 Tallahassee can do something. But if you cannot do it, we're going to have to get J eb Bush involved in this or the next governor in November. I believe it's unfair. Many people here live here for many years. I see them screaming, say, what's going on? You know, here I'm trying to get -- and pretty soon I'm going to say, wait a minute. If these people going to leave, I'm going to have to leave, too. I won't be able to build in here. So I really wish that they can, you know, do something about it so I can build my house here and live, you know, where I want to live. And I appreciate it. You know, I know it's-- CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, sir. MR. ARGUEZ: We can't do much, but I hope you do. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you. MR. ARGUEZ: Thank you. MS. FILSON: The final speaker is Glenda Roberts. MS. ROBERTS: Hi, Mr. Chairman. My name is not Glenda Roberts. I'm Rutha Geesey. I'm speaking for my family. Glenda Roberts is there, and the rest of the family. We moved into Naples, some of us, over three years. I retired and I also just moved in here permanently this year; however, prior to moving, I applied for homestead. When I applied for homestead, I was told I could not have homestead because I have another property in another state where I lived over 30 odd years and that I must first not -- I must first remove the tax abatement that I'm getting from that property in order to apply for homestead here even though I'm living here, using all my retirement funds here, and I can't get homestead where I live. So I think someone should look into that. Besides getting homestead, the tax increase, as a matter of fact, went up almost by 25 percent because I don't have homestead, which means then that I would have to take a whole month of my retirement salary to pay for taxes, leaving me with 11 months. Page 59 September 7, 2006 And it's just last night we were discussing, maybe I have to move to another state or move back to where I was because then I would save quite a bit more on the income that I'm retiring on. So besides thinking about the taxes are very high and that there should be something with the homestead, if you have a property elsewhere where you lived, you should not give up what you have because you must go back to visit, you have families and children, et cetera, that you should not have to just sell it or give it up just to get homestead where you're living and spending. So if you can look into that -- I definitely think that that part of the tax law, if it's a law, is unfair. The second thing that I want to talk about is that when you look at the -- this stuff that you send here that was sent, it says that there's Mosquito Control. I have never seen anyone spraying for mosquitoes where we live. There are ponds and pools and there are mosquitoes so big, you cannot even stay outside after six p.m., and even early morning you come out, they're all around you. So if we're paying for Mosquito Control, there should be people sent out there to take care of all the ponds that are there. The next is the roads. The roads are terrible. Some of us do live on paved roads and the other roads have not been paved. We've been there for over three years. There are lots of houses on the street, and the roads not paved. And if we're paying, there should be something done to those roads in the Golden Gate area. That's on Everglades Boulevard area. Also, we're talking about the Naples Zoo. I notice that we have an increase in tax, almost doubled from $29 to $41. I took out a membership, an annual membership there. Why am I paying a membership fee and also paying for -- you know, paying again, a part of my taxes, for the zoo? So I think those should be looked into. If you have a membership fee, annual membership fee, I can see others paying, visitors, et cetera, to maintain it and not that being part of the Page 60 September 7, 2006 budget that is part of your tax that you're paying. And since the bell has rung, I must thank you then for what -- for allowing me to speak, but I do think that we need to look into the taxes, and especially for the homestead piece of the taxes for people who are living here. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, ma'am. MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Thank you. That moves us to item 1D, which is a resolution to adopt the tentative millage rates. In July, you adopted the proposed millage rates. Tonight you adopt a resolution adopting the tentative millage rates. And then at your final hearing two weeks from tonight, you will approve final millage rates that will be used in determining the tax bills for fiscal year 2007. So we would need a motion and the board approval of a resolution to adopt the tentative millage rate. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All right. I have a motion the floor. Do I have a second? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Got a motion on the floor to approve the tentative tax millage rate by Commissioner Coletta and seconded by Commissioner Fiala. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion carries, 4-1. Page 61 September 7, 2006 Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I want to explain the reason that I voted against. Restate, the people were notified that this is the meeting to come to. And the real decision-making about further rollback will be made in two weeks from now. So I think that's not fair to the citizens or the taxpayers, and -- that came here -- out here tonight. And what we're saying is, what they really should -- the night they should have came was the 21 st of September, correct? MR. MUDD: No, sir. In past years, this board has decided to hear public comment on the first meeting and also hear public comment on the second meeting before they made a determination of what they were going to set the millage at and discuss the unfinanced requirement list, if there's anything that this board wants to add to the budget. I went through what we had done in the past with the chairman of the board prior to this meeting in setting the agenda. We talked about it, and he concurred that it would be a good idea to wait till the second meeting to talk about the unfinanced requirement list, and then he approved the agenda for this evening as we did that, and we wanted to make sure that we gave the opportunity for the public to talk at either meeting before the board made their final decision. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I guess -- you understand my concern, Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, and I think that we've covered that. I think that all aspects have been covered. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You see why I think it's an injustice to the people when they were given a notice that they could come here and speak? CHAIRMAN HALAS: They did speak. They had the opportunity, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And they did speak, but the actual -- Page 62 September 7, 2006 CHAIRMAN HALAS: And they're going to be able to speak on the 21 st, too, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, they won't be notified there. CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's going to be listed on -- it will be notified that they can come and speak. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, this is the one that we always get comments about. That's the only reason I'm bringing it up, and maybe it's -- could do it a different way next year. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, if I may. I think Commissioner Henning -- I agree partly with you on it. The fact that anytime you can give the public due notice, no matter how far you have to go to do it, is a wonderful way. And of course, the tax notice is always a way to do it. You know, there's three times they have an opportunity to come before us on this, and all three times I want them to see them avail themselves of it. I really want them to speak this time. I wanted them to speak the last time, and definitely want to hear from them again. As far as the notice in the tax notice that went out, possibly we can address that and expel it out in a better way. Is that possible, Mike? MR. SMYKOWSKI: For the record, Michael Smykowski. There are -- statutorily we are required by law to hold two public hearings. The official notice for the first public hearing that was held tonight is, for all counties and all taxing jurisdictions in the State of Florida, is the TRIM notice. On the TRIM notice it listed our public hearing, but it also listed, you know, the South Florida Water Management District hearing in Palm Beach. If you happen to be in a municipality, it identifies when each of those respective hearings are. Page 63 September 7, 2006 Again, there are two opportunities for input. The final hearing is advertised, we are required by law between three -- not less than three, not more than five years before the final hearing, which will be September 21st, to advertise. We will have a full quarter page ad in the Naples Daily News advertising that the board will be holding its final public hearing, and in boldface type, it mentions that, you know, a final decision on the budget and taxes will be held -- or will be made at that meeting. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You still haven't answered the question. Is it possible that we could have it included the next year's tax bill when these meetings are going to be rather than just this meeting so people will know there's a succession of meetings to attend? Is that something we can do, or is that limited too as far as -- by state statutes? MR. SMYKOWSKI: We'll have to talk with the property appraiser as to, you know, the format, and the Department of Revenue, because the -- the TRIM notice is dictated by the State of Florida in large part, so -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibly an insert that might be able to go into it. I do agree that we need to give the public out there every single opportunity to come before us, because that's what we're here for. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I understand. And-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how do we get that notice out to them? And so when Commissioner Henning brought that part up, he is right on that. I do think that we're meeting quite a need by putting it in the paper, but does it meet the same needs as the tax bills? A lot of these people are outside the area. They don't get the paper. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Right. In the TRIM notice -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I would like to hear a little bit more on this when we go into next year and we start to plan out our Page 64 September 7, 2006 original session. Maybe we can make that -- when we're setting the budget criteria for how we're going to do it, maybe at that point in time we might be able to address it and we might be able to find out what all the legal ramifications are. And for that, I appreciate, Commissioner Henning, you bringing it up. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I'll talk with the property appraiser's staff in the morning. And if I can get an immediate answer, you know, I'll bring that forward at the final hearing or have a representative from the property appraiser's staff available, if possible. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: And we'll see to what extent. Ifwe can't change the notice itself, I know Mr. Skinner puts in a notice all about the homestead exemptions, Save Our Homes. How it works, it's a trifolded sheet that helps explain the TRIM notice that goes out. So even if we, you know, can't amend the TRIM notice itself, certainly an insert, you know, that there will be two hearings, I would think we'd be able to accommodate that in some fashion. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much. I think we addressed that pretty good. Any other questions? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: On the questions that I had about the budget, ad valorem reoccurring dollars for repairs and capital improvement, how far in advance can I be looking for that information prior to the adoption? MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I'll try to get it to you by the middle of next week. Is that okay? COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's great. Thank you. MR. MUDD: Sure, no problem. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other items that we need to take Page 65 September 7,2006 care of at this point? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MR. MUDD: You need to go to item number E, which is a resolution to adopt the amended tentative budget. Mr. Smykowski read a list to you early on of the differences from the budget and things that had changed, and those were on -- I think it was the second item that you talked about. Mike? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. That was in item B, and then we addressed some commission questions relative to those changes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: The final item is the announcement. The final public hearing on the Collier County budget for fiscal year 2007 will be held two weeks from tonight at 5:05 p.m., that is September 21 st, and the board will be making final decisions on the tax rates for the millages that are under their control and a final decision on the Page 66 September 7, 2006 Collier County budget at that point in time. The general fund at this point is at 3.579 mills, an increase of 12.9 percent over the rolled back rate, and the aggregate millage rate, which is a weighted average of all of the millages that are under the control of the Board of County Commissioners is 4.4864 mills, an increase of 14.43 percent over the rolled back rate. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I have nothing further. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'd like to bring one item up that may be of interest to put on the unfunded mandate, and this is the Collier Health Services, Incorporated. It's a cost share whereby the county puts in about $235,000, and the returned fund, the drawdown, is about $559,000. And this is in regards to individuals that are 58 percent of -- a percent of the people who fall below the 100 percent of the federal poverty level. And this was submitted to me by the Collier Services Health, Incorporated (sic), so is there a -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to second that if you need a second, or I don't know if you just give direction. But this is something, too, that they have it arranged in such away, I believe, that we get the money back in the Collier County account. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, we do. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it goes back toward the money that we have spend -- we're mandated to spend for social service agencies. So basically it's a win-win situation that we can help this agency to be able to reach out a little bit farther to meet the unfunded needs of the public out there at no cost to the taxpayers in the end. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you just need three nods? MR. MUDD: I need three nods, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's just to put it on the list? Page 67 September 7, 2006 MR. MUDD: That's just to put it on the list. CHAIRMAN HALAS: To put it on the list. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just to put it on the list. MR. MUDD: And I'll add -- and I'll add an explanation from the letter to the documentation that you had. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I address that? If that's the case that it's coming back, why not just take it out of the existing health services budget and apply it, if it's coming back? You know, why can't you do it that way? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why not? CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm not sure. What guidelines do we have on this? Mike, can you give us some assistance on this? MR. MUDD: Sir, well, let's discuss it a little bit, okay? CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MR. MUDD: When you talk about -- I'm trying to think about the -- when you talk about the funds that you get from the -- it's a difference between the maximum of what we finally get charged. We get a -- we get a reimbursement from the state. And I'm trying to think of the acronym now that they call it, because they just changed it from before. And the -- if somebody could help me, that would really -- that would be really nice. The problem that you have -- CHAIRMAN HALAS: Uncompensated-- MR. MUDD: -- the problem that you have with the payment of this person -- of this agency when they're paying some bills, may it be to the David Lawrence Center or whatever, that reduces the amount of money that we're eligible for as far as this reimbursement from the state. So I can't agree totally with the statements that are made. There will be a small amount of money that will have to be paid out of a fund. It's not just a clean wash. Page 68 September 7, 2006 CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's cost share. MS. KRUMBINE: Marcy Krumbine, director of human services. And the name of that program now is the Lower Income Payment Program, LIPP program. And what we, in speaking with Mr. Achen, had discussed doing is taking the money that we already have in our budget, give -- send up to the state for this program, take a portion of that, that $235,000, and instead of sending it up with our 3.1, send it to him so he can get that match back, so he could get that $500,000 back. The only loss that we have is we lose our match money, which is -- which would come to $41,000. So that is the missing piece. CHAIRMAN HALAS: He ends up actually getting more money in regards to addressing the issues here? MS. KRUMBINE: Oh, absolutely. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's already addressed. We don't have to put it on the UFR list. MR. MUDD: You have $41,000 that you're going to have to put on the UFR list. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, where does that $41,000 come from? MS. KRUMBINE: We already have in our budget $3.1 million COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MS. KRUMBINE: -- that we have dedicated to this LIPP program. We send it up to the state. They add 17 and a half percent, and then it brings back $3.6 million that we use to address the uninsured, underinsured, the needy population, okay. So instead of sending up that 3.1, we're going to take out $235,000 so we can match that for Richard Achen's program, okay? So we'll get $235,000 in services back, but we're going to miss that extra 1 7 and a half percent that we would get from the state because we're not sending it up with our LIPP program. Page 69 September 7, 2006 So we're going to lose $41,000, but he's going to gain the additional amount of money to operate his clinics. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's already covered, so we don't have to put it on the UFR list. MS. KRUMBINE: You could put $41,000 on the UFR list so that we are made whole. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Here's the thing. You're providing these services to a certain sector of the community. MS. KRUMBINE: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And by this new program, you're actually getting more money back for this certain sector of services for this certain sector of the public. MS. KRUMBINE: We're -- Collier County government is not getting that money back. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The citizens though. MS. KRUMBINE: Collier -- right, through Collier health -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. MS. KRUMBINE: -- clinic is getting the money back. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So whatever you provided to those citizens before, they're actually getting more back through this new program. So $41,000 is -- you just probably have a heck of a lot more money to provide other services to other residents. Am I correct? MS. KRUMBINE: Well, it depends on what you're defining as the term we. You mean we as in Collier County -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Your budget. MS. KRUMBINE: No, not -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: We, your budget. MS. KRUMBINE: No. I'm going to lose we -- in my budget, $41,000. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But it will go to Mr. Achens ( sic) -- or is it Dr. Achens -- Page 70 September 7, 2006 MS. KRUMBINE: No, Mr. Achen. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Mr. Achen's program, and whatever monies that you previously expended for that low, low income people, you won't have do it because Mr. Achens (sic) is going to get that extra money. MS. KRUMBINE: It's different services. Because if you look in the letter, he's going to hire -- you know, he'll hire a doctor, he'll expand his -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: As an expanded service for that sector of the public. MS. KRUMBINE: Right. But the other things that we pay, like we promote -- we have a partnership with the department of health where we give money to the immunization clinic and to the David Lawrence Center, and then to pay individual services, secondary and tertiary services for patients, that's -- that's what will have to be cut by $41,000. MR. MUDD: What I have to find out from Mr. Achen -- and this is another way to get where you want to go, Commissioner. A lot of counties charge a 20 percent administrative fee for doing exactly what you're doing right here to cover the 1 7 and a half percent that they're losing out of their budget in order to make it happen. I've got to see if Mr. Achens (sic) can take on $41,000 more out of this increase, okay, to pay for the lost services that she's going to have to give away on the 41 K. I will have that answer for you at the next meeting if that's a possibility or it does something to this program that he's in in order to get that done. CHAIRMAN HALAS: If you can get it maybe earlier, that would be good. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's great. We're not going to make a final decision for two weeks, so we can make that decision then. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Page 71 September 7, 2006 CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Anything else we have to cover? MR. MUDD: That's it, sir. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any questions or concerns? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wouldn't dare. CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We are adjourned. Thank you very much for coming tonight. ****** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 7:31 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL FRAN~~ ATTEST';} " ~ fL' <~ - . l..)J.....tJA..,' ~ ,,' DC .. D-U{hF.f~ ~CLERK s 1 qnlt"r. on1. These minutes approved by the Board on t'Jo~em'Oer \Lf\~ as presented v or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS. Page 72