BCC Minutes 09/20/2012 B (Budget) BCC
BUDGET
MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 20, 2012
September 20, 2012
TRANSCRIPT OF THE SECOND BUDGET MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida
September 20, 2012
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Fred Coyle
Jim Coletta
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Georgia Hiller
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Mark, Isackson, OMB Director
Ian Mitchell, Executive Manager to BCC
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
� . vt, � ,
r Azoido.
fit
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
BUDGET SESSION
September 20, 2012
5:05 PM
Fred W. Coyle - BCC Chairman; Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta - BCC Vice-Chairman; Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice-Chairman
Georgia Hiller - BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning - BCC Commissioner, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES
UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
Page 1
September 20,2012
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING— Collier County FY 2012-13 Budget
A. Discussion of FY 2012-13 Millage Rates and Increases Over the Rolled
Back Millage Rates
B. Discussion of Further Amendments to the Tentative Budget
C. Public Comments and Questions
D. Public Reading of the Taxing Authority Levying Millage, the Name of the
Taxing Authority, the Rolled-Back Rate, the Percentage Increase, and the
Millage Rate to be Levied.
E. Adoption of Resolution Setting Millage Rates. Note: A separate motion is
required for the Dependent District millage rates; and a separate motion is
required for the remaining millage rates.
F. Resolution to Adopt the Final Budget by Fund. Note: a separate motion is
required for the Dependent District budgets; and a separate motion is
required for the remaining budgets.
3. ADJOURN
Page 2
September 20,2012
September 20, 2012
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ladies and gentlemen, Board of County
Commission meeting is now in session.
Would you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm glad we don't have to sing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to sing?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I said I'm glad we don't have to
sing like at a Kiwanis Club.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, okay. Well, I'm glad you're not
going to sing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I don't blame you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, it's all yours.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good evening,
Commissioners. Welcome to the second of your two statutorily
required public hearings to adopt the fiscal 2012-2013 county budget.
Mr. Mitchell is available to take public speakers. If anyone
wants to register to speak at the appropriate time, they can register
with Mr. Mitchell.
With that, Commissioners, I'll turn this to Mr. Isackson.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, County Manager Ochs. Good
evening, Commissioners.
If you'll bear with me, there's a number of things I have to put on
record, part of TRIM requirements, for the final public budget hearing.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, members of the audience, those
watching on Collier television, welcome to the final public budget
hearing on Collier County's fiscal year 2013 budget, which runs from
October 1, 2012 to September 30, 2013.
Pursuant to Florida Statutes Chapter 200 governing the Annual
Truth-in-Millage Process, an advertisement for this hearing was
published in Naples Daily News on Monday, September 17th, 2012.
Page 2
September 20, 2012
This hearing date was also announced at the first public budget
hearing September 6, 2012 and was contained in Resolution 2012-136,
approving tentative millage rates as the maximum millage rates passed
by the Board of County Commissioners on the 24th of July, 2012.
Agenda and speaker sign-up slips are available in the hallway.
You must register if you wish to address the Board of County
Commissioners regarding the county budget. Mr. Ian Mitchell will
take speaker slips.
Following some introductory remarks regarding tax rates and
any changes to the tentative budget initially submitted to the Board
of County Commissioners on July 17th, 2012, and subsequently
amended at the first hearing of September 6, 2012, it will bring an
opportunity under Item 2.0 on the agenda for public comment.
Speakers will be called by name.
Item #2A
DISCUSSION OF FY 2012-13 MILLAGE RATES AND
INCREASES OVER THE ROLLED BACK MILLAGE RATES —
DISCUSSED
Item 2.A on the agenda is discussion of the fiscal year 2012-13
millage rates and increases over the rolled-back millage rates. State
law requires that the first substantive issues to be discussed are:
Number one, percentage increase in the millage over the rolled-back
rate needed to fund the-budget; and two, the reasons ad valorem tax
revenues above the rolled-back rate as calculated on the State DR420
forms are being increased.
Rolled-back rate is defined as that tax rate necessary to generate
prior year tax revenues, and this tax is calculated, not including
taxable values associated with new construction, additions, deletions
and rehabilitative improvements.
Page 3
September 20, 2012
The Board adopted budget guidance for FY 2013 included a
millage neutral position for the general fund and the unincorporated
area general fund, which together represent 91 percent of the total
aggregate taxes levied across all Collier County taxing authorities.
Fiscal year 2013 amended tentative general fund and
unincorporated area general fund budgets as presented are based upon
a millage neutral tax rate.
Neither of the substantive discussion topics mentioned above
applies to fiscal year 2013 Collier County budget based upon TRIM
statutory definition of an ad valorem tax or increase above the
rolled-back rate.
Referring to Exhibit 2-A, each Collier County taxing authority,
exclusive of debt service, exclusive of voter approved millage rates for
operating in debt, and exclusive of the Pelican Bay Municipal Service
Taxing and Benefit Unit, Collier County Lighting MSTU, Rock Road
MSTU, Haldeman Creek Dredging MSTU and the Golden Gate
Community Center MSTU has proposed a millage rate either at the
rolled-back rate or below the rolled-back rate.
Budget guidance provided millage neutral tax rate positions
would be taken in the general fund and unincorporated area general
fund.
Further, MSTU tax rates would be set between millage neutral
and tax neutral, based on respective advisory board recommendations.
The cumulative aggregate rolled-back tax rate for all of Collier
County taxing authorities, exclusive of debt service, totals 4.3459 per
$1,000 of taxable value.
The proposed aggregate tax rate for all Collier County taxing
authorities, exclusive of debt service, totals 4.3214 per $1,000 of
taxable value. This represents a decrease of .56 percent.
No changes to the millage rates, as tentatively on September 6,
2012 first public budget hearing are proposed.
Page 4
September 20, 2012
Item #2B
DISCUSSION OF FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE
TENTATIVE BUDGET — DISCUSSED
Commissioners, the next item is 2.B, a discussion of further
amendments to the tentative budget.
Staff has proposed no further amendments to the amended
tentative budget adopted by the Board at the first public hearing on
September 6th, 2012.
And Commissioners, that concludes my remarks under 2.B.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, that brings us to public comments
and questions.
Do we have any speakers?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, I'm sorry, before you take public
comment, if I could at this time, it would be appropriate I believe to
follow up with two items that the Board asked the staff to look into at
the first public hearing that was held two weeks ago.
As the Board will recall there was general expression from the
Board of support for a $300,000 request from the David Lawrence
Center to help fund the expanded Baker Act facility that they have
built.
And secondly, there seemed to be general support also for an
allocation to complete the fire station at the Port of the Isles Station so
that we can get that fire company out of the hotel that they've been
lodged in for far too long.
Staff would recommend that we make no changes to your budget
this evening but that if the Board is predisposed to move favorably on
those two items, that we bring back an executive summary at your
regular board meeting in October and provide some options to fund
both of those projects. And then the Board can choose from among
those options that we bring forward to you.
Page 5
September 20, 2012
It will result in no increase to your budget that you would adopt
tonight and no increase in your millage.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, so bottom line is you believe you
can accommodate both of those requests without changing any of the
millage rates?
MR. OCHS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I support that. You need
that in the form of a motion or just nods of the head?
MR. OCHS: No, I don't need it as a motion, sir. I just wanted to
mention that as follow-up to the Board's discussion on those two items
at the last hearing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The reserves going into the
fiscal year and needing the capital dollars for the start-up, where are
we at? Are we going to have to do mid-year amendments?
MR. OCHS: I'll let Mark take you through that scenario, sir.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, I -- obviously when we
contemplate mid-year cuts, we don't do that lightly. And it's really all
about trying to establish our beginning cash position in the general
fund.
As you know, we have done mid-year cuts over the last few
years. I take stock of that in December, generally, once I know what
my beginning audited cash position in the general fund is.
And from that point then I begin to seriously look at whether or
not we need midyear cuts or not. If-- County Manager's blessing, we
can come back to the Board with a discussion on that topic, if that's
the Board's desire. But I can't sit here and tell you right now if I'm
going to do that or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, we know what our
expenses are going to be based upon the budget. So all you're relying
on is revenues that come in, and there's assumption on the revenues?
Page 6
September 20, 2012
MR. ISACKSON: Well, if we -- in its simplest terms, if I -- the
benchmark is $50 million that I have to start the year with in the
general fund, for example. And I know that my reserves going in to
'13 are 24 million. And if I spent everything that I took in, my
beginning cash would be $24 million.
So when you start looking at a decision on whether you're going
to make mid-year cuts or not, I have revenue that come in over
expenses because we budget very conservatively on the revenue side.
And if I have to force the expense side down, that's what the mid-year
cuts do in order to get me above that 24 million base on reserves to
that $50 million benchmark that we look at. Because we've got quite a
bit of money going out the first quarter of the FY. So I won't know
that really, Commissioner, until, as I said, around December is when I
starting making -- we make those decisions internally.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But your anticipated --
like you said, you budgeted conservatively on the revenue.
MR. ISACKSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're saying that's pretty
solid then.
MR. ISACKSON: Yeah. And I expect actually to receive more
money in than I normally have budgetary. We do that virtually every
year --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So either way --
MR. ISACKSON: -- sales tax, revenue sharing, whatever.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Either way, we're going to have
to do a budget amendment coming in once you know hard numbers
MR. ISACKSON: Well, normally I don't do budget amendments
to true up my revenue over my forecast. I let that flow through the
course of the FY. And when we come to you in June, when you see
that forecast column, that's where you'll see the true-up in terms of
where I think revenue's going to be versus what we budgeted in that
particular fiscal year.
Page 7
September 20, 2012
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Mark, have you accounted for the
$11 million de-obligation of TDC funds related to FEMA?
MR. ISACKSON: It's in the pro-forma that you're going to see
for the Board meeting on the 25th. We've laid that out within that
budget.
Right now if you look at the adopted budget for 195, that would
have to be a reserve position that we would have to -- you certainly
have sufficient reserves to do that. What we've laid out for you for
your 25th meeting is a pro-forma that shows that.
Now, depending on what happens during the course of the year,
we might come back with you once we know more information and
amend that particular budget. But for right now, as it stands
adopted-wise, it would buried up in those reserves at some 25 or 26
million in reserves that you've got sitting in Fund 195.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The second question I have, is
have you adequately reserved for the potential $15 million liability
related to the FRS employee pension reimbursement?
MR. ISACKSON: If the state told me on October 1 that I had to
stroke a check for $15 million, that would come from your general
fund reserves.
Now, do I think that's going to happen? I hope not, and I don't
really think that that's going to be the methodology. But that's where
we come from.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What do you think the
methodology is going to be? I know the Court's just heard the case.
MR. ISACKSON: Look, I would hope -- this is what I would
hope would happen, and that the three percent component of that and
to make the employee groups whole, that FRS would adjust their rates,
retirement rates going forward on a methodical basis over the course
of time to make the employee groups whole. I don't know, maybe
Page 8
September 20, 2012
they'll use some combination of cash from the counties and the
respective municipalities plus some adjustment in the Florida
retirement system rates. Who knows? But I'm hoping it's not a -- I
find it very hard to believe that that will be a one fell swoop check
from the municipalities and counties.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We've only found out about these
two liabilities over the last few weeks. Are there any other potential
liabilities that you're aware of that you haven't brought to our attention
at this point that we should be considering for purpose of this budget?
MR. ISACKSON: No, I think, ma'am, we've tried to cover most
of our, what we think is going to be, of our reserves.
Remember, we're growing our reserves from 18 million to 24
million in a relatively weak economy. The only way I can do that is
on the expense side of the house. We can't do it on the revenue side,
because we're trying to control that element of it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You've indicated to me that you
feel we're under-reserved by about --
MR. ISACKSON: If I had my druthers --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- a whole month.
MR. ISACKSON: Yes. If I had my druthers --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and we have only enough cash
to carry us through one month of operations and that you feel that we
need two months. What are you doing to increase those reserves?
MR. ISACKSON: Well, ma'am, I can't -- I can only do so much
in terms of the general fund reserves. And that's really where I'm
concerned about. Because the general fund is the cash flow engine for
a lot of different things that go on in the county.
Midyear cuts are obviously a technique that we've used over the
last few years to do that, to drive our reserve position up. You know,
if I have to continue to do that -- remember, the goal is our cash
position, our credit rating and the payment of debt. Those are the
three things that I pay particularly close attention to as I prepare
Page 9
September 20, 2012
budgets and we prepare your budget guidance.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. So as of this point in
time we have inadequate cash reserves.
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I --
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
MR. ISACKSON: I wouldn't call it --
MR. OCHS: Go ahead.
MR. ISACKSON: I wouldn't call it inadequate. In fact, I think
our cash position is pretty good. But when you start looking at GFOA
recommendations and things of that nature, there are a lot of counties
that are AAA rated that have a heck of a lot more cash reserves and
their cash position's better than ours.
But, you know, their revenue sources, their tax rates, their
revenue position is a lot different than ours. We do what we can,
given our current revenue position.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So then to restate, you recommend
that the reserves should be double what they are right now.
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I think realistically --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's a prudent position.
MR. ISACKSON: I think realistically our reserve position in the
general fund, I'd like to grow it another six or $7 million. But that's
not realistic right now. And we continue to try and incrementally
reach a position that provides I think a -- what I would think a
reasonable and prudent position and that's what we do.
We have other things that we're trying to do in terms of asset
maintenance and things of that nature. So it's awful difficult to try and
focus on one side and still try to accommodate some of our other
desires.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And employee raises. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's go back to FEMA de-obligation.
What I understood the Florida representative to say to us when he
was here is that FEMA has already recovered or will recover that
Page 10
September 20, 2012
money from future disbursements to Collier County, or the State of
Florida. It's not as if you're going to have to write a check for $11
million. What that really is, is if in fact they win this de-obligation
battle, what you're really looking at is a potentially smaller share of
disbursements from them in the future. You're not looking at having to
write an $11 million check to FEMA. Is that correct?
MR. ISACKSON: Well, sir, I don't really know how that $11
million is going to materialize. You're right, it could be off any future
disbursements that might come our way. But if someone -- if
ultimately I have to write a check, I have to be prepared to do that.
And that's what we're -- from a budgetary standpoint, we have to be
prepared for that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So if you're prepared for that and the
money has already been taken from the State of Florida, as I
understood him to say --
MR. OCHS: That's what Mr. Seibert indicated.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that it has already been taken from the
allocation to Florida, you are not going to be asked for an $11 million
check. So if in fact you are reserving for the potential payment of$11
million, you just increased your reserves dramatically, didn't you?
MR. ISACKSON: Well, I --
MR. OCHS: In the TDC fund.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: In the -- okay.
MR. ISACKSON: Yeah, there's --
MR. OCHS: For beach renourishment, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I understood you to say that that
money wouldn't have to come out of general fund revenues if you had
to pay --
MR. ISACKSON: No, if I portrayed that and you understood it
that way, that's not correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, very well.
MR. OCHS: That money is fenced off in your TDC funds in
Page 11
September 20, 2012
your beach renourishment cost center.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: It has no bearing at all on your general fund or your
general fund reserves.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good, thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, to answer your question,
Leo, I'm in favor of, you know, bringing back the David Lawrence
funding.
I do have a question about the Ochopee -- Port of the Isles.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, is that a capital expansion
or is it a capital improvement? Because if it's a capital expansion, you
should be using impact fees, which they don't have. However, you're
using a source to augment capital expansion, and therefore the impact
fees would have to be recalculated.
The second thing, I'm reading the August 13, '12 Ochopee Fire
District and Chief McLaughlin relays to the advisory board that Mr.
Jackson said the district will have to get a loan in order to remodel the
station. And we're kind of back where we were four years ago. We're
looking at a 38 -- 380,000 to 410 loan to finish the facility as is
completed.
So there is an option for -- to loan the -- our district the money, based
upon discussion from your staff, County Manager, to the advisory
board. So maybe that's some of the options we can bring back to get
that done.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Last time we talked about that, you're
right, the chief had some discussion with the Ochopee Advisory Board
about either doing a district-wide one-time assessment of all property
owners or a loan that could be repaid back through the millage.
The way their MSTU is set up right now, they're not set up to do
an assessment and they're at their millage cap right now and they're
Page 12
September 20, 2012
struggling to fund their current operation with their current millage,
and it is at its millage cap right now. So the only -- well, we can bring
those options back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, bring those back because,
I mean --
MR. OCHS: We will.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- we're kind of setting -- it is a
dependent district, but we're setting precedence when we do things
like that, and we don't want to set precedence where we're, you know,
giving money to other fire districts, when they have a source of
revenue and they can't meet their source.
Right now I think one fire department that can't -- has a difficult
time paying their loans off now. So that's my only comment. Yeah, I
do want to see that come back.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, we will include all of those in the options
when we come back, sir.
Item #2C
PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 2.0 on your
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, public comments. Ian, do you
have any?
MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir, we've one speaker and that's David
Schimmel, who will be speaking on the David Lawrence Center.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Good evening, Commissioners. I appreciate
your support of expanding our Baker Act receiving facility. I
appreciate the County Manager's problem-solving attitude and I hope
we can get this done. We hope to open first week of November. So
resolving whether this funding will be available in October will be
very timely. So I appreciate your support.
Page 13
September 20, 2012
I'm not going to rehash the importance of this, a public safety
need to have these crisis beds available. You know it's a tremendous
impact on the community. As I said in June, 600 people had to be
referred out and there was about a 10-day wait at area emergency
rooms. So we don't want people who need to be treated for their
psychiatric problems not getting access to care. And that's what this
expansion is all about. So thank you for your support.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If the money isn't available on time, the
first patient you'll have there will be Leo Ochs.
MR. SCHIMMEL: We've had a bed reserved for Leo for a long
time.
MR. OCHS: Appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask you a favor? Can you
reserve one for Commissioner Coyle too?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because based on his last email, I
think he needs it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I need all the help I can get, David.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Well, the good news is you probably have
insurance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Probably not. Not for what ails me. It's
not a covered item. But anyway.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Thank you very much. And if you've got
any questions for me, just let me know.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you for all you do. We
appreciate your contribution to the community. It's very important.
MR. MITCHELL: Sir, that was your only public speaker.
Item #2D
PUBLIC READING OF THE TAXING AUTHORITY LEVYING
MILLAGE, THE NAME OF THE TAXING AUTHORITY, THE
Page 14
September 20, 2012
ROLLED-BACK RATE, THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE, AND
THE MILLAGE RATE TO BE LEVIED — READ INTO THE
RECORD
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Then Mark, we'll go through this
ridiculous reading of the millage rates.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, 2.D is a public reading of
the taxing authority, the rolled-back rate, current rate to be levied and
percentage increase or change from the rolled-back rate. This public
reading is to occur before adoption of final millage rates. I will begin.
General Fund 001, the rolled-back millage rate: 3.5736. The
proposed millage rate: 3.56245. Percent change in the rolled-back
rate: -.25 percent.
Water Pollution Control, Fund 114, the rolled-back millage rate:
.0294. Proposed millage rate: .0293. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: -.34 percent.
The Unincorporated Area General Fund 111, the rolled-back
millage rate: .7219. Proposed millage rate: .7161 . Percent change
from the rolled-back rate, -.80 percent.
Golden Gate Community Center, Fund 130, rolled-back millage
rate: .1971 . Proposed millage rate: .1990. Percent change from
the rolled-back rate: .96 percent.
Victoria Park Drainage, Fund 134. The rolled-back millage rate:
.0479. The proposed millage rate: .0479. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: 0 percent.
Naples Park Drainage, Fund 139, the rolled-back millage rate:
.0090. Proposed millage rate: .0090. Percent change in the
rolled-back rate: 0 percent.
The Vanderbilt Beach MSTU, Fund 143, the rolled-back millage
rate: .5022. The proposed millage rate: .5000. Percent change from
the rolled-back rate: -.44 percent.
Isle of Capri, Fund 144. The rolled-back millage rate: 2.0424.
Page 15
September 20, 2012
Proposed millage rate: 2. Percent change from the rolled back rate:
-2.08 percent.
Ochopee Fire Control, Fund 146, the rolled-back millage rate:
4.0536. The proposed millage rate: 4. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: -1.32 percent.
Collier County Fire, Fund 148. The rolled-back millage rate
2.0729. Proposed millage rate: 2. Percent change from the rolled-back
rate: -3.52 percent.
Goodland Fire MSTU, Fund 149, rolled-back, millage rate:
1.2803. Proposed millage rate: 1.2760. Change from the rolled-back
rate: -.34 percent.
Sabal Palm Road MSTU, Fund 151. The rolled-back millage
rate: .1107. The proposed millage rate: .1000. Percent change from
the rolled-back rate: -9.67 percent.
Golden Gate Parkway Beautification, Fund 153. Rolled-back
millage rate: .4753. Proposed millage rate: .4753. Percent change of
rolled-back rate: 0.
Lely Golf Estates Beautification, Fund 152. Rolled-back millage
rate: 2.0550. Proposed millage rate: 2. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: -2.68 percent.
Fox Ridge Storm Pumping MSTU, Fund 154. Proposed millage
rate: .0531. Proposed millage rate: .0500. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: - 5.84 percent.
Radio Road Beautification, Fund 158. Rolled-back millage rate:
.3210. Proposed millage rate: .3210. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: 0.
Forest Lakes Roadway & Drainage MSTU, Fund 159.
Rolled-back millage rate: 1 .1672. Proposed millage rate: 1.1551.
Percent change from the rolled-back rate: -1.04 percent.
Immokalee Beautification MSTU, Fund 162. Rolled-back
millage rate: 1.0465. Proposed millage rate: .9354. Percent change
from the rolled-back rate: -10.62 percent.
Page 16
September 20, 2012
Bayshore Avalon Beautification, Fund 163. Rolled-back millage
rate: 2.4444. Proposed millage rate: 2.3754. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: -2.82 percent.
Haldeman Creek Dredging, Fund 164. Rolled-back millage rate:
.7613. Proposed millage rate: .7735. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: 1.60 percent.
Rock Road, Fund 165. Rolled-back millage rate: 2.7024.
Proposed millage rate: 3. Percent change from the rolled-back rate:
11.01 percent.
Radio Road East MSTU, Fund 166. Rolled-back millage rate:
.4828. Proposed millage rate: .2401. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: - 50.27 percent.
Conservation Collier, Fund 172. Rolled-back millage rate: .1694.
Proposed millage rate: .1651. Percent change from the rolled-back
rate: -2.54 percent.
Forest Lakes Debt Service, Fund 259. Rolled-back millage rate:
2.9301. Proposed millage rate: 2.8449. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: -2.91 percent.
Radio Road East Debt Service, Fund 266. Rolled-back millage
rate: 0. Proposed millage rate: .2319. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate, not applicable.
Conservation Collier Debt Service, 2005 Series, Fund 272.
Rolled-back millage rate, .0815. Proposed millage rate: .0849.
Percent change from the rolled-back rate: 4.17 percent.
Collier County Lighting, Fund 760. Proposed millage rate: .1502
-- rolled-back millage rate, excuse me, .1502. Proposed millage rate:
.1631. Percent change from the rolled-back rate: 8.59 percent.
Pelican Bay MSTBU, Fund 778. The rolled-back millage rate:
.0853. Proposed millage rate: .0857. Percent change from the
rolled-back rate: .47 percent.
And the aggregate millage rate, rolled-back millage rate, 4.3459.
The proposed millage rate: 4.3214. Percent change from the
Page 17
September 20, 2012
rolled-back rate: -.56 percent.
Item #2E
RESOLUTION 2012-162: SETTING THE MILLAGE RATES
LEVIED FOR FY2012-13. NOTE: A SEPARATE MOTION WAS
REQUIRED FOR DEPENDENT DISTRICT MILLAGE RATES
AND A SEPARATE MOTION WAS REQUIRED FOR THE
REMAINING MILLAGE RATES — ADOPTED
Commissioners, that brings you to Item 2.E on your agenda,
which is adoption of the resolution setting the millage rates. And
please note a separate motion is required for dependent district millage
rates, and a separate motion is required for remaining millage rates.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's start with a motion for the
dependent millage rates.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the dependent
millage rates.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- dependent millage rate resolution by
Commissioner Fiala, and seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
Page 18
September 20, 2012
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The motion passes unanimously.
Now, we'll entertain a motion for the adoption of the remaining
millage rates.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Coletta, second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Item #2F
RESOLUTION 2012-163: ADOPTING THE FINAL BUDGET BY
FUND. NOTE: A SEPARATE MOTION WAS REQUIRED FOR
DEPENDENT DISTRICT BUDGETS; AND A SEPARATE
MOTION WAS REQUIRED FOR THE REMAINING BUDGETS —
ADOPTED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, Item 2.F on your agenda is a
resolution to adopt the final budget by fund. Once again, note that a
separate motion is required for the dependent district budgets and a
separate motion is required for the remaining budgets.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, we'll require a motion adopting
Page 19
September 20, 2012
the final budget for the dependent district budgets. Motion by?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Now we'll entertain a motion to approve the final budget for the
remaining funds. Motion for approval by --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Fiala, second by
Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes 4-1 with Commissioner Hiller
dissenting.
MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then in that case we have no
Page 20
September 20, 2012
other business to take care of, so we are adjourned unless you have
something, County Manager.
MR. OCHS: No, sir, just again real quick, I'd like to thank Mr.
Isackson and the entire staff from our budget office. They've done a
great job, worked very hard to bring this budget to you. So I'd like to
thank them for their hard work.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Yes, thank all of you.
Very well, we are adjourned. Thank you, and good evening.
Page 21
September 20, 2012
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:40 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
FRED COYLE, Chairman
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
. � .�. .
w I. !� s
e 15
These minutes approved by the Board on ,0 d-,23 0044. as
presented �-'' or as corrected
Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Court Reporting,
Incorporated by Cherie' R. Nottingham, CSR.
Page 22