BCC Minutes 01/24/1995 W (800 Mhz Funding)WORKSHOP MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 1995,
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COHMISSIONERS
LET IT BE REHEHBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in
and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning
Appeals and as the governing board (s) of such special districts as
have been created according to law and having conducted business
herein, met on this 24th day of January, 1995, at 3:30 p.m., in a
Workshop Session, in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East
Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRPERSON:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
ALSO PRESENT:
Bettye J. Hatthews
John C. Norris
Timothy J. Constantine
Pamela S. Hac'Kie
Timothy L. Hancock
W. Neil Dotrill, County Hanager
Bill Hargett, Assistant County Hanager
Ken Cuyler, County Attorney
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: Let's convene the workshop for the Board of
County Commissioners for January 24th.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Would you hit the sound for us, please, just
hit the toggle switch right in front of you.
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: I'm going to convene the workshop for the
Board of County Commissioners for January 24, 1995, regarding the 800
Megahertz funding.
Mr. Hargett, do you have a presentation for us?
MR. HARGETT: Yes, ma'am. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Bill
Hargett --
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: Let me interject something. Before we get
started, let me ask a question of this Board. Normally, we don't take
public comment during workshop. And we have a number of people here
from the fire districts and so forth; some are fire chiefs; some are
fire commissioners and so forth. I'm questioning whether they call
this input.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think since they are a direct part of
what we're doing, yeah, I don't think of them as the general public.
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: Are we going to advance to the public --
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: I don't think they are considered part of
the general public. They are actually people that are directly
involved in this.
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: They are going to be directly affected by
it.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So we are going to limit the input to those
that are directly affected, we're not going to take general public
comment?
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: Generally, we don't. I just wanted to see
if we are going to continue in that direction.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: I think the fire districts are all a part of
this discussion, and they're not -- shouldn't be considered in this as
the general public.
FIRE CHIEF PETERSON: We're government agencies; we are government
agencies.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: We're quietly tap dancing around there's
one or two people here that want to give us some information. Does the
Board want to hear that today or not?
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: That's quietly what we're tap dancing
around, yes.
COHMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well we were quietly tap dancing around it.
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: We are no longer tap dancing.
MR. DORRILL: So that this Board will understand, we need to be
able to do the pricing associated with the final purchases that you
plan to make and have that on the agenda for the February 7th meeting.
So at the Board's next regular meeting, it's again going to be one of
these issues where the same opportunity is going to avail itself to all
the individuals who want to speak.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: I think that's appropriate.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: As do I.
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: We will continue then with our general
policy, that unaffected general public people will not be participating
in this.
Mr. Hargett, you're on.
MR. HARGETT: Again, good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Bill
Hargett, Assistant County Manager. On the heals of your hearings on
the variances and on behalf of the independent and dependent fire
districts and the enterprise funds I am here to plead a hardship and
ask for you to fund the 800 Megahertz system. Before I do that,
however, I would just like to review a little bit of background with
you.
If you recall, at your October 26th meeting, you did enter into a
contract to purchase an 800 Megahertz radio system. On November the
8th you approved an interim financing plan and directed the County
Manager to be back to you within 90 days with a permanent financing
plan. As a result of that, on December the 2nd, your staff sent out a
letter to the independent fire districts outlining a number of options
available and asking for the opportunity to meet with them.
And in that particular correspondence, in which the Board was
copied on, we identified to the fire districts that there were an
unlimited number of options and did present, really, on one hand what
we felt were the extremes of where, perhaps, the users paid for
everything. And the other extreme was where the Board might pay for
everything. And then there was a middle alternative, which we said the
Board would pay for the infrastructure and the users would pay for the
radios.
As a result of that, the independent -- or the Steering Committee
of the independent fire districts did meet; did adopt a resolution
indicating that they all fully supported the option whereby the Board
should pay for both the infrastructure and the radio equipment.
Following our December 2nd letter to them and their action, we did
attend the December 12th Steering Committee Meeting of the independent
fire districts.
On December 14th and 15th your staff did meet individually with
all six of the independent fire districts. On January 17th we had a
follow-up workshop, a collective workshop, with the fire districts in
which we reviewed all of the information that we had and exchanged
further the ideas about the various options for funding.
On January 19th, this past, your finance committee did meet and
reviewed all the information in terms of costs and sources of funds for
this. In attendance was our financial adviser, who at this time is
completing work on at least ten alternatives for a source of financing.
And, of course, today brings us to the workshop between the Board and
the independent fire districts.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You said the financial adviser. Who is
that?
MR. HARGETT: Mark Salmon.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sorry?
MR. HARGETT: Mark Salmon.
We have two meetings in the future, beyond today. There is a
finance committee meeting scheduled for tomorrow, in which we hoped to
finalize the source. We think, perhaps, we have identified how we
would service any debt, to identify the source of the funds. And,
finally, on February the 7th we would present a permanent financing
plan to the Board for your consideration.
I think with that I need to move into, really, an overview of the
800 Megahertz system. I will ask John to turn the overheard on there.
What we have done, in reviewing the system with both the Board and
independent fire districts, is to identify first of all the contract
amount of $8,232,000.00. That's broken down 70 percent for
infrastructure, about 5.5 million; and about 30 percent for user
equipment, about 2.4 million. Where we have gone at this point is,
really, to take those two major categories and the capital costs and
try to break them down into components and try to identify the various
items under each one.
First, on the left under infrastructure, about five and a half
million dollars. It includes such things as the tower sites, the
backbone, the dispatch center, training installation, and warranty. And
we have included that $1.4 million, which gives us a total cost of 5.7.
On the other side, the user equipment or $2.4 million, what we have
done here is identify, really, down to the departmental level, what we
have anticipated in terms of all the users of the equipment.
This chart was actually developed by getting a list from each one
of those departments as to all the radios that they had, the types of
radios, and assuming a one-for-one exchange of those radios, and also
an average price for radios between a basic and, I guess, one with all
the bells and whistles. So what we think here is it represents
probably an average value. And, again, that represents the $2.4
million.
At this point I will also point out, from this chart, that is the
net cost. The actual user equipment was estimated or valued at 3.8
million. There is a $1.4 million credit which has been netted out into
the -- into each departmental cost. From this point we have really
begun to concentrate somewhat on the user equipment and have tried to
place each one of these users in a category. John, would you flip the
next chart.
We have taken each one of these departments and really put them
under -- in a category that we have listed, first of all, General
Funds. You can see there that the majority of these departments are
areas under the county manager's agency. We have got enterprise funds,
they are also under the county manager agency. But the reason that
they are broken out is that they have their own individual funding
source, that being the users of those services. You've got the
constitutional officers, in this case the Sheriff; your dependent fire
districts, there are two of them; and the independent districts, there
are six of them. And for each one of these categories there is a
subtotal for that.
Moving from this category, we then tried to place the categories
under one or more funding sources or funding authorities. In this
particular case, under the Board of County Commissioners, all those
departments that you saw under the county manager's agency certainly
fit -- would fit under the Board of County Commissioners along with the
Sheriff, bringing that total for user equipment to about 1.6. Our
enterprise fund, again, is the funding authority onto themselves--
343,000 dependent fire districts, about 74,000; and the independent
fire districts about 352,000.
At this point then we really are taking a look at -- once we have
identified these costs, categorized them, fit them under the funding
authority, really, begin to look at each of the impacts and the total
cost of the system. John, would you put up the next one? The first
thing that we did was take a look at the user equipment and each of the
funding authorities', I guess, portion of that user equipment, as a
percentage of the total cost.
You can see here that under the Board as a funding authority we
immediately identify about 90 percent of the entire capital costs which
would automatically -- in our minds would automatically fall under the
Board. The other funding authorities that we identified, the dependent
districts, amount to about 1 percent of this project in terms of user
equipment; enterprise funds about 4.2 percent; and the independent fire
districts about 4.4 percent.
So you can see that, I guess, as a slice of the pie or a slice of
the whole, that each one of the funding authorities, other than the
Board, I think, individually has a very small percentage of the
project. However, when you perhaps look at them collectively, you
get about 9.7 percent. One of the views that has come forth is that
we should look at them individually; but also what you might do for
one, you would certainly consider doing for another.
So while it's important to, perhaps, look at the individual
percentage, it's also important to look at those funding authorities
collectively. So another thing that we did was then begin to look at
these costs as a percentage or a part of just user equipment. So,
John, if you would, show them the last one. What is shown here is the
pie for the user equipment or the radio costs, which is about $2.4
million. And, again, we have broken that down into the funding
authorities.
The dollar amount is the same; it's just the percentage that is
different, because we are just looking at user equipment in this case.
And as it reflects there, the Board is a funding authority with 68
percent of that equipment under the Board. The independent fire
districts amount stays the same, but the percentage of the pot here is
15 percent. The enterprise fund is 14 percent. And the dependent fire
districts is 3 percent. And that's kind of how we have analyzed the
costs of the different funding authorities. So, John, if you could, go
to the next one. Slide that down a little bit if you don't mind.
The next thing we kind of tried to take a look at is what do we do
from here? How do we get to this -- to the decisions that need to be
made? And the first thing that we started off with is, really, looking
at the two pieces of the system as we saw it, that was the
infrastructure and the user equipment. And, first off, up at the top
under infrastructure, really the first question that needed to be asked
was is this going to be paid for by BCC funds or under -- or use the
Board as the funding authority.
And, up to this point, there has not been any indication that the
Board would do otherwise or was considering anything else. So we would
answer that question "yes," and then begin to really evaluate the
financing. Do we use existing funds or determine a funding source?
And that would be a matter strictly for the Board. So that would bring
us down to users' equipment. If for some reason the Board was not
willing to fund this infrastructure, we really need to figure out a way
-- if there was a way that the users could fund it; and if there was
not, we really need to stop what we are doing. We do have the
contractor, if you will, who has been given a Notice to Proceed, who is
working and obviously at a cost to the county. So we would need to
stop this and continue to use the VHF system.
However, if there was a way that users could fund this, I guess,
we would certainly need to determine a payment basis. And then it
would really bring us right back to user equipment, which we bring the
discussion to this part -- or at least the discussion that your staff
has had with the independent fire districts has really been, I guess,
kind of the crux of the issue as to the payment for user equipment.
And, again, the first question is is the Board going to fund. And
if it's "yes," we still have the question of how we would do it --
which most of that preliminary work is done. If the answer there
is"yes," we simply need to -- we can end this meeting very quickly and
keep the contractor working and continue on. However, if the Board is
not going to pay, I wanted to discuss in further details other
alternatives to fund the user equipment other than from what I will
call Board funds, BCC funds.
We came to the question of would user funds -- could we use that?
If the answer is "yes," certainly we need to look at the various ways
to pay for that. If the answer is "no," again we are back to stop and
we need to discontinue any additional costs and continue to use the VHF
system.
What I would like to do, very quickly -- I think the Board is
certainly aware of the various funding options that it may have. I
wanted to show you some of the options that I have discussed with the
users under that matrix of using user funds to pay for radio equipment.
One of the things that we had talked with them about -- and, first off,
let me say that among the six districts, we did not anticipate that
there might be any single alternative, that in terms of users paying,
that we might come up with that would satisfy everything.
So one of the things that we had looked at was all the various
options that might be available, trying to insert as maximum
flexibility into this as possible. And so the way that we have
structured this is the options could vary from one district to the
next. Now, first was direct payment. We have gone through and
identified the costs, and the payment would have to be $50,000.
If a district had the financial wherewithal that they simply could
write a check for their portion of the radio equipment we were going to
ask them to pay for it. If they didn't have that kind of up-front
cash, then we looked at annual payments, which was our view that the
Board would be willing to -- you were going to borrow, say, $5.5
million or $6 million. And if a person who had a $50,000 radio cost
and couldn't afford to come up with $50,000, that you would be willing
to take that fifty and add that to the amount that you were going to
borrow and in turn finance that for the individual district so that
would give them some type of annual payment.
We developed options for anywhere from four to fifteen years. They
could make those types of annual installments back to the county either
through existing funds that they may have or should they need to levy
the additional millage where they had that possibility. I think there
are one or more, perhaps, districts who really capped out and that
really didn't appear to be an option.
And, finally, one of the options that we talked about is should a
district not have the funds, not be able to raise the millage, that the
Board may entertain -- the Board being the Board of County
Commissioners may entertain the possibility of creating an HSTU around
that particular district and levy the necessary millage in attempt to
generate the cost of radios from within that fire district. And those
were the user-equipment funding options that we had looked at.
Just something real quick called the funding -- if you would,
John, put up the next slide. What we have done or where we are right
now, in terms of infrastructure, on one hand I've got the Board of
County Commissioners up there on your left; I have the users over on
the right; the infrastructure costs we have assigned under the Board.
I believe that's the direction that you have provided. The county,
under radio equipment, the county manager's agency, we have assigned
that under the Board. The Sheriff, his radio equipment, we have
assigned that over to the Board.
So we are at a Board total or subtotal at this point of $7.2
million. The remaining questions are which side of the chart here do
we place the enterprise funds, the dependent fire districts, and
independent fire districts. That total is 769 -- roughly a $770,000
decision; that's how much those three categories add up to be. So one
of the things that we have done here is to take a look at what
difference -- or how that would impact, I guess, funding options.
What we have done right here, on the left, principal -- we'll
assume just for a moment, if you would, that the Board financed
$8,232,000. In your fiscal year '95 budget, you do have budgeted
$1,350,000.00, which is -- I will assume or will represent is cash;
and therefore is the amount that you would not need to finance.
Subtracting those two, you have about $6.6 million.
Looking down below that -- and I used seven years, five years, and
three years -- our current commercial paper rate is 4.1 percent. We
used 4.5 since that is a variable rate and certainly may change. You
can see that your annual payments would run as high as $1,128,000-- I'm
sorry, a low of $1,128,000 up to $2.4 million if you were interested in
a real short-term loan.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. Do we have a copy of that in
this?
MR. HARGETT: No, ma'am.
On the other side of the page is a 7.2 -- $7,230,000.00 which is
the Board subtotal at this point and basically represents our estimate
of the costs at this point for everything except the
dependent/independent fire districts and the enterprise funds. Again,
subtracting the amount that you have budgeted for this year, you would
need to finance $5.8 million. And, again, looking down at the bottom
under annual payments, your payments would run for seven years from a
low of $997,000 up to $2.1 million.
I have reflected out on the right a principal difference between
each side of this, being about $770,000. And then below that you can
see the difference in the annual payments for each of those time
periods. There were -- in the information that I previously provided
the districts and to the Board, we have discussed the, I guess, the
advantages and disadvantages, really, with the two options that we have
presented out on each end of the ladder as well as one in the middle.
I think there are pros and cons for every one of them. We have
attempted to discuss those with the Board as well as the fire
districts. And at this point we are prepared to go forward with a
permanent financing plan. And we need at some point, February 7th or
prior to that date, we need to know what to do with the $770,000.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Hargett, back here on -- I guess these
pages are not numbered, but back under the user equipment category
funding --
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: If I could make a comment. I need to
leave, I have a four-hour drive ahead of me. I just wanted to share my
thoughts with you. This is a workshop and we won't be taking a vote--
and Commissioner Norris, if you don't mind my interrupting so I can
leave --
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Oh, that's okay.
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: My preference, with the end that this Board
gets to on this, is that we have each and every entity involved in
this: The Sheriff, the Solid-waste Department, the Utilities
Department, the County Manager's agency, and the various fire
districts; that each and every one of them make the appropriate line
item in their own budget and we address it accordingly. That is my
preference.
And part of my reasoning for that is if you look through this, you
will notice that the City of Naples is not included and neither is the
School Board. I have got some concern that if we start saying that the
BCC, through its ad valorem tax, is going to pay for enterprise funds,
the Sheriff, who has his own budget, as well as the independent fire
districts and dependent fire districts that the City will be in here
asking for half million dollars for their radios and the School Board
will also be coming in and saying, "Gee, you funded theirs; now fund
ours." I think we are at a crossroad where we have to be very careful.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Are you speaking specifically to the user
equipment?
CHAIRPERSON MATTHEWS: Yeah, exactly, radios themselves. And with
that I have spoken my piece, and it's a workshop. I'm going to head
out and head to Orlando. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: As I was saying, Mr. Hargett, on these
prices of user equipment I think you were saying that that's the
average radio price. These figures for the different agencies that
will be buying radios, if they wanted to go to the basic radio, for
example, an average radio, they would save a lot of money; is that
what you're saying?
MR. HARGETT: There is, within the contract, two different parts
of contract documents. There is reference to the basic radio -- and I
will ask John to speak to this in a little more detail. I don't know
that they necessarily conflict. At one point it says the basic radio
is -- would be the type of radio that our administrative agencies would
use, service agencies.
And then there's another part of the contract that says they would
service or could be serviced on the front line along with our emergency
agencies. I want to make sure there is not any conflict. With that,
using the basic radio costs, it does -- there is about a third -- a 4
1/2 percent rate, there is about a 30 percent reduction in those costs.
We did calculate those; we did amortize them out; and we did provide a
copy of that to each one of the districts for their particular case.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Did you have more questions on that
line?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I share some of the concerns that
Commissioner MAtthews shared. And I wonder if we could kind of get to
the meeting. I have a concern -- it's not a matter of 4 percent. I
think we could end up spending a couple of million dollars on radios
here if BCC general ad valorem absorbs that. I share her thoughts
there. I guess if the majority of the Board feels that way -- I
thought we should probably get into what's appropriate payment
schedules and what's not, rather than deal with is going to pay. I
thought maybe we could move that portion along rather rapidly.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I think it's appropriate concerning the user
equipment for each user to pay for his own user equipment. I also
think it's appropriate for the Board to pay for the infrastructure. If
at some point in the future the City of Naples or the School Board
recognizes the wisdom of joining in with us on a county-wide system,
then that would enable them to do that simply with just their
forwarding their share of the infrastructure at some point in the
future and purchasing their user equipment, of course.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I will go with that. I guess my feeling
is, as far as I understand, it wasn't the Board of County Commissioners
that bought the existing radios that the agencies are using. I don't
see this as being a change in policy, just a question as to whether or
not this is the train everyone wants to get on board with and how we
want to do that.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: It's my concern -- and I endorse and agree
with what you're saying, that whoever has been paying for their--
whoever has been paying for equipment should continue to pay for
equipment. My question is -- and I guess maybe this is something
we will hear from others today -- from a timing prospective and a
budgeting prospective, have these other agencies been included in the
loop to -- I mean, what is their present schedule for purchasing new
equipment is my first question.
And my second question is should they opt not to purchase
equipment at this point in time or on the same schedule as the County
is currently -- as we are currently proceeding, what are the
ramifications of that? Is what I read in the papers true, we won't be
able to talk to each other?
MR. HARGETT: No, ma'am. The current schedule is we really should
reach substantial completion on the system in April of 1996,
approximately a year and two months from now, well into another budget
cycle. Our FAC deadline for that is September of '96, so we don't have
a lot of flow time. In terms of operation it's our belief, in
conversations with the supplier, that we can patch in, as it was put to
me, one to two VHF operating systems.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: One to two, like two maximum?
MR. HARGETT: Yes. The Sheriffs' Department, who worked real
closely with us on that, estimated that there would be an additional
annual cost of about $8,000 to do that. And running some of the
numbers, $8,000 a year, let's say, for one district would be forever.
And obviously -- we would have to pay $8,000 a year every year.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Okay. I understand.
MR. HARGETT: And obviously that cost would increase as the
Sheriffs' costs increase. So what we did was make a comparison of
that with the amortized cost of purchasing the radios, and in most
cases -- in fact, I can't recall a case where the radios were not
cheaper than the cost of patching through.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: Your suggestion being that if they wanted
to patch in, they could patch into our system -- one or two users could
-- it would cost them $8,000 a year, and so it would be cheaper for
them to go ahead and buy the radios now than to patch in, which is an
option available for one or two users anyway? Have I got that?
MR. HARGETT: Yeah. The other thing that just happened, in about
the last week, is you recall the part where we were receiving $1.4
million in trade allowance for the existing radios? We have been
successful in convincing the supplier that we should be allowed to
keep those radios without any loss in trade-in allowance. He has
agreed to do that; so that each one -- each user, who has current VHF
equipment, would be allowed to keep that equipment for mutual aid, and
for, in some cases, I would suspect -- well, for whatever purposes
they wanted to.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: The translation is we would get the credit
as if we had traded in the equipment, but we get to keep the equipment?
MR. HARGETT: Yes.
COHMISSIONER HANCOCK: Great. Could we get about three more of
those?
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: I'm sorry, Commissioner Norris, may I
continue? I keep forgetting to get recognized.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Go ahead, you're on a roll.
COHMISSIONER HAC'KIE: And the purpose being that those who have
kept those radios would continue to use that system?
MR. HARGETT: No, ma'am. There are numerous agencies in which the
independent fire districts deal with on a mutual-aid relationship that
do not have an 800 Megahertz System.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What does that mean, a mutual-aid
relationship?
MR. HARGETT: Well, they come to their assistance when they need
it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: "It's a big fire; we need your help"?
MR. HARGETT: Yes. And so they still need to communicate with
these people; so they would need to retain some of their VHF equipment.
And that which they don't need, perhaps they could sell it to help pay
for their 800 system.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm not going to wait until the pieces
start following into place, because they are coming very slowly.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Actually, we are going kind of rapidly
for us. Commissioner Norris, the one I thought I wanted to raise, we
would do the financing and they would reimburse us annually each
district?
MR. HARGETT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So we could take advantage of the 4.5
percent? Is that what you're saying? MR. HARGETT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I completely lost my train of thought.
MR. DORRILL: We would, as part of that though, need to charge and
pass through that interest cost, because otherwise you are precluded
from extending credit at no-cost credit.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I remember what it was. You said four
to fifteen years. My only concern is payment over fifteen years when
we're talking about technology; this technology could be obsolete in
fifteen years.
MR. HARGETT: The technology could. In fact, one of the things we
looked into was what was the life of the equipment. And we certainly
didn't want to extend the payment period beyond that. The information
was twelve to fifteen years. So we might be stretching it at fifteen.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That particular decision is one we are going
to make next week, exactly which funding mechanism.
MR. HARGETT: I think that the actual decision in terms of --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Two weeks.
MR. HARGETT: -- Whether or not the district wanted to make annual
payments, is a decision the districts will make. You only need to say
whether or not you, number one, are going to ask them to pay for the
radio equipment.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I was originally --
MR. HARGETT: And if so, would you allow --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Excuse me. I was referring to the
infrastructure payments, not the user equipment.
MR. DORRILL: If you want to extend credit, we prefer that you
tell us that today or get some consensus of the Board to do that today
so that we can prepare the legal documents appropriately for the 7th.
So there is no policy issue there. If you want to leave them the
option to finance the purchase of their radios, then we will build that
mechanism into our financing proposal.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Personally, I want to extend them every
option we have available and let them chose what they would like.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I would like to hear from them.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Maybe this is the time I think we should
hear from the different districts to see if they're going to
participate in this project or how they feel about it.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: For the record, Chief Charles McDonald,
Marco Island Fire Control District, also Chairman of the Collier County
Communication Committee, and a member of the 800 Public Safety, and
newly elected President of the Collier County Fire Chief's Association.
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Congratulations.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: Basically, it was -- you guys sort of stole
my thunder, so to speak, so I'm going to have to back up and regroup.
When we started in 1990 it was more or less trying to drive a
proposition of we need this and we desperately need this system to
today where we are just trying to play catch up with the Board's
decisions.
We want to first start out thanking, of course, Assistant County
Manager, Bill Hargett and his staff who both collectively and
individually contacted the six independent and two dependent fire
districts in Collier County. That was certainly a change in pace, to
be included in both the planning and be included in the financing of
something that is such an important project as public safety. It goes
without saying that many years and hard work by different committees,
individuals, and department heads have brought us to where we are
today, including participation input by citizens and of course the
taxpayers of Collier County.
So where do we stand today? We struggle with the same questions
that you Commissioners have been struggling with today and in the past.
As a Fire Service Steering Committee, what I have here-- and I'll pass
that out if I can. What I'm passing out today is -- what we are
passing out is a resolution that was drafted by the Fire Service
Steering Committee. And it's important that I go through with you on
this resolution, given the time frame we are already here in the
evening.
One, the resolution points out several things. It defines what
the Fire Service Steering Committee is. And the Fire Service Steering
Committee is comprised of Fire Commissioners of the independent fire
districts, advisory boards of the dependent districts, the
Administrative Fire Chiefs of Collier County, and associate members who
have rendered tremendous service in fire protection. So that defines
where this resolution came from. It's more or less a unified voice of
Collier County. And that's, sometimes, a very difficult thing to get
-- a unified voice in Collier County, especially from the fire
districts.
Then we define the purpose and objective of the association, and
it's to bring together persons interested in saving lives, the
protection of property, and preventing and extinguishing fires to
discuss ways and means for the betterment of the fire service in the
reduction of unnecessary loss, life, and property, and the promotion of
legislation for the same. We conduct fire research; we make fire
surveys; we cooperate with the governmental agencies in the development
of the fire service through year around educational program and in an
accountable cost effective manner; and we engage in other lawful
purposes.
Now, in order for us to make the most efficient use then of that
power, we are kind of joining forces today in a cooperative effort, A,
in support of the Collier County Board of Commissioners' decision to
authorize the purchase of the 800 system. We thought that was
important to let you know, because we had heard the rumors from the
rumor mill that there are some districts out there that are not in
support or not fully in support of the 800 public safety and other
agencies that are more or less pursuing -- what I call pursuing their
own personal agenda. So we put that in resolution form for Collier
County through the Steering Committee.
The next one is, of course, Commissioner -- excuse me, County
Administrator, Mr. Hargett, submitted a letter dated September the 2nd
to what we call the Steering Committee or to all of the agencies
involved. Within that letter then, he offered us three alternatives.
And under Alternative A, and I quote, "The County would pay the entire
cost of the initial installation and purchase all the equipment. The
user would share in the costs of maintenance and further expansion,
including full costs of purchasing replacements or growth related user
equipment."
Now, we understand the constraints that Mr. Hargett works under,
the same that I do or any chief in this organization, that we answer to
our Board. So we took that under advisement while we were studying the
proposals offered. Then we wanted to clarify just exactly what it was
we were talking about under Alternative A, and that was, for the
purpose of clarification, the cost of maintenance would be defined as
user equipment only, such as portable, mobile and bay station radios.
There was some inference that maybe the districts could afford to
help fund the basic infrastructure and/or the towers, et cetera. So we
wanted to make sure of what we were trying to clarify. And we were
trying to clarify it as far as maintenance and the user equipment that
we use, the mobiles, the bay stations, and the pottables. Then it was
-- we just went ahead and listed the advantages of selecting
Alternative A. And, once again, we used the wording out of Mr.
Hargett. We thought it was excellent wording.
Some of the wording then was, "The advantages that are most likely
met with Option A are to ensure uniform cut over and 100 percent
participation among all the users at commencement." We had a very real
concern in studying the history of 800 systems in other counties and
other states, that it was sometimes a piece meal process. And all we
have to do is go as far as Lee County to understand what we mean by
piece meal.
I think they have been at their project now five years, and
there's still fire districts and entities that should be under that
system that are not under that system. So we had that concern, that we
wanted to at least have 100 percent participation, make it a turn key,
because it affects everyone from Marco Island all the way to the far
reaches of Immokalee. So we wanted 100 percent participation; we
wanted that when you turn that key we wanted everybody to benefit from
it. Everybody will be paying for it, so let everybody benefit from it.
He also listed under Alternative A some of the reasons -- some of
their -- full participation and commencement would likely result in the
following: Eliminate the need for patching non-800 users and
unnecessary duplication of dual systems; enable agency training to be
conducted in a more coordinated and uniform manner, which is more time
efficient and would lessen the need for redundant training later;
maximize system loading to more fully utilize and maintain the
available channels; and maximize multi-agency to give it command
capabilities, et cetera, et cetera.
We just turned right around, and we thought that was great
wording. Now, one of the reasons why the Steering Committee drafted
this resolution is, the main thing was that there were -- we go back
through the budgetary process and as he pointed out 4.4 percent of the
system. And I will be -- quite frankly in verse of public opinion, I
don't think there is a district out there that is adverse to paying for
the radios.
Please understand what we're saying here. If there is a
possibility, though, at 4.4 percent -- which is what, 95.6 -- that you
have already done at 4.4 that some entities, through either the process
of budgeting or any long-term commitments such as a lease-purchase
plan, that future Boards can say -- deny that potential funding for
that particular year and get off an 800 system, did we really want to
roll the dice on that situation. And maybe we are trying to -- and all
we are attempting to do here is simplify the situation.
For 4.4 percent, $352,000.00, six independent districts and two
dependent districts will have to go back through the budgetary process
in some form or fashion. Impact fees, we had just had a ruling from
the County Attorney, impact fees are very iffy as far as funding that
position. Now, if you took Marco Island, which I am chief of, Marco
Island has already committed at this point in time to roughly $1.3
million of the 800 system. The latest communication that I just
received was that our share of the user fee is now reduced down to
$33,000 to be a full participant.
My question is what happens "if" in the future, on that 33,000 or
however the funding comes out, as we are dealing with eighteen Fire
Commissioners -- and those Fire Commissioners roll over fairly rapidly.
If we are dealing with citizens' input at this time, at some time are
we going to really muddy up the water, and then where are we going to
be with that?
So understand where the Board is coming from, where the Steering
Committee is coming with this resolution. We are not inflexible; we
want to work with the Board; we are 100 percent in support of the 800
system; we are down to 4.4 percent. Does the Board want to roll the
dice over that? Maybe there won't be any problems; maybe things will
go right down the road. But that's one of the points I wanted to make
with that. I appreciate your time.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: Thank you, for that, Chief. I don't think
we want to roll the dice at all; we need a firm commitment that the
fire districts are in, because we are at a point right now where we
could just stop the system and not go forward and not spend all the
money.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: Right.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: So if you're saying to us that you're
looking for a commitment from us, I think it's the other way around;
we're looking for a commitment from you to see where we are going with
this. You know, you are one of the most important parts, and the most
important driving force, after the Sheriff, of having this system at
all. So we are looking to you to get the commitment so that we can
feel comfortable in going forward.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: I understand that. Given, within the time
frame of what we have operated under, if memory serves me right, this
is probably one of the few projects that the Board has approved and
then funded. If -- and that's kind of the situation we are in, too.
We have approval of the system, now we are going to have to go back and
get the funding even though the funding is minute at this time.
Speaking for myself, all I can say is we would work hard to get
that particular funding. As I stand before you right now though, as a
fire chief of Marco Island, I do not have the three members of my Board
in front of me. Yes, I have talked with them about this; yes, they
have given a nod, but not collectively and not in a public setting.
And that's what each and every one of these chiefs and commissioners
are going to have to go back and do before their Board, whatever that
dollar figure is.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Dotrill, we are going to hear this again
on the 7th?
MR. DORRILL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Is there anything that would keep you from
having the commitments in hand by the 7th of February? FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: Speaking personally, no.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Sir, is there any other fire district that
could not make a commitment by the 7th?
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: If I could yield the floor to Chief
Peterson, he has a very important part he would like to make at this
point.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Certainly.
FIRE CHIEF PETERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
One of the things that I want to share with you is a key to this
project. And it not only affects the fire districts, but it also
affects the county. The important thing we need to do, as well as
meet with the Board here, is we need to meet with the vendors.
Because as you may or may not be aware, there is -- whether it's
portable or mobiles, there are three different types that have been
bid here. And in those three different types, there are four or five
different versions of those types.
And what is key to the dollar figure and the dollars that we look
at today on the chart, is that those figures are going to change
because I played around with them last night in our own fire district.
And what may be shown to you today as a $30,000 or $50,000 figure, when
we sit down with the vendors and they can show us the physical hardware
and we say "Okay, we don't need ten Type 1-A radios, but I need five of
those; and I'll take five of Type-2 radios," that radically changes my
total dollar figure.
The figures you have been looking at for everybody have been an
averaged figure, not the high and not the low. So each district, as
well as the county agencies, are going to change in those dollar
figures. Mobile radios are radically the same thing. The radios we
had bid for fire engines are dual control, and they are almost $1,000
more than the conventional mobile.
So once it's determined what they are going to be -- that's why I
want to share with you as far as coming back with you on the 7th when
they sign an agreement per se, we would still not be able to sign a
dollar figure with you; nor will you with us, I don't believe,
accurately. Because until we determine what that is going to be, it's
going to be -- sit down with the vendors -- that figure is going to be
in limbo. So for me to go to my Board or any other district to
determine -- we're still at the point where we can't say exactly what
that dollar figure is going to be for you until you finance whatever
that dollar figure is going to be.
Sharing that with you, I will just reiterate what Chief McDonald
did. And that is that we are committed to it as a fire service. It is
important, and it is needed. We want to work with you on this, so
don't look at this as we're locking down or anybody is locking down.
But, dollar figures, we need to get all parties involved in that to
determine -- because we may be below $300,000 or we may be above that
$400,000 figure.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Thank you.
Mr. Hargett, although we would like to have a commitment from the
various districts of their agreement in principle, when would you say
we need an actual -- when would it be necessary for them to actually
pick out their equipment and get a firm dollar price on their
equipment?
MR. HARGETT: We could have that -- we could have the vendor get
with each one of the fire districts immediately.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No. Iim asking you how long can we delay
that.
MR. HARGETT: Sure. If we can have just a second, we do have a
schedule of efforts that is to occur. I would just like to take a look
at that.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Sure. In the interim, Commissioner
Constantine.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Yes, thank you, just a couple of
thoughts. I agree with Commissioner -- the Chief. Boy, am I having
trouble. I agree with Chief Peterson that obviously before your Boards
can make any final commitment they need to know what that dollar amount
is. We do that every Tuesday; we need to know what it is we are
committing to. But Iim pleased, particularly, with the third paragraph
of the resolution where everyone is unanimously endorsing the project
and the purchase of the 800 system and the implementation of the 800
system.
Just a couple of thoughts, and this is why I think itls important
to have a commitment in principal, I guess, as we cost those out
regardless of what this paw-waw will tell us when we find those
numbers. And that is if someone tells me I can take my dad on an
all-expense paid trip to Orlando and ask me where I would like to stay,
Iim going to say the Stauffer or Iim going to say -- as long as theylre
picking up the tab, Iill say something great. If itls dad and I going
and Iim picking up the tab myself, I probably wonlt stay at the
Stauffer; weill stay at the Quality Inn or Comfort Inn or someplace
nice, but more affordable.
So I think we need to be clear -- not that anyone would ask for
more than they absolutely need, but we need to be clear going into that
process who is picking up the tab. And I realize these numbers may
change, but I looked at the independent district numbers, as put
together by Mr. Hargett, and I just picked the number eight years
because he said four to fifteen, so half of that, halfway in between
that.
And my numbers are rough because I canlt figure 4.4 percent off
the top of my head. But there is no one greater than $10,000 annually;
on average itls around 6,000 or 6,400 annually per payment. If you did
that over eight years, when you look at the thirty-eight thousand,
forty-eight thousand, fifty thousand nine eighty and so on, it would be
like sixty-four hundred, seventy-two hundred, forty-nine hundred.
So I donlt think we are looking at a huge tax burden if we agree
to finance. And I think if we expect everyone to get on board, we have
to do that. Obviously, we canlt pay for our whole system ourselves in
one shot; I donlt think we can expect you to do that either. So I
think we need to look at what to finance and how long to finance, and
hopefully you all can go with that. But when we break it down into how
much each district is actually going to be responsible for, according
to these numbers anyway, itls not a lot per year. I think we can make
it affordable.
MR. HARGETT: Commissioner, the answer to your question is we
would need to know by August of 1995.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: So there is quite a period of time yet
before they even need to make that particular commitment.
MR. HARGETT: Yes, sir, in terms of radio delivery. In terms of,
as I understood Chief Peterson's concern of knowing what the individual
equipment is going to cost each fire district, I'm understanding he
needs to know that right away so he can go back and say the cost of our
equipment is $53,225.19 to his commissioners. And they are either
going to approve that or not approve that.
That's what I understand your concern is, that you need right down
to the -- you need to know what it's going to cost. And that in turn
depends on what types of radios they select; that's why they need to
get with the vendor to do that.
MR. DORRILL: And I think as part of that we can schedule the
necessary vendor demonstrations and have them be here in Collier
County; we can control that in order to aid the fire districts. But
if, for example, Chief Peterson needs one Cadillac radio for the
Chief's car, naturally, and two Buick radios, and then the rest
Chevrolet radios, that's going to be at their discretion. And they can
price their individual user equipment up or down as they see fit. We
are not about to dictate the quality of the features of the individual
devices themselves.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Chief Peterson, maybe I misunderstood
you, but I was under the impression that you were looking for how
quickly we could get that information or get the radio vendor with you
folks.
FIRE CHIEF PETERSON: One of the things that I was looking at was
the schedule that was provided that indicates -- one of the tasks is
order user equipment. And that's in the area of 2/14/95. And also
what the Board was working around -- looking at some type of
contractual agreement for the 7th of February meeting.
When the bid was put together, we tried to narrow models of
radios, if you would, down or the options down to a certain limit to
prevent the Cadillac and the Chevy type of thing. It's pretty narrow,
but still we need to determine, by physically seeing those radios,
what's going to work for the engine crew that's on the street versus
the staff people. There is going to be a difference there, whether
it's rail to bridge or the Utility Department, whatever the case is; so
that's what I'm referring to there.
But to go to my Board, as county agencies come to you, you're
looking for an exact dollar figure approval, and not for us to return
back to you and say, "Oh, by the way, we need to add another 30,000 or
50,000 to it." That's my only reason for sharing that with you, not to
hold the process up of what we're doing on any of these. But when we
start talking figures though, that's my caution to you; don't lock us
into a figure. So when we come back and say, after evaluation of
equipment, it's now changed. Well, that's my precaution to you.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Norris --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner Hancock is next.
COMHISSIONER HANCOCK: I'm getting kind of two lines of thought
here. One is a statement prepared by the, for lack of a proper term,
Joint Fire Commission that says the county would pay for the entire
cost of the installation and purchase all the equipment. It doesn't
say anything about reimbursements to the county for individual
equipment that each fire district would take and use or utilize.
This is in support of the county financing every element of the
system and there being no proviso for repayment to the county of what
we -- in other words, the radio fairy shows up and drops them off on
your door step, flies away, and the county foots the bill. Your
individual departments are not affected fiscally in any way, shape, or
form by that; except for the maintenance after the radio fairy drops
them off.
I don't think that that's what this Board is talking about. I
think this Board is talking about the backbone being our
responsibility. However, those individual radios that your department
would use are your responsibility as they have been. And we would be
more than happy to look at purchasing them up front, but not that we
are going to purchase them and just turn them over solely for the
maintenance cost to the fire districts.
I don't mean to assume, for the balance of the Board, but that's
my understanding. We are talking about this -- and I see you nodding
your head, like what we're talking about is a good idea, but it's
directly in conflict with what you have adopted. So I'm a little
concerned of resolving that conflict so that we're all on the same
page, and we can at least move ahead understanding that there's no
confusion.
If we can't do that, then we have a whole other issue at hand, and
we need to deal with that. It's my contention that although we may
finance the initial purchase, the county ad valorem taxpayer -- that's
not fully funded out of that source alone without reimbursement for the
equipment that you choose. And I guess I have to ask the balance of
the Commission, are we --
COHMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think that's what we have been
discussing.
COHMISSIONER NORRIS: That's what we said.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So there is a difference in this resolution
and what we're talking about. And, I guess, that's conceptually what
we want to arrive at. Can we agree that what the Board is proposing is
amenable to the districts, at least so we can move ahead? If it's not
amenable, now we have a roadblock and a decision to make. I guess I'm
just forcing the issue on that.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner Constantine.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I was going to say and what I would
like to see us do along the line -- and as you said, everyone has been
kind of nodding their heads as far as financing. I hope we are beyond
-- despite the fact it's not your favorite choice, I hope we're beyond
the ad valorem financing everything.
What I would like to see is, as quickly as we can, get the vendor
with each of the chiefs and their perspective boards so that you can
have exact dollar figures for what each individual districts' needs
are; and as quickly thereafter get some indication from your Board,
within the financing parameters that we have laid out, if that works or
not.
Frankly, I would rather have that information back before -- and
if we have to delay this until February 14th instead of February 7th, I
would like to have that information back. I don't think it's going to
happen, but if all the districts or the majority of the districts come
back and say, "Gee, our Board said, no, we don't want to participate,"
then I would hate to have us already have gone ahead and put the
contract with dollar figures and so on. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: So I think we need to have that answer;
we need to move ahead with you and for you, both ways. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Commissioner.
FIRE COMMISSIONER: I just want to clarify this resolution. This
is a resolution adopted and based on a staff letter that we received
from your staff outlining three alternatives. We analyzed those three
alternatives and voted unanimous for the one that we thought was the
best option. Now, if the Board here did not intend to ever pay for
those radios, why were these options ever given out?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: The Board hasn't made that decision,
officially, Commissioner.
FIRE COMMISSIONER: Well, maybe not officially, but opinions and
newspaper articles -- this is why this resolution was adopted, because
of this paper dated December 2nd.
MR. HARGETT: Commissioner Norris, I might respond to that.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Go ahead.
MR. HARGETT: I'm not sure Mr. Kendal was at our January 17th
meeting where I addressed this issue. And I would like to clear that
up so there is no misunderstanding. And I think most of the districts
understand what was in that letter. I would just read a couple of
parts of it so that the Board understands.
"I am enclosing some preliminary information for your review.
This information is intended to be used as a basis for discussion,
since we will need a starting point. As you will see, there is a wide
range of alternatives that can be considered; and we have listed an
alternative to the far right; one to the far left; and one in the
middle. I feel certain you may have other alternatives we could
discuss. I look forward to hearing your ideas and suggestions about
how we might proceed."
Just preceding the alternatives is a statement that says, "It is
important to note that there are numerous possible plans that could be
considered. An exhausted listing and analysis of all the possible
alternatives is beyond the scope of this report. The staff has
considered several of these approaches based on input received from
many sources, including several local and out-of-town government
agencies."
And we did list Alternative A, where the Board pays everything; we
listed Alternative C, where the districts paid for everything; and we
listed one in the middle. And, yes, they were offered up in the
context that was presented in this letter; but to say here is Option A
for you to vote on and accept and approve -- I think it was offered up
to say here are the two extremes, and in between are there any options
that we can come up with.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I don't -- Mr. Kendal, please understand; I
would have picked the same option.
FIRE COMMISSIONER: That's what I'm trying to say.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: And I certainly didn't mean my remark to be
condescending, talking about the radio fairy. The truth is I would
have done the same thing. If I could defer half of our budgetary items
to someone else, because it's taking meat off of my plate and someone
else has to figure it out, I would do that, too. But the bottom line
is, you know, whether this Board feels that's appropriate, to absorb
the individual radio costs of the independent fire districts -- and in
short of taking a formal vote, which we can't do today, I would guess
that that is not the position of the Board.
FIRE COMMISSIONER: I sort of figured that, but I wanted to
clarify why we came up with Plan A.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I understand that; and I certainly didn't
mean to be critical in my remarks.
FIRE COMMISSIONER: I needed to get up anyway.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Are there any other issues that we need to
cover this afternoon?
FIRE CHIEF NUTLEY: I'm Chief Nutley with Immokalee Fire
Department. Two years ago in Sheriff Don Hunter's office, as Chairman
of the Collier County Chiefs' Association, we met with Don along with
a county staff member, who was at that meeting. And we asked Sheriff
Hunter -- at that time I asked that a commitment be made by all of us.
And that commitment would be to stick it down to the last day, meaning
today. And that commitment was not that we ask the County Board for
anything; that commitment was that we all stuck together; that we find
a central funding source, naming no one.
The purpose of that was already stated by Chief McDonald earlier,
that we have done some extensive research. In the past four years,
we've been working on this. And we have found that other counties and
other districts had problems, especially when they worked with
multi-government. And here we're working with seven different
government agencies; each having its own Board; each having its own
political problems.
The County Board has already said it doesn't have the cash at hand
and has to go out and borrow it. And we figured the independent
districts would have the same problem. Our neighbors next door in Lee
County have seventeen fire districts. The county put up 800 Megahertz
and said, "Cough." Currently there are four districts out of
seventeen. What did that do for the public? We thought -- we wanted
to overcome that problem. Because we serve the public; our whole daily
activity is service. And who pays the bill is John Q. Public. On a
county-wide system for emergency services, we have the public's
interest in mind from the very start.
Number one, how can we put this enhanced system on line so that
every citizen in the county benefits from it? It doesn't make -- we
don't look at political boundaries. Years ago there were turf battles
among fire districts and everyone else. Currently we go into Lee
County; I go into Hendry County; we cross district lines, county lines.
The main thing is get there and take care of business and give the
public the best service.
It's the same way with independent districts crossing each other,
as one Commissioner mentioned in asking about mutual aid. The closest
district responds or the closest units respond; we don't care whose
district it is. The end result is ad valorem tax, everyone pays; the
bottom line is who is going to pay for this system. It's our tax
payers.
Now, I do know the City of Naples may have some gripe about it;
and that's something that we offered the City of Naples all along, to
come on Board with us. But they stayed back and only recently started
attending our meetings again. But for the main reason -- and we never
thought of any tooth fairy coming down and giving us radios. And it
doesn't make any difference to me if my radio has a turkey on it as
long as it works. If I lose it, I'm insured to get a new one. We
carry insurance.
But the main thing is the public; we don't want to injure the
public. We don't want to have any discrepancy in service to the
public. They are going to get the best bang for their buck. Central
funding source, if it happens to be the BCC, then that's who's going to
carry it. Where are you getting your money? It's right back to the
bottom line, county-wide ad valorem taxes. And if we have to go back
into the independent districts -- and we thought of this -- some of
those districts may not at the time be able to pay.
We couldn't ask our Boards for a decision, because we didn't know
what the costs were going to be. Just up in the past thirty days we
started getting some actual costs, and even those now we found out
today may be a little rocky; so we couldn't go to our Boards.
Personally, my position -- my Chairman is here, sitting here, my Board
doesn't meet until the 9th of February unless we call a special
district meeting.
And I'm not saying that's out of the question, but my Chairman
would have to call it. I don't know that my Board can answer,"Yes, we
want to get on Board." We support -- professionally we support the
system; we think it's the best thing for the citizens of Collier County
as a whole. We are about fifteen years behind in communications in
this county. If you don't believe me, ask any other chief that has
worked in any other state in the country.
But I honestly believe that through a central funding source we
wouldn't have to worry about what is politically correct. Folks, we
didn't -- never once today have we said anything about what is best for
the citizens. We are a public service agency; we work under extreme
emergency conditions at all times, every agency that is here. And we
can do for a week or two without garbage collection; and we can do for
a week -- a day or two without water and sewer.
But you can't do for even an hour without the agencies that are
involved in this, and that is our public service agencies that give you
emergency services. And we mutually aid each other with no thought
about political boundaries; and we work every day like that. What we
are asking you is to forget about the political boundaries; let's take
the politics out of this. Because the end result is the taxpayer is
paying for the bill anyhow. And if one agency can handle the financing
package and get it done, then the taxpayer is going to end up fitting
the bill. And we're not gaining anything from it. And all we want to
do is serve you, the public.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: This isn't a speech in favor of
consolidation, is it?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That was a great speech, Chief Nutley.
Unfortunately, I don't agree with all of it. You say we should ignore
political boundaries. Unfortunately, while you can do that with your
service, we can't do that with our finances. We couldn't ask the
Collier County taxpayers to fund Lee County, for example, in any of
their endeavors. And it's the same when we ask the general Collier
County taxpayer to fund an independent fire district.
The general taxpayer doesn't pay for your fire trucks; they don't
pay for your hoses; they don't pay for your uniforms; they don't pay
for your electric bills; they don't pay for your office supplies; they
don't pay for your radios you have now; and they shouldn't be paying
for the new radios that you use.
The central financing is taken care of -- what was it -- 95.6
percent of all of the system. And you get to use it just by buying
your equipment. So the central financing system that you are referring
to is generally in place, but you do need to buy the new equipment that
you use. It wouldn't be fair for Chief McDonald's people to pay to buy
your radios; nor would it be fair for your people to pay to buy his
radios.
So we do have to be aware of political boundaries, and we have
been from a fiscal standpoint. And I understand from an operational
standpoint that you don't need to worry about it, and that's fine and
everybody appreciates the fact that you don't.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Chief Nutley, you made the point that
in Lee County currently only four -- I think you said only four of
seventeen districts are currently on their 800 Megahertz system? FIRE CHIEF NUTLEY: I believe so.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I guess thatws what I want to avoid
here. Before we dive head long into putting this system together, I
want to make sure we can get everybody or pretty much everybody on
board. If we come back in February and only a fourth of our fire
districts want to get on -- and I think the Sheriff is in, but if hews
questionable on it, then we need to stop. And, hopefully, if we can
get the vendor together with you all and get some real figures by -- as
I said, if we need to delay it seven days to get that answer, so what
if we donlt end up there until February 14th.
But I think we need to have -- you need to have numbers and then
we need to know does that work for you or not.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Sheriff, good afternoon.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Good afternoon.
Was there a question of the Sheriff as to my commitment to the
system?
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: No, I thought you pulled something back
there with the look on your face.
SHERIFF HUNTER: No, I thought I heard Commissioner Constantine
suggesting I was not totally committed to the system. I certainly am
committed to the system. I want the Board to know that I support every
effort that they may make to go forward with the system and to provide
a whole system so that all of this intra-governmental system can talk
to one another.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Can you pick up your tab for your
radios?
SHERIFF HUNTER: Weill pick it up. Iim sure youlre going to give
it to me, and Iill take it. You bet you. Iill be happy to have it,
because this is our lifeline, Tim.
And I think you know that when that fire fighter and that EMT and
that paramedic and that police officer step out of the vehicle and
confronts the problem, they need that radio; thatls the lifeline. And
every day we tarry, every day we delay, is another day of system
saturation. And the possibility exists that we are not going to get
the help there when we need it. So I very much strongly encourage the
Board to go forward and work out some sort of solution so we can have
that system.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Thank you, Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Mr. Hargett --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Iim sorry. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: -- Is it realistic to get the vendors
with the various districts between now and February 7th or 14th?
MR. HARGETT: I think that would be pressing it. Ithink within
the next thirty days would be more realistic. The February 7th date
was based on a ninety-day request of the Board. If you wanted to
extend that by thirty days, I donlt see any --
MR. DORRILL: Let me explain what the normal procurement will be
in order to answer Commissioner Constantinels concern. We -- I think I
hear consensus here that the Board wants to provide umbrella or
comprehensive financing for the backbone and infrastructure of the
system. And you want the individual users, whether itls you or
regardless of who it is, to pay the user cost for the device itself.
We are going to set up a separate cost center and extend our
interim financing. And I have set up a little cash-flow system to
make draw payments based on the schedule that is in the contract. The
earlier we can get good information on the pricing list the better.
The earlier we know the actual number of devices they want and the
individual models or features, the better off we are going to be.
But that's -- I think we do need the commitment by the 7th, if
possible. If any individual fire district wants out or if they want
terms extended to them, we would need to know that in order to move
forward with the final program. And I've heard you say you want to
extend financing, but you want them to pay the proportionate share of
the cost of the device itself.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Chairman, I am just confused and a
little disappointed. I thought that the purpose of today's workshop
was that we were going to hear, maybe not "yes" or "no" or "we ' re in"
or "we're out," but some indication of something similar from what we
just heard from the Sheriff .... we're absolutely committed; let's go
forward." And, yes, I know you have to get -- I understand your Boards
have to vote on it. But I don't feel like I know anything more than I
knew before I got here today about whether or not the fire districts
are in or out.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: I think I do know one thing that I didn't,
and I think it's very reasonable; that they don't know exactly what the
cost is. And I have to admit if I'm in their shoes, I'm not going to
say, "You've got me," and then find out the cost four weeks later and
__
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Don't we know some ballpark? Don't we have
reasonable estimates?
MR. HARGETT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that what we're seeing --
MR. HARGETT: Yes, these costs are known and they are reasonable.
COMMISSIONER HANCOCK: So what do you want to hear, "these are
the costs, I can handle that"?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
MR. HARGETT: That represents the average cost of the mid-line
radio. If they want more than that, it costs more. What we sent to
them yesterday, which I think may have created some of this confusion,
is we were using the mid-line radio costs and we looked and said,
"Perhaps they don't need that much. What is the price of a base
radio?" We had previously used 7 percent in our interest calculations;
we looked at our commercial paper program and said, yes, 7 percent on
bonds and so forth. But if we use commercial paper we're at four and a
half; let's bottom line it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. HARGETT: And that's what we did to them.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: We seem to be covering the same ground over
and over. Let's try to wrap this up. Commissioner Constantine.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I just have a question for the chiefs.
If we don't have an exact dollar figure, could you go to your Boards
and ask for a "yes" or "no" to participate with a not-to-exceed figure?
If Golden Gate shows forty-eight thousand or fifty-seven thousand,
could you go to your Board and get them to say "yes, we are in, but not
to exceed sixty thousand"? And if it comes back being fifty-five,
great. But at least we can have a threshold there where we know if you
are in or out or that you are out all together. But I think that
wouldn't be asking too much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We need some guidance.
FIRE CHIEF RANGE: May I address that?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Go ahead, sir.
FIRE CHIEF RAGE: Gary Rage, President of the Immokalee Fire
Control District. One thing I have not heard today and I would like,
maybe, the Board of County Commissioners to ask their staff or
whoever-- one of the things that I have asked the chiefs -- and our
Board asked this question besides. Let's say we did go along with the
purchase, however the plan is, what is this going to cost us down the
road. Presently we, basically, pay nothing. Our budget is small,
believe me.
Are we talking about anything down the road in terms of users'
fees? Are we talking about anything in terms of maintenance of the
infrastructure?
MR. DORRILL: None is contemplated, and none has been charged back
to the user agencies for the 25 years that we have had a 911 dispatch
function in this county. I wouldn't begin to try and get this Board to
say that in the year 2010 that they wouldn't change that. But there is
none proposed and none contemplated as part of this program.
FIRE CHIEF RAGE: Okay, that answered my question. Thank you.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Can we ask the chiefs to do that, to
look at -- to come up with a not-to-exceed dollar number? So at least
at your next meeting, whenever that is -- and in that way I think we
can still have an answer back and stay on our February 7th or February
14th schedule.
MR. DORRILL: Just for purposes of example -- and I will choose
Chief Peterson, because he is standing at the podium -- what we would
probably do in order to move ahead, since we have priced the total
system out at $7.999 million, we would probably price part of that a
contingency fund.
And, for example, currently the user inventory for Golden Gate --
if I am reading this right -- is $90,000. If Chief Peterson
independently, ultimately, decides he wants to purchase $95,000 worth
of radios, that's fine; but by no later than August we need to be able
to get into production and we need to know what his final is. To sit
here today or next Tuesday -- and, frankly, on an $8 million project,
to worry about a thousand dollars here or a thousand dollars there is a
tremendous waste of time and effort.
We will have a contingency in the cost center as part of the
pricing package that we bring to the Board. Individual and final
decisions, you know, plus or minus a few thousand here or a few
thousand there for any individual user are decisions we don't have to
have by February 7th.
MR. HARGETT: Mr. Dotrill, so Chief Peterson doesn't have a heart
attack, read over one more column.
MR. DORRILL: I'm sorry, his costs were $57,000.
MR. HARGETT: He was already squirming.
FIRE CHIEF PETERSON: To partly answer your question, this really
goes back for myself very actively for the last year and for other
chiefs the last four years, the public service agencies or emergency
service agencies of Collier County have been working together and the
community has participated in a 800 Megahertz committee. And in that
committee we have talked four plus years of single funding source.
This last year we had asked -- had talked about a single funding
source. We had asked to participate in the finance committee, in their
discussions, to get some insight of where the county was looking to go
with it.
So what we present to you today and share with you today, it may
seem a little hard for us to sit still because we have been discussing
this for four plus years. So forgive us for our shortsightedness,
maybe, of not educating you quite as fully on that, but we have been
working with staff for four plus years in this direction, that we deal
with a single funding and minimize the impact to the taxpayer and not
hit them two or three different times, but do it at one time.
And as Chief McDonald and Chief Nutley pointed out, because it's
emergency services is why we approached it from this direction. So
when -- maybe we shake our head the wrong way or something, we have
been working for a long time toward this single funding source. That's
partly where we're coming from.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Thank you.
Does anyone have any further issues or comments?
(No response.)
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: If not, we're adjourned.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Can I just summarize the direction we
are going to head?
COMHISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, please.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I think I saw nodding, but, hopefully,
if anyone objects to the idea of going back to your individual boards
and having a cap figure which you don't want to go over but under which
you will participate, let me know. Hopefully, we can have that back,
that information back, whatever that date is in February that we are
going to see it.
And the second thing is I would still think it would be in our
best interest to have the vendor, even if we don't meet it by February
7th, have the vendor get with the different districts as quickly as
possible.
MR. DORRILL: I agree.
COMHISSIONER CONSTANTINE: That's all I have.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Mr. Hargett, are you clear with the
directions?
MR. HARGETT: Yes, sir.
MR. DORRILL: Otherwise, so everyone understands, we will provide
the umbrella financing; you are going to prorate the user device costs;
you will extend terms to those districts that need to have terms
extended to them. I'm thinking that we are probably going to be in a
seven-or-eight year recommendation when we come back to you. I don't
want to have either unlimited and be a buy-out mechanism as part of
that. And as Mr. Constantine was quick to say, the average department
then, if they elect to go the term route, is going to be somewhere
between $6,000 and $8,000 a year for those independent fire districts
that are out there and need to get financing.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: One thing. I believe my understanding of
what we are going to offer the independent districts is flexibility in
their financing. I think we have a number of different options that
we'll extend to them, and they are certainly welcome to take advantage
of any one of them.
MR. DORRILL: Or write a check initially, if they don't need terms
extended.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: That's one of the options.
MR. DORRILL: That's the way I'm leaving here today then, unless
instructed otherwise.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: Can I make one more point?
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: You can make one more point, a short one.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: I understand that what you're saying -- we
are just couriers going back to our elected officials. COMHISSIONER NORRIS: Exactly.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: And as such, we will be pointing out some
other things and probably attempting to come back and push you a little
bit in the direction we'd like to see you go rather than -- because
there is no vote taken here.
One point that we will be bringing to you individually is a form
of double taxation. If you're taxed ad valorem for the infrastructure
and then we're taxed for the user, we're coming right back to the same
people as I pointed out. At the start of this thing it was $1.3
million for the Marco Island taxpayers, and now we are going to cough
up just a little bit more in there, 48,000 for the radios. So that's a
point I need to bring before the Board -- not before the Board, but
make you aware of it.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: I guess we're trying to talk tax
equity. It make more sense to do it by individual districts. If you
are talking about tax equity, then it doesn't make any sense to do it
from ad valorem. Because the City of Naples is paying and not
getting-- Marco Island is going to be paying for Chief Nutley's radios.
So I think the argument doesn't wash there.
FIRE CHIEF MCDONALD: The one point on that is you've asked-- you
brought the remark up about consolidation. For the first time, we
attempted to act consolidated, because we wouldn't be before you with a
consolidated answer to your questions. So if you would keep that mind
that for the first time that is what you are seeing in that form of
resolution. Thank you.
MR. DORRILL: In complete response, so we don't all waste each
others time on the 7th, if we were going to prorate the total costs of
this project, the Marco Island share would go from 50,000 to 400,000.
And then he would be an equal owner in all of the infrastructure. I
think the Board has been extremely magnanimous in deciding that they're
paying 96 percent of the total cost of the project in order to own and
operate their system. We are only talking about the user devices. So
I hope we don't waste each other's time on the 7th talking about the
tax equity.
COMHISSIONER NORRIS: I hope so, too.
If there's no further comments, then we're adjourned.
There being no further business for the Good of the County, the
workshop was adjourned by Order of the Chair at 5:25 p.m.
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING
BY: SHARON H. LANDIS, CSR 9010