Backup Documents 12/11/1998 EEMERGENCY SHERIFF'S MEETING
DECEMBER 11, 1998
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
EMERGENCY MEETING
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1998
3:30 P.M.
AGENDA
NOTICE: AIA, I'ERSONS WISIIING TO SI'EAK ON ANY A(;ENI)A ITEM MUST REGISTER
PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITll TIlE COUNTY AI)MINISTRATOR
PRIOR TO TIlE PRESENTATION OF Tile AGENDA ITEM TO lie ADI)RESSEI).
REQUESTS TO Al)DRESS TIlE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WltlCII ARE NOT ON 'rills AGENI)A
.MUST Ill.: SUBMI'I-rEI) IN WRITING WITI! EXPI,ANAT1ON TO TIlE COUNTY
AI).MINISTRATOR AT I,EAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO TIlE DATE OF TIlE MEETIN(; AND WII,I, BE
11EA RD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WilO DECIDES TO APPEAl° A DECISION OF TillS BOARD WII.L NEED ts,
RECORD OF TIIE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING TItERETO, AND TItEREFORE MAY NEED TO
ENSURE TllAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF TIlE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WltlClt RECORD
INCI.UDES TIlE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WIlICI! TIlE APPEAL IS TO liE BASEl).
ALI, REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS
I'ERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAl. TIME IS GRANTED BY TIlE CtIAIRMAN.
ASSISTED IASTENING DEVICES FOR TIlE IlEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABI,E IN TIIE
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
I'I.EI)(;E OF AI,I.E(;IANCE
API'ROVAL OF RESPONSE TO TIlE SIIER1FF'S BUDGET APPEAL.
l)ocument accepted and Staff authorized to forward as a response to the appeal: Chairman
authorized to execute a transmittal document - 3/0 (Commissioner Constantine and Mac'Kie
al)sent)
3. ADJOURN.
Colher County Govt. Complex Bldg. - J , ~.... . ..
3301 Tamiam, Trail, East· Naples. FI 33962
Telephone (AC 813) 774-4434
:::-, . ::
TO: The Col'lief County Board of Commissioners
I hereby submit to you the following budget for the operation of
the Collier County Sheriff's office for the fiscal year beginning
October 1, 1992 and ending September 30, 1993.
LAW ENFORCEMENT: FUNCTION 521
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
$22,730,300
3,653,600
1,115,400
TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT:
$27~499t300
CORRECTIONS:
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL CORRECTIONS:
FUNCTION 523
$ 8,076,900
2,072,700
21,200
$10t170,80;
JUDICIAL: FUNCTION 516
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
...-TOTA~ JUDICIAL:
FICE BUDGET:
DON HU~TER~--~ERIFF
621,700
13,500
2,700
637,900
. .Befor.$ me, on th'i's' 21st day of May, 1992, app'ea'red Don Hunter,
:":Sheriff. of ~611ier .County, Florida, who states that to the best
: of .his knowledge and belief the above established amoun, ts are
· '" reasonable and necessary for the proper and efficient operation
of the..Sheriff's Office for the ensuing year.
Notu~y Public
R'=CEIVED
\ Colher Counl¥ Govt. Complex Bldg. - J
, , Te~,~hc,~., ~AC 8 ~ 3~ 774-4434
TO: the Co111e~ County Board o~ Co~issione:s
I hereby submL~ to you the ~ollow~ng budge: ~o~ ~he opera,&on o~ the
Collie[ County She:i~'s O~&ce ~o: the ~&scal yea~ beginn&ng
OcLobe~ 1, 1993 and end&rig 5ep~e~e~ 30, 1994.
JUDICIAL: FUNCTION 516
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
capital Outlay
TOTAL JUDICIAL:
724,100
21,800
1,20Q
747,100_
LAW ENFORCEMENT:
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT:
FUNCTION 521
$24,518,900
3,753,800
965,300
~29,238,000
CORRECTIONS: FUNCTION 523
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL CORRECTIONS:
$ 8,329,600
2,112,300
14,500.
$10,456,4OO
$40,441,50q
TOTAL SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET:
DON~HUNTER2 S~ERIFF
Before me, on this 1st day of June, 1993, appeared Don Hunter, Sheriff
of Collier County, Florida, who states that to the best of his
knowledge and belief the above established amounts are reasonable and
necessary for the proper and efficient operation of tile Sheriff's
Office for the ensuing year.
.,;.',..',, ,' ._.f!
Notary public :
..,. Nlrtp: ~'~..' . ...-:
iii f >.L~. ~ .... '
rob, \~/ .] Jc.~ T~'tm~am~ Tr~,l E,~S;. ~aDies. FI 33962
o ~ , e~e:.",me, z,.-' ~'31 774-443.1
TO: The Collier County Board of Commissioners
i hereby submit to you the following revised budget for the
operation of the Collier County Sheriff's Office for the fiscal
year beginning October l, 1994 and ending September 30, 1995.
JUDiC iA/.: FUT~D 516
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
871,100
4,400
TOTAL ~JDICiAL:
$ 905,309
LAW ENFORC~-~ENT:
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL LAW ENFORCf24ENT:
$ 25,496,500
3,772,000
1.062,50__q
.$ 30,337,000
I
CO.~CTiONS: FUND 523
Perscna! Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outla'/
TOTAL COR.RECTION$:
TOTAL SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET:
DON' HU~.~EN-F'-S HER ZFF
$ 8,972,200
2,605,600
69,900
!1,647,700
$ 42.890,000
~-efore me, cn this 1st day of June, 1994, appeared Don Hunter,
Sheriff of Collier County, Florida, who'states that to the best of
his knowledge and belief the above established amounts are
reasonable and necessary for the proper and efficient operation of
the Sheriff's Of~ig'ej fo~-~h~ ensuing yea~
'~ ~J ~NocarZ ~ublic
~ ~ ~p~ I~S. ~:. iii
Collier County Govt. Complex Bldg.- J
3301 Tamiami Trail, East. Naples. FI 33962
Telephone (AC 813) 774-4434
RECEIVE[
JUN - 1 1995
Board of County ¢o~tss'
TO: The Collier County Board of Commissioners
I hereby submit to you the following budget for the operation of the Collier County Sheriff's Office
for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1995 and ending September 30, 1996.
JUDICIAl.: FUND 516
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
$ 921,600
35,100
0
TOTAL JUDICIAL:
~ 956f700
LAW ENFORCEMENT: FUND 521
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
$ 26,314,900
4,252,000
1,206,800
TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT:
~ 31r773~700
CORRECTIONS: FUND 523
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
$ 9,245,500
2,947,400
10f000
TOTAL CORRECTIONS:
$ 12~202t900
TOTAL SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET:
DON
~ 44t933t300
Before me, on ti'ds 1st day of June, 1995, appeared Don Hunter, Sheriff of Collier County, Florida,
who states ll~at Io the best of his kmowledge and belief the above established amounts are
reasonable and necessary for the proper and efficient operation of the Sheriff's Office for the
ensuing year. t 1 .... '
!
I c~r~o..o.c~s" I
I ~co.ut.m~e.~ ~.,m~.~'~,~,.'_.~]
tj riff ttttter
Collier County Govt. Complex Bldg. - J
3301 Tamiami Trail East. Naples, FL 33962
Telephone (AC 941) 774-4434
TO: The Collier County Board of Commissioners
I hereby submit to you the following budget for the operation of the Collier County Sheriff. Office
for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1996 and ending September 30, 1997.
IUDICIAL: FUND 516
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL JUDICIAL:
903,000
36,100
3,000
942,100
LAW ENFORCEMENT: FUND 521
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT:
$ 30,859,500
4,680,900
1,488,20Q
~.37,028,fi00
CORRECTIONS: FUND 523
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL CORRECTIONS:
$ 9,591.700
3,258,500
50,000
~q, '12,900,200,
TOTAL SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET:
$ 50,870,900
$ 1,7116,901]
RESERVE FOR ATTRITION:
DON'" HUNTEI~, SI-tERIFF
Before me, on this 15th day of May, 1996, appeared Don Hunter, Sheriff of Collier County. Florida.
who states that to tl~e best'of his knowledge and bell,cf the above established amounts are necessary
for the proper and efficient operafiofloftlCeCeriff s Office for the ensuing year·
U Notary Public
Collier County Govt. Complex Bldg. -J
3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112
Telephone (AC 941) 774-4434
RECEIVED
MAY i 1997
TO: The Collier County Board of Commissioners
I hereby submit to you the following budget for the operation of the Collier County Sheriff's Office for the
fiscal year beginning October 1, 1997 and ending September 30, 1998.
JUDICIAL: FUND 516
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL JUDICIAL:
LAW ENFORCEMENT:
FUND 521
$ 1,132,400
55,500
12,800
$ 1,200,700
Personal Service:;
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT:
32,171,900
5,035,000
2,989,800
40,196,7O0
CORRECTIONS: FUND 523
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
TOTAL CORRECTIONS:
$ 10, I 11,100
3,597,300
222,200
$ 13,930,600
TOTAL SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET: $ 55,328,000
RESERVE FOR ATTRITION:
DON HU~'I~.~E,ER, ~HERIFF
$ 1,784,300
Before ,nc. on this 1st day of May, 1997, appeared Don Hunter, Sheriff of Collier County, Florida, who
states that to the best of his kHowlcdge and belief the above established mnounts are necessary tlr the proper
and efficient operation of the Sheriff's Office tlr the ensuing year.
No~ry Public -- v~.:,~::/~ ~b'r,~:c~
IDRI A
Collier County Govt. Complex Bldg. -J
3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112
TelephOne (AC 941) 774-4434
Honorable Members of tim Board
of Collier County Commissioners
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, FL 34112
~,;.ird of "-
RE: Certification of Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 1998-1999
Dear Com,nissioners:
Pursuant to the requirements of Florida Statute Chapter 30.49 (2)(a), I do hereby submit and certify the
following proposed budget for the operation of the Collier County Sheriff's Office for the fiscal year
beginning October l, 1998 and ending September 30, 1999.
Type of Law Total
Expenditures Courts Enforcement. Corrections Budget
Salary of the Sheriff $ $ 105,000 $ 0 $ 105,000
Salaries of Deputies
& Assistants i, 192,400 35,939,800 10,699,900 47,832,100
Expenses Other Than 59,500 5,060,100 4,084,700 9,204,300
Salaries
Equipment 0 2,340,700 98,400 2,439, I00
Investigations 0 61,500 0 61,500
Total Before Reserves
$ 1,251,900 $43,507,100 $ 14,883,000 $59,642,000
Reserves - 5 % 0 2,982,100 0 2,982,100
TOTALS
$ 1,251,900 $46,489,200 $ 14,883,000 $62,624, I00
-.~.Res r>~clf.tll I ¥, $91:m~J tt~e~.
~o~t4t, ~h~d ff
Bcfi~rc mc,~on'ffiis 1st day of May. 1998, appeared Don llunter, Sheriff o[ Collier County, Florida, who slalm~
~st of his knowledge and belief the ahovc .stablishcd amounts ar~ n~c~,ry lbr thc proper and efficient operalion of thc
Collier County Shcril'l's Office fi~r the 1908-1999 Final
N;,,ary P6{~lic at Larie , ,',/ '
S~atc of Florida { ,'* ~, :~^t. N(mik'/:~/.',,,i.-"
I. :,. 2{ :, 'r COlJTU'I,{R;I rr
Ii' t ..v ~ :l':' I'IJIIIJC. STATE OF
I-I.ORFO^
,.Z~ ;,,I b,~ [5"iI Oi' J biO,
I~D~(O~I) ' "~ERVE YOR BH'E~XPT~B ATTRYTXON'e TO TH~ BHERTFJ'~B
OIPF'ZCB'GZ:],"~A~ FUND (040).
9~;]~]: To seek Board approval for a ~udgat amendment
appropriating $604,600 as approved in the FY 1996 budgst to the
Sheriff's Office Ftmd 040.
~l Per tho Board's approval of tho November 21, 1995
agendaTttem 11(A) adopting the proposed Sheriff~s Office pay plan,
a budge= amendment As needed to cover I~ ~ncraasod costs An
personal services expen=es in tho Sheriff's budget.
~./~~ The budget amendment increases the appropriation to
Fund 040by$604,600 (040-6X10~O-5~2~OO-O~and decreases the Reserve
fo~ Sheri~f's Att=i~ion by $604,600 (001-9Z90[0-991000-0060),
None.
~: Tho= Ihs Board of County Commissioners approve~he
budge= amendment transferring $604,600 from the Reserve for
Sheriff'g Attrition to the Sheriff's General Fund appropriation.
Don Hu~ri~f
DATE: SePtember 16. 19~
WPD51\ba96_2\dv
SEP 2 ~
TITLE
-epa ed:
If previously approv,:d,
Cost Center Title
Expenditure
gbject Codq
qg/ooO
BUDGET AMENDMENT R£OUES~
For Budget/Finance Use Onlyl
A.P.H. Date
To BCC Yes No
(FUND NO. )
Attach Executive Summary
Item No.//~J -
EXP~ISE BUDGET DETAI~
Cost Center No.
Project Title
Exgenditure Title
Project No.
Increase current Revised
~ ~ Sudqet
TOTAL
Cost Center Title Cost Center No.
Expenditure
pbiect Cod~
~xpenditure Title
Project Title Project No.
Increase Current Revised
~Decreasek __~udqe~ _Budqe~
Cost Center Title Cost Center No.
Revenue
Object Cod9 Revenue T!=~9
Project Title
Increase Current
~ Budqe~
Project No.
Revi~ed
Bu~qet
TOTAL
November 24, 1998
CO~MISSIONER MAC'KIE: Got three things coming together here.
CHAIRPERSON BERRY: That's great.
Thanks, Commissioner Norris.
CO~4iSSIONER NORRIS: You're quite welcome.
Item I1LA1
DISCUSSION OF FUNDING LAW ENFOR~ SEI{VICES TO~CO ISLAND - LETTER
TO BE PRESENTED TOMARCO ISLAND CITYCOUNCILREGARDING ~ BCC
DISCUSSION OF THIS llA~EAND ~ CIT"fOF MARCO TO DF2kL WITH ~ ISSUE fin
DECEMBER 7, 1998 AND THEN TO BE DISCUSSED FURT~RRAT ~ BCC M~RTING OF
DE~ER 8, 1998
CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Moving on to item ll(A) (1). The sheriff
must be here, we must be gonna talk about the sheriff today.
C0~4ISSIONER CARTER: I see his smiling face.
CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Funding law enforcement services to Marco
Island.
SHERIFF HUNTER: My favorite topic.
CO~.~ISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ours, too. We love talking about this.
Not.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Good morning. Don Hunter, Sheriff, Collier
County. Thank you for permitting us to get this item on the agenda.
We thought we would bring this before the board for further
discussion this matter. The clock remains ticking, and we are, as you
know, attempting to receive full funding for the -- for this fiscal
year that we're currently in.
We are, as we said before, approximately a million dollars shy of
being able to fund the full budget, and though it is a disputed
matter, we have consistently reminded the board that the million
dollars is for essentially new positions, because as we said, the
legal position of the agency, the constitutional position of the
agency, is that we do provide service to Marco Island, as we do to all
areas of the county. And we do that under a bylaw in that I cannot
remove services from Marco.
So I'm asking the board to reconsider their position, in light of
your recent discussions with City Council and the discussions that
you've been conducting over time pertaining to matters that the board
have with City Council. And here I am.
CHAIRPERSON BERRY: Commissioner Constantine?
COM~ISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Sheriff, my recollection is that
during the budget process, we did go ahead and approve those 17 new
positions. And we expressed concern during that process with Marco
Island and the fact they weren't planning on paying their fair share.
And we've all had dozens of discussions on that since.
Recently, the Board of Commissioners sent some correspondence to
you in response to your request for a state statute for what we
intended that funding to be for. And the letter, signed by
Commissioner Berry and approved by the whole board, was very clear
that we intended it to be for those 17 new positions county-wide, and
Page 25
November 24, 1998
that if there has to be a cut, we need to limit that on Marco Island,
since they've chosen not to pay their fair share.
You have, and your agency has, excellent response time
ever~where. And I know you strive to maintain and improve that. That
excellent response time isn't required per state statute. You are far
above what the state requires. You guys do a great job.
But the point is, you could backtrack somewhat on the level of
service that's provided on Marco Island and still be within your state
requirements.
And so I think I'm a little confused as to what it is you're
asking for today, when I think the letter was, just two weeks ago,
three weeks ago, was pretty clear that the funding decision we were
recommending was get those 17 new guys and gals and get them on the
streets and do what we need to do with them to make sure the
community's safe. And if there is someplace that needs to be limited,
please, stay within your state requirement, don't do that, but surely
you can trim some things on Marco and still maintain that requirement.
COmmISSIONER MAC'KIE: Madam Chair?
Just to follow up on that, Sheriff. I probably wouldn't be
talking about response times and calls for service, but I wonder if
some of the niceties that are provided couldn't be reduced, and the
community policing and some of the things that are greater than the
constitutional standard. That's -- I wonder if you've explored that
at all.
SHERIFF HUNTER: Yes. Well, let me make a general comment,
because I believe I owe something to Commissioner Constantine. And
let me talk about the so-called -- the niceties, as you phrased them.
First of all, I would like to say that the board has been
patient, and I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to bring it
back before you again. And it is something that you have tirelessly
reviewed with me. And unhappily, I haven't been able to persuade you
that the 17 positions -- which I concur, you did make statements
during the public hearings that you agree with the positions, you
approve the positions, and as far as you're concerned, the million
dollars goes for funding those positions, and I appreciate that. And
I'd like for that to be a part of the record, that I recognize that
that's your intention.
But as we said before, unhappily the situation with the
cons[i~ution and the skate law, my interpretation, and as well as my
legal counsel's interpretation, and I believe the Attorney General's
interpretation will also support this, is that the Sheriff's Office
will continue to be required to provide service to all of the entities
and all of the people and all of the visitors within Collier County
until something changes, until the law changes or until the
constitution is revised further to suggest otherwise.
So knowing that and knowing that you have not funded by your --
it was your determination that a million dollars would be taken from
the Sheriff's Office to represent services on Marco Island, I
understand your intent, but the million dollars that is supposed to be
witb~ra,~n fro~ Marco Island cannot be legally withdrawn from Marco
Page 26
November 24, 1998
Island in terms of services by the Sheriff's Office, by the
constitution and by statute. I can't withdraw those services, so I'm
caught in a dilemma. I know your intent is to fund the 17 positions,
.but we do not have the funding to fund those positions, knowing that
we must provide service to Marco.
CO~4iSSIONER MAC'KIE: Sheriff, is there some percentage, though?
Is there some portion of that million dollars that -- on the niceties
question?
SHERIFF RUNTER: Now, having addressed that issue --
COI.~4ISSIONER CONSTAMTINE: And that's where I guess both of us
are kind of asking the same thing. Is there a level -- surely there
is a level you're required. I don't think anybody is disputing that,
you're required by state statute and the constitution to do that. But
is there a lower level at which you can do that and still meet your
legal obligations?
CO~-~v~ISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because it's now -- well, just because the
next step and what I hope to ask this board -- I'm just going to go
ahead and say at the beginning -- is that we propose something to the
legislative delegation to require an incorporated city to provide some
level cf law enforcement or contract. You know, as we looked at the
statute and thought we could sue them to force th~m to, and apparently
it's vague, that that may be something that --
Ci~AIRPERSOt,; BERRY: Well, I think it speaks to in the statute,
but their charter doesn't speak to it.
CO~.£{ISSIO~.;ER MAC'KIE: Well, but --
CP~.IRPERSON BERRY: Which is a problem. As I recall when we had
this discussion earlier, their disc -- their charter is silent and the
statute assumes that when you have a municipality, you're going to
have a law enforcement service.
CO~.i.!ISSIONER MAC'KIE: And so my hope is that the county attorney
can give us some recommendation of a request to make of our
legislative delegation to fill that loophole. But that's --
CO~4ISSIONER NORRIS: Doesn't do us any good for this budget.
CO~.14ISSIO~;ER MAC'KIE: But as we're here today --
SHERIFF HUNTER: A point -- pointed issue. Let me clear up one
thing. As far as my interpretation of the law pertaining to the
municipality of Marco, they are authorized but not required --
CO!.~4ISSIO~;ER ~4AC'KIE: Right.
SHERIFF HUNTER: -- to have a law enforcement force within their
city. Amd, of course, as you say, the ordinance tracks that.
Tkey do know that the sheriff is required to be there,
regardless. And that is a part of this dilemma. Do we have to provide
the s~e level of service to Marco next year as we provided last year?-
This year as we provided last year? Is that level of service subject
to adjustment and different deployment strategies?
Tke answer, of course, is yes. Deployment strategies depend on
where ycu find the crime. 9~at I've tried to convey to Chairman Ber~i
and ts !{r. Fernandez in separate meetings, as well as from time to
time i~.dividua!ly with you as well, is that I have one successful
area, cne successful substation that we service in Collier County at
Page 27
November 24, 1998
this moment for a number of different reasons. It has a lot to do
with the nuances of the area.
~arco Island is an upscale area, it is a tourist destination,
~ets a lot of.visitor traffic, but it is a .relatively safe area when
compared with other areas of the nation, the state and even within
this county. It is the successful area.
As a law enforcement professional, I believe that I am charged to
keep this place safe. If I'm going to be a responsible law
enforcement professional, I try to move all substations up to the
level that I see at Marco, which is a successful area in terms of
crime rate. I don't withdraw services from Marco and cause the crime
rate to creep up or to dramatically increase if I'm doing my duties.
So it's not an issue of whether I am permitted by law to redeploy
assets. It is a matter of in good conscience and as a professional,
do I remove services and cause that to happen as it's happening
elsewhere in the county.
COb~.~ISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I guess that --
COI.H~ISSIONER NORRIS: Can I interrupt just for a second? There's
an unattended big case sitting out there in the aisle. I'd like to
see if we can get that removed.
COI.£-~ISSIO~JER ~4AC'KIE: Mr. Bailiff?
And I guess the crime prevention issues are what I'm calling the
niceties. I mean, is that why you're -- are there community policing
functions that you could quantify -- I'm looking for a dollar amount.
I'm looking for a way to say okay, Marco, I would -- I'll blink, you
~now, because I'm not into that, but I will certainly blink if that's
what it takes to provide a level of service that you are
conssitutiona!ly entitled to, even though I think you're unfair and
wrong to do it the way you're doing it. But not that they get
eve~fthing they've always gotten.
I don't see why they should get everything they've always gotten.
There's got to be some minimal level of se_-vice. There's got to be
something. If it's cops on bicycles riding around the neighborhood or
whatever it is, there's got to be something that can ccme out of that.
SHERIFF HUNTER: ~4ay I remind the board to address this point,
withdraw some of the se~ices, perhaps, or make adjustments to the
ccm~unity oriented policing concept, remove crime prevention officers
cr techniques from a particular area, again, I'm going to be falling
back on this point that Marco represents the substation of
significance in terms of success for law enforcement, for crime
prevention, for public safety, and I'd like to move all substations up
to that same mark, that same -- it's not a standard, but I'd like to
get to that point.
The -- you'll recall that the $1,053,100 was derived by
deterr.,ining how many calls for serviCe Marco Island represents. Each
call for service -- and we've refined this over a number of years.
Each call for service requires a deputy sheriff to respond to.
Scmetimes we do that over the telephone, sometimes we ask a person --
the ccmpiainant to come in and report it so that we don't have to send
a marked unit to that location.
Page 28
12 I1 g$ FF.t, 15'29 FA! 9113~9135g cITY. OF )IAR¢O ISLASD ~ 00.'
Tr:mscript of Skeriff Hua:er's remarks - City Council meedug of October 12. 1998.
C'o',~ m: Shenff Htmtcr...
it:mtcr: Good Evcp&~g. For th: r¢core;. Don Hunter, Sheriff, Collier Coun,'3. I al.,preciat¢
you havb, g m2 here and pe~n~g me ~ op~o~, to speak. Let me step out of my
role...~ve all have se'.'~al roles tha we perfex. I'm going to step away from mv
political role and I'll be saying some things pretty bltmtly that I'm sure you c~-,
av?reziate. ~,lr. So!dcnwa~, ff3et:'li pay pat:culm ancat~en, because I ~oxx' the: we
s?,v~J a coww.:on back~-ound, ~d ~. Tucker...I a~Kreciatc your coach:ts. I do
c,:i:sidzr you a ~iend as well. l Enamk ~L'. Moss for all tl~e work dmt t:e's done by wa,;'
1'zzk~'ou~:d. a:d he's been s~ggli:~s ,xifi: fids for z number ofnlontM, as xx e
C'o'., in. I would like to ~amt: you for aal the xxork Eqat you hay; done x~ )th the
,'~:ci N.k. Dev. pamcul&-iy. I ~hara.: you For all the work 5kc Brandt also hv_g m Jr wi(h
aSz::cy ~d has mod to do some bazkSrouz~ on t~s as well. 1 M~owtt:at you have a',l
bz::: h~volved.
,.,e:ore I sa:.' a:yO..in$, i v,'ar.t to qua:i.e..' mi.' co;p, merits by saying ti:at I don't
di...~uzde ye:.: from tak~,g ace)Ga, and :' don't wis!: to diss'.,ade you from the
t¼a: I've seen tomght tox,.'a.-ds pros-ess :kat is being made m te.?ns of Sn,.n,,' ,. ,V-s pa:ro~.' I
'a'z-,,: to conE,,-n a cou=lc of statm::en:s t?.at have bc.m made. One, you ,,,,'il! ha,,':
seamless Sl:cri£f'$ off. ce patrol services. I. much like you, will not be bullied into
c;'-.ar:ging operat~or'.s mereiv because a pamcul.,,.u-, eo:'e."ra'ncnt body has not t&kcn
rzs>>n.-'!bility for :hei:, role, I th/r3:, amd I ha','¢ said for ~e record, that :Ids Council i:as
d~':nons~'a:ed Z""-.-a~' wisdom. And I heazd vrisdom :oalgt:t. The wisdom a~ issue m the
inst,'m: momer, t is that, fi-. ankly, ~h,' bonom line is you haven't been :axed for sen'ices ~d
thee'c fore as a Cotu..qc!l I would fred it vcr7 hxd, m,: siuir, g in your :o1¢, to co:ne £onvva-d
~t-!~ ..m,.,' men,::,' that represents taxa:ion when i haven't been taxed for ir.
[ v. iii s!-,eak iustead th:on: :he hear':,. I ff.:ess, a.nd as ;.: c:ttzm~ of Yus County. as weil as
....... x~,,,~, .... :ttc ;lee Ecz:d efCountv. Commissioners the i'~ ne,.'.'
Ou-.o-,eg. lookm,_, rote ::,,e :'ur'are and t.-: mg to pre&ct :,.'kal ~s 'zom~ to
n,...p,., re Coil/c: C'otElp.' Lq =.,...e.,.1. n~: mst .,,,a,.o Isl;md. wc tn' to Nan For lb~at funtre.
Tius ,,'ear v,'e sad 17 new positions would be ,.,,'hat *.,.'c believe is necessary to
fi:,.: activir.' o£tkc age:ecl.' i:~ thc ft:ra.-e. V,'inat the Board ofCou, at7 Commissio.':e:s has
t .Ie.~. ,1. e.'~ done ts ta:,,,.t, awav some of:hose pos:tions. Tl".c best I can .'o,-",--
.... ,. .... at the
:.-,,om,.vnt, is ~hat dun to ti:e a~-ccvr, cmts fl'eat we made with the Boa. rd
Co::z:fissbt~:rs ~o ?kase. in p,:siv, o.-.s over ti~s ne.x: )'ear, roach Like ye:: va': ,:.oH:?: ', ha,a:
;,-) ,.:,- most ill.:ely under :he PSO canct:?t. ',ve 'tould be Iookin~ at a,c;u,
r .......... to f:a.-.d lkcse i 7 F';S::~ons . '.:se aren't real ntmtbers, l?',at's m' rerolle':::c,n of
!iu: t~tlmbcrs the: xvt: discussed i.-. p'.'b!ie hcz."i:~s., Somewhere be,"wc~m. $~',',r~.C,C.,t-., and
51.C'5.: ~00 is a au:abet :?.at reprzsc.-.:s fit,: nc'.,.' positions tLat would b'e -
.... ~ ...u v.¢u:c ' ,. ..... :.a~ or. I:~,~. to v. ¢..'k to the b-,.n:.qt of Ccl}:~,' C¢.u::7.'.
· ' I .... ',:' ~'.. '" I'm s:-:-::d:n[.
~.~ .: L-.,.,v., :r ~ ....... ¼,,- ,:~a $,', '~'~' k~'.'m~ ..,'
~!:'::.:.:.';:.vi:',z [ v~'~.,' .-...::~ cr.¢eu:r.~:.'.o~ :~ '~c ~,,:~ :.a' c Boa. rd oi' Co~nt~
Cc:: .......-: ::,:;~: .... : ...:" ','~ res.':ci:sib:~:b,'.. . v,'k::-k .,-:. .... ....... : :.,.:,' :,-'r: gi't I x,~,-,~,.i,,..,,, rfp(':: 'K.::, :~.e'
ha'.c - -,: ,,~ ....... ': .... ,' re.,?cnsibi:!r,' :c ','a'.':c,' .':r C'.," ....
:~,:L,..'2 ~',OV,'.[1. X'"': '
';.7.-: 5:.~.~;~.' c,?,:.r..iT.:::2: to £'.vc v, - ~-o
.t,. mr:.. :o 7 .......'- a.:v.- ' · th:s ._,
C'-:i::s' :2: dls::.:s~:.o:.s Ca: wc had in closed s':~ion 'ai:k :~ Boa.rd 05 Co~:r.l'.'
- ~---i=.,=., .... ~ ' ": ?,:3: . . ..
t,_o ..........3 ........ ~.~u [ '=""'""=:? ' '
...... =..e ma" :ac r,:.r,.-ur.g o'~t eftm:e here.. ~u; {.-.
cZ-,:.:d scs~:,:ns ti:at v,'e i:ad ',,.'itl: the Boa..-d cf Court' Corr~-"d~.$ion=',_% mr.' =:aE' znd ti::'
Boa:'~., ti::'..' :,.'ere w.:'e:'t.".e.i by ti'~e~r cor. su!l~: ~a: had commiued to a st.a::ty for .npac'.
.... ~.c ....... t, :.:'mt tke Ske.-iff's ce. , . ,.,. · ·
o.,¢,., usirlg a ~,a_,.,,-.r¢ dcn'.'ec.
,_.'-""~_:::" ,::.:,?.c:', ::' n:e:i, v.'ou:~ '~c .~r.c.~ n,x~° ' >e~,' i£0 la'.'., en,"o:Ce.T,e::: 0 f;i'r.:.':L il' !.".= v
.:...._.,,"","" '"' s;~":dard ."c,.-m. :.::as !e th.-, She~ f."'.~ o.,,..."'~'" .N':x: ',*a~-... C':c Beard '.,'c',.:1,.5. ':av.: ',',,..
."..".5 _, '55..: rs :" order ~e .'""'- .... ' .....
, e ,, ........
'*'" '.:.',":'~ .-C,':::C.=t;d :.-. r'- · '_"::(!t'e: '~" :.'O:; Ca:; ~' 4, o .: -.. ~ -.
. ,..~ . ~. .,.- .....:...,u.,:. L". al:ret:if::
~"'~ ....... Cc:.'_'T.i£5{o.-.~:'£ ~'.a~ c:'c'::"" '," :~.:g..%.qc' ' 4--,- ;,~ .'T.v on:'." ,'--,-, v. "- ': .... :'-'
.... ': "' ~ ~";""' ;10W ~:il: l~".,'V C9'.I:C ,...,..., ..... ~ ..
"~..- .~ o.::,- :,,.'n: :n.c ........ ... ....-...-=: .... . '""'": ':0 b°'-r. = .T. ere
?."::::. in m,
T:.~".scn?'. of ~h~n,t' ~-,;a, ur.,cr. 's ;--marks - City Cotu~cil mee;ir.g o£ Octobe: 1 .~, 1595.
CowL',.: Tt'~al you v~;' mumh
?:-.?.:".d b:.': ~
:',,le. rze I:,!,:r.d D~:.~ C,'t? Clerk
(A',:dio laze-:. :,.'2.i~.zble u::r:, reque$:.)
Collier County
Response to Sheriff's Budget Appeal
The Collier Count>, SheriWs
These issues as delineated in
the Collier Count.,,' response.
Office budget appeal is focused on two distinct issues.
the Sheriff's Office appeal are identified below, followed by
Two million, nine hundred eighty two thousand, one hundred dollar reduction
(S2,982.100) itl Sheriff's reserves which have been appropriated in the County
General Fund and not in the budget of the Sheriff, as proposed by the Sheriff,
aud as required by Chapter 30.49(7), Florida Statutes.
Response:
On an annual basis the Board of County Commissioners has included reserves for the
Constitutional Officer funds in tile Collier County General Fund. In FY 99, this was
consistent with the following excerpt from the fiscal year 1999 adopted budget policy
related to rcsc~'cs:
Recomnlcnd:ltion Operating funds may budget, at a minimum, a 5% reserve for
contingency. A reserve for contingency is typically budgeted in all operating
funds, with the exception of the Constitutional Officer funds. Reserves for the
Constitutional OtEcer funds shall be appropriated within the County General
Fund.
It has not been the practice of the Board of County Commissioners to establish a separate
rcsc,,-ve for contingencies in the Sheriff's operating fund, as tile required annual amount
was alwavs included in tile Collier County General Fund reserves. As evidenced by tile
Sherit'i-s budget certification from fiscal years 1993 through 1996, no separate reserve
was requested by the Sheriff. (See attached Sheriffbudget certifications from FY 93
through FY 96).
A rcsc~'c for attrition ',vas requested in FY 97 in the amount of $1,706,900 and in FY 98
in the amount of $1,784,300. This separate reser~'e was not approved by the Board of
County Commissioners as the 5% reserve for contingencies in the General Fund was
deemed adequate. Funds from resemes have been made available to the Sheriff in the
amount requested, as demonstrated by the Board approved FY 96 budget amendment 96-
623 (See attached Executive SummaD' and budget amendment) in the amount of
S604.600.
2. One million, fifty-three thousand, one hundred dollar reduction ($1,053,100) for
law euforcement services to be provided to the City of Marco Island. This amount is
vit:,l to the orderly and effective execution of my constitutional and statutorily
assigned duties as Sheriff.
Response:
Prior to fiscal year 1909, Marco Island residents provided funding for the Sheriff's
Office. in part, through the Unincorporated Area MSTD millage. By virtue of the Marco
Island incorporation, tile ability to tax Marco Island residents through tile Unincorporated
Area millage ,.vas eliminated, requiring a fundamental change'in the mechanism for
funding this portion of the SherifVs budget. In early transition discussions, it xvas
established that the Cit,,' of ,Marco Island desired to maintain the existing level of service
provided by tile Sheriff.
The Board of County Commissioners has provided clear policy direction since tile
adoption of tile budget policy at a regularly scheduled board meetinu on (see excerpt
below) ,X. larch 3. 1998 that road patrol sen'ices to the City of Marco Island would not be
subsidized by the balance of taxpayers in Collier County.
"The Collier County Sheriffs Office provides laxv enforcement sen'ice
on a county-wide basis. Service is funded partially by the General Fund
and partially by tile Unincorporated Area General Fund MSTD.
SherifFs Office service in tile unincorporated area includes road patrol
sen'ice for Marco Island, hnmokalee and Everglades City. The MSTD
portion has historically funded an enhanced level of sen'ice in the
unincorporated areas. This enhanced service is not required by cities,
which supplement the SherifCs services with their own local police
forces. In order to maintain consistency in this renard, it will be
necessar,,' to provide SherifFs service to Marco lslanc~ via a different
fi,nding mechanism in FY 99."
A portion of the proposed budget for tile Collier County Sheriff's Office ,,,.'as predicated
on a 51.053,100 contractual payment from tile City of:Marco Island for Sheriff's road
patrols ,,vithin tile Nlarco city limits. The logic of this Board policy direction was that it
,,,,'as unlhir to increase the cost of law enforcement service to all other County residents
and decrease the cost to the Marco residents in order to continue to provid~ to Marco
Island tile highest le,.'el of Sheriff service in tile County. On No,,'ember 24, 1998 Sheriff
ttunter addressed tile Board of Count.,,' Commissioners regarding Sheriffs service to
,X. larco Island and stated tile following,
"\Vhat l've tried to convey to Chairman Berry and to Mr. Fernandez in separate
meetings, as well as from time to time individually with you as well, is that I have
one successful area, one successful substation that we service in Collier County at
this moment for a number of ditTerent reasons. It ]las a lot to do with the nuances
of tile area. Marco Island is an upscale area. it is a tourist destination, gets a lot of
visitor traffic, but it is a relatively safe area when compared to other areas of tile
nation, tile state, anti e,.'en within this county. It is tile successful area."
During this discussion the Sheriff further stated that,
'... I'm going to be falling back on this point that Marco represents the substation
of significance in terms of success for law enforcement, for crime prevention, for
public safety, and I'd like to move all substations up to that same mark, that same
- it's not a standard, but I'd like to get to that point." (See attached transcripts
from the November 24, 1998 Collier County Commission meeting).
The City of ~larco Island budget included reserve appropriations of $1,241,452 to
establish a Public Safety Department. At the November 24, 1998 Collier County
Commission meeting, tX, larco Island City Manager William Moss indicated that there was
not a specific timetable for implementation of' the Public Safety Department. As of
December 1998, the City had only hired tile new Public Safety Director position to
develop the implementation plan for the department. In tile interim, law enforcement
services are provided exclusively by the Collier County Sheriff's Office at the highest
level of function in tile County, based on remarks made by tile Sherif¥.
As such. tile City of hlarco Island has apparently not met its statutory obligation to
establish a municipal police force. Section 166.049, F.S., purports to require tile City to:
have a Chiefof Police to schedule at least two lax*.' enforcement officers to be on duty at
all times For 24 hour coverage this would require a complement of at least I0 offic'ers.
To date this has not occurred Tile County reasonably expected tile Cit.,,' to implement its
police force or contract with tile Sheriff's Office during tile transition phase.
Statements made by Sheriff Hunter on October ! 2, i 998 to the Marco Island City Council
disc()ura,..4_,ed the City from making a contractual contribution for Sherift% Ott'ice service.
.An excerpt from tile SheritTs statement to the City Council was as follows'
'One, you will have seamless Sheriff's Office patrol services. I, much like you,
will not be bullied into changing operations merely because a particular
government body has not taken responsibility for their role. I think, and I have
said for tile record, that this Council has demonstrated great wisdom. And I heard
great wisdom tonight. The wisdom at issue in the instant moment is that, frankly,
the bottom line is that you haven't been taxed for services and therefore as a
Council I would find it very hard, me sitting in your role, to come forward with
nny money that represents taxation when I haven't been taxed for it."
'l'his $I,053,100 p:L,,'ment from tile City of' Marco Island was based on costs of tile
District 6 Sherifffs substation, pro-rated by tile 72% of sec'ice calls from that substation
being within the corporate limits of tile City of Marco Island. As no contractual
arrangement was formalized with tile City of Marco Island for Sheriffs road patrol
services, tile Board. on September 23, 1998 at tile final FY 99 budget hearing, reduced
tile Sheriff's budget reques~ by $1,053. 100.
The Sheriffs appeal pe~ilion states that tile $1,053,100 is vital to tile orderly and
~:fl~,ctive execution of constitutional and statutorily assigned duties of the Sheriff.
I lowever, tile growth in the budget approved by the Board of County Commissioners
Cwithout the $1,053, I00 payment from the City of Marco Island) exceeds the estimated
population growth on a percentage basis and slightly increases the cost per capita from
FY 98 levels. (See chart below).
Comparison of County Population and Sheriff's Office Budget and Cost Per Capita
FY 1990- FY 2000
County Adopted Sheriffs Cost per
Fiscal Year Population* % Increase Bud.qet** % Increase Capita
1990 152,099 n/a 30,625,500 n/a $201.35
1991 161,600 6.2% 36,061,300 17.7% $223.15
1992 168,514 4.3% 38,158,500 5.8% $226.44
1993 174,664 3.6% 38,803,000 1.7% $222.16
1994 180,540 3.4% 41,160,600 6.1% $227.99
1995 186,504 3.3% 43,775,000 6.4% $234.71
1996 193,036 3.5% 44,850,000 2.5% $232.34
1997 200,024 3.6% 51,305,600 14.4% $256.50
1998 213,439 6.7% 54,952,500 7.1% $257.46
1999 224,229 5.1% 57,809,500 5.2% $257.81
Notes:
· Source: Bureau of Business and Economic Research
"' Budget figures include Board paid expenses.
Of her Funding Options
On page 6 of tile appeal petition, there ,,,,'ere options identified by the Sheriff; for the
Board of Count.',' Commissioners to resolve this funding issue including:
Oplion #1: The Board could agree to fund the $1,053,100 from tile "Excess
Revenues" received at the end of the 1998 fisc:fl year. These revenues were
identified at the Septemller 23, I998 hearing.
Response: All of these revenues sources identified are General Fund revenues. As noted
throughout the budget process, tile use of General Fund (county-xvide) revenues to
subsidize Sheriffs service provided to the City of Marco Island was in direct conflict
with the Board's policy direction, as it requires the balance of County residents to
subsidize law enforcement services provided to residents of the City of Marco Island.
Option #2: By budget policy, the Board of County Commissioners could have
:~greed to fund the $1,053,100 and negotiate with Marco Island for some portion of
tile required funding in p:lyment.
Response: Once the Board provides the initial $1,053, 100 for laxv enforcement sep,'ices.
there is little incentive for the City of Marco Island to provide any funding of their own.
Option #3: The Board of County Commissioners could have appropriated :~
comhination of revenues received since the September 23, 1998 hearings, i.e.. the
SherifFs interest earnings in excess of budget, the Clerk of the Courts' fees in excess
of budget, and pending FESIA (Hurricane Georges) reimbursemeut funds.
Response: All of these revenues sources identified are General Fund revenues. As noted
tl~roughout tile budget process, the use of General Fund (county-wide) revenues to
subsidize Sheriffs sen'ice provided to the City of Marco Island was in direct conflict
with tile Board's policy direction, as it requires the balance of County residents to
subsidize law enfi)rcemcnt services provided to residents of tim City of Marco Island.
This section of the appeal petition further states that tile Board took no action to resolve
the revenue issue with the Board of County Commissioners. This is simply untrue. The
Board, in a September 10, 1998 letter to Marco Island City Council Chairman Harry
Cowin, requested the City of Marco Island to identify its intentions regarding the
$1,053,1 O0 payment for road patrol sen'ices.
Response to Conclusion Section of Budget AppC2al
In the conclusion to the SherifFs budget appeal petition, it is stated that the Board of
County Commissioners agreed until the final budget hearing on September 23, 1998 to
fund the Sheriffs buduet in full includin,, the City of Nlarco Island sen'ices and the
seventeen (17) expanded positions in recognition of an ever growing community. This is
I;actuallv incorrect, as it was stated previously on the record on numerous occasions that
funding for Marco Island road patrols was predicated on a contractual arrangement with
the City. The record includes the adopted budget policy, and a July 28, 1998 Executive
Sun, mary requesting the Board to adopt the proposed FY 99 millage rates.
The conclusion section further states that the Board's impact fee consultant, in a draft
rep{wt, advised that the Sherifffs Office will be understaffed by one hundred, twenty-four
certified lax,,' enforcement officers in 1999. It is important to note that this report is a
draft report, not in final format, and has not been received, reviewed, or accepted by the
Board of County Commissioners.
CoIIlllV SII ltl ltl:! rv
In summary, the percentage increase allocated to the Sheriff lbr fiscal year 1999 is, in
fact. greater than the percentage increase in the County population and provides sufficient
funding for the continuation of n responsible level of law entbrcement in Collier Count,,'.
Collier County Govt. Complex Bldg. - J
3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112
Telephone (AC 941) 774-4434
December 9, 1998
Robed B. Bradley, Director
Office of Planning and Rudoefing
E×eculive Office of the Governor
The Capilol Building
Plaza I.evel 05
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001
RE:
Collier Counly Sherifl's Office
Appeal of FY 1998-99 Bud0el
Dear Mr. Bradley:
Pursuanl Io Seclion 30.49(4), Florida Slalules, Ihere is allached herein and suhmilled herewilh, an
appeal of lhe bud0el for FY 1998-1909 of Ihe Collier Courtly SherifFs Office as approved by lhe
Collier County Board of Commissioners. The information contained herein is a true and accurale
presenlalion of our proposed work pro0ram for FY 1999.
The appeal focuses on Iwo specific poinls of appeal, pursuanl Io a conversation wilh Case Analysl
T. F. Manelli, of hud0el reductions hy lhe Collier County Board of Commissioners of lhe budgel of
Ihe C. nllier Counly SherifFs Office as proposed:
Two million, nine h, mrlred eighly Iwr) Ihousand, one hundred dollar reduction
($2,gR2,100) in Shnrilf's reserves which have been approprialed in Ihe Board of
Cnrnmissioners' cnnlingencies General F~mrl and nol in Ihe hudgel of Ihe Sheriff, as
prnposed by Ihe Sher~[I, and as required hy §30 40(7), Ft..ST.
2)
One million, fifly-lhree Ihousand, one h~ndrerf dollar reduction ($1,O53,100) for law
enfnrcemenl services In he provided lo lhe Cily of Marco Island. This amounl is vilal
In Ihe orderly and effeclive execulion ot my conslihdional and slalulorily assigned
d~dies as Sheriff.
I am cnnfidenl Ihal lhe evidence presenled herein to Ihe Administrative Commission will find in favor
r,f my reqtmsl.
r)l ! dy
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify Ihat a copy of Ihis Petition was hand delivered Io Barbara B. Berry,
Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier Counly, Florida, lhis 0'=1 ....t~,.,
(lay of December, 1098.
Cdlier County Sherifl's Office
TABLE OF CONTENTS
/~ Ilactlnlnrll 2
Alln¢:hmenl 4
AIMcllmenl .5
Allachmenl I~
Allachmenl 7
Allachmenl ,q
Allachmenl O
Allachmenl 10
Allachmenl 11
Allachmenl 12
AIInchmenl 13
p~ge_N_umbe_[
Pelilion
St~mmary of E>'pendih~res by Expenditure Category 1
Stlmman/of Bud0el by Aclivity 2
Detail of C~rrent Positions 3
Detail of New Positions Reqt~esled 4
Detail of Personal Services 5
Delail of Operating Expenses 6
Delail of Capilal Oullay 7
Board of Counly Commissioners FY 1999 Budget
Pohcy -//larch 3, 1098 8
Trnnscript nf Board of Cm~nly Commission
t,,,lnrcl'~ 3, 1008 Meeting lo Set R~Irl.r'}el Policy
47
Sheriff's Bridget as s~hmdlm'l In Board of County
r}nrnnlis.~!nners l'l]l;rJj¢,l Rnnk) 70
SherifFs R~Mgel as amenrler~ and rerhiced
hy ~he Board of Cmmly Commissioners
fl otter from BCC) 279
Transcript of Board of County Commission
.h~ne 19, 1998 Btdget Workshop 282
Tmnscripl of BoaF(I of County Commission
,hHy2h, 10OR bleelinolnSetTentaliveMillaoe 409
Transcript Qf Board ~[ Cot~nly Commission
September O, 1098 R,~rloet I-leaFing A0enda 418
GeplembeF 15, 10OB SherifFs l.eller lo Chairman BeFw
Of F~mding Impasse Impact 441
Transcripl of ~o~Fd ~[ Cot~nly Commission
Seplemher 23, 1009 Final Btldgel Hearing 443
Oclober 27, 190~ SherifFs LeIleF lo Chairman BeF~
St~goeslino Cmmly Ftmding Options 474
Oclnher 30, 1098 ~tmriff's I.elter lo Chairman Berry
regarding ~heriff's "~cess Fiends" 476
flnvemheF 0, 1008 Memoranchim from the Counly
AdminislralnF I~ Cntlnly Commissioners recoonizino
$348,011 in "Available Stlrplus" 478
November 13, 1098 SherifFs I. eller In Chairman Ber~
Req~eslinfl Resloratinn of Funding 482
TABt_E OF CONTENTS
(Contint~ed)
Aliachmenl 14
Allachmenl 15
A0enrla gl Board of CounIy Commission
November 24, 1998 Re0Lilar Meeting,
outli,'dnO Marco Island funding options
Cmlnr,/ConsulIard's Law Enfr~rcol'nenl Impacl Fee
Shady - Final Elrafl Gill"l/OB
4B3
,185
IN Ri:_:
BEFORE TIlE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION
STATE OF FLORIDA
Ai~penl of:
Don tit. inter, Sheriff
Collier Cotlnty, Florida
TO¸
P_.E-_T._I_T_I.Q. H
Admir~islralion C.ommission, Slale of Florida cio
Robert 13. Bradley, Direclor of Planning and Rtlrl0elino,
The Capilnl, Plaza Level 05,
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-00f')1.
COMES r ~(~...',.~ f')nn I h~nlnr, Shp. riff nf Cnllinr C.n Inly, Florida hy Ihis Petilion files his
Appeal In II~e ,*,.rtmu~islralinn r',nmmissinn pllrs~lanl In Ihe prnvlsinns of Seclion 30 49,
Flnl~t;'~ filnl~t~:r',, fram tim nclinn and rlncismn nf Ilia Rnnrrl of C. mlnty Commissinners of
¢.r:,lh,:,.r C.n~ inly, I:l,"~rula, rn0arrhn.q Ihe i'~rnl',ns~.rl I'll Irl0el as s~lhmilted hy Ihe Petilioner for
Ibp, nrmr,qlinr'~ nf IlIa [-:herifr's (hit'me nf Collier r'.n~ inly, Florida, f~r Ihe fiscal year beginning
(hr: nl~er 1, 1.fl.rhq nn,'t nnrhn.fl .fir:plemher 3Fl, 1,000, and in stlppnrl of stlch pelilion allached
her,":In copies cfi tl'~e I~rl.qnt proposed hy Ihe Pet nner, lhe htldOel as approved by the
resl~nnrlenl Rnarrl of (:n~ ~nl;, Cnmmissinners (RCC) and nlher documents prepared in the
farm nnd mnr',nnr prp. scriherl hy lbo Exemllive Office nf Ihe Governor of the Stale of Florida
rind al-~prnved h,/II~e Arh'ninislralion Camm ss nn, all of which are incorporated herein by
II'~s referent:r:,. In fl~rllmr s~ppnrl nf Il'ds pnlilinn and as Ihe reasnns or grounds of lhis
apl',O, al, Pelilinn~r slmv.,s lira fnllnv,/in.q'
.A.. Orfi~.ln('!s [er :t'..l~l~fi,."!!
The Rnarrl r;f C.,~u~ly Cnmmiss~nn~rs has reduced Ihe FY 1998-99 Sheriff's
Prnl',Os,nrl t~'l.rlnl I'W ,"['.6,42,1,2,fl~ Allar:herl (See Atlachment .'l~, please find lhe
Rnarrl'?'. I'~lld,:i~nt rnspnnsn dnlnrl I'Jnve. mher 18, 1998 as required by §30.49 (4),
Fl..ST., lislir'~0 RGG nmnnrlmer'~ts In Ihe Sheril'f's prnpnsert hlidoel' The Sheriff's
Appeal is made frnm I!~m 1 (Reserves) and Item $ (Marco Island Road Palrol) of
said Ir:ilar (2¢.,e. Allac. hmen! 4) lnlalin.q $4,rl35,200:
i/ Item 1 of November 10, 1998 letler resulted in a reduction of $2,982,100 in
reserves cnnlrary In lhe reqtliremenls of §30,10 (2) (a), (6), (7) and (8), FL.ST.
2) Item 5 of hinver'nber 10, 1998 leller is a reduction in Ihe amounl of
$1,053,10r') far all road palrol cosls in the recenlly incorporaled Cily of Marco
Island.
As a resedit nf lhese refh~clim~s. I, as Sheriff, arn unable lo certify lhe amended
I',~Jd.qel for the prnper and efhcient operalinn nf Ihe Office n[ Sheriff far FY 1998-99 The
nmenderl i~t irl0et clnr:s nnt iRc. h ~rle fl lnrlino s~ ifhcinnl far II~e nrderly and effeclive execulinn
r,r tl~n cnnslil~linnnl n~rl ~lnl~tnrily mnndnlerl rip,lies nf this
!!-qm-! :- Ro~crYq. s-.mi~:~nnropri~!or! !o_!h¢_O_en~r~!. E,.~nd
'Fl~is appeal firsl addresses reserves r~f $2,.9,q2,113Q fr~r Ihe Sheriff which have heen
nl~proprialerl in ll'~e Cmmly's General FLmrl nnd nr')l in lhe budoel of lhe Sheriff as
req~l~slert in Ihn ~l'mrirf's prnposerl h~d0el and as req~ired hy §30.49(7), FL. ST.
The faih~re In apprnprlale lhe Sheriff's rerlJmSled reserves in Ihe Blldoet
,%l'lerifl' is cnr'drar;, In §~3 ,IO(2)fA)(G), FI..%T., which rnq~ ~ires a reserve for conlir, gencies
in Ihe SherifFs h~rl(lel, il Is alsn cnr~lrar,/ In 0~ dO(G), FI. ST., which requires such a
reserve, anti il vmlnlns {~Q,IO(7), Fl..ST, whicl~ clearly slates lhal "lhe reserve for
nnnlinfln~r:ies itl ll~e I~lrlflnl r~r n Sl~nrif[ ~;l~nll he onvernnrl I~y Ihe same provisinns
(lr}vernln0 II~e an~n~u~l rind llS~} r~[ II~e rn:;r~rvr~s far cnnlinciencies apprnprialed in the
f;n~lnly I~rl0el' r~.Cnl~I lhnl ll~n reserve far cnnlin0ency in Ihe htlrloeI of Ihe Sher ff shall
he apprnpriated ~ff~an ',vrillen reqtlesl of Ihe
Ttds lan.cj~aOr: is rnnnrlnlnry ami hal precalnry nr discrelionary. The reqturement
is alsn nr;l ilhlsnry sinn,% ~mlil<e reserves in Ihe Cm~nly's hudoel' reserves in lhe Sheriff's
2
h,~dOet ".s.!!~.3!! he appropriated upon II7o wrilfen request of the Sheriff". §30.,19(7),
FI. ST. (Emphasis added'). TI'ds Js ql~i~e different frnm reserves in the Cbunty bL~doet
which req~ ~ire an amendment precess for appreprJalinn.
'Tn the cnnlrary, the Beard nf Cnt~nly Cnmmissinners pnlicy (See Attachment 1)
stales: "Opnralin.q fi~nds may bLJdoet, al a minimum, a 5¥,, reserve for contingency. A
reserve is typically ht~rl0eted in all operating funds, wJlh Ihe exceplJon of Constitutional
Officer Ftu¥1s. Reserves for lbo Conslilulional Officer Fronds shall be approprialed wilhin
Ihe Cat,ely General Ft~nrl." This pnlicy clearly vJnlalns lhe req~irements of ~30.49, FL. ST.,
nf~ cilerl nhr~vn F~ ~nrls in Ihe nmnt ~nl nf $2,0R2,1RR have been approprialed by lhe Roard
nf Cntlnly [;nmnlissir~f~ers I~tll were planefl in ll~e r:n~nly's Oennrnl Ftlnd and nnl in the
I an~ rerl~nsl~n.r1 ;'~pprnprialinn nf $2,.qR2,1~F1 in reserves Ir')lbo Sheriff's
Ti'ns ,qmot~nt is c~n.",~sl,'-:nl with Ihe Rnarrl nf Greenly Cnn~missinnn..rs' pr~licy regarding
rp. se~.,,n.% ir'~ lh~ Rnarrl's t'~rl0r:t I'~1 s~r.h fi~nrls are re. rip,ired in Ihe Sheriff's ht~rlget and may
~'~nl 1.~~. r,::sc:rvert ns tiu-: [tC.~S I'~'~s (Innc: Tl'~n fi~nrls I'~nve I-,eec afprnprialerl and inch,derl
in Ihe as.':.essorl millhon nnrl I nm req~lnsllnrj Il'ds rnserve ha placed in my btldgel as
r,~q~irerl hy haw. Tr,an.~;fnr nf II'~,~se fi~r'~rls per §.3Fl ,1.r), FI. ST, In lhe Sheriff's budoel has
~'~n illlpncl nn assessed m~lln_qn rains ,
'I I'..~s app,~r~l ~l,':m a~trlresses Ihe rerhml~nn nf $1.('t53, l f')~3 ~r'~ lhe Sheriff's prnpnsed .
t.-:..v e.r~f~',rremenl t:~ ul,.'i,"..l f~r salaries assnc~alerl v,,,ilh palrol services provided to lhe City
,;f /.larch Island, ,r~c,nrpnrnled in A~Otist 1007. This redt~ction Io lhe Sheriff's budget
r:hm~nntes all f~ ~ndu',,:.l far nil In,,v enfnrcemenl palrnl services tn lhe City of Marco Island.
l I'ln C.~l,,, rlnp. s n(':,l I'~-i,.,,~ p'n ,~c~pal law enfnmemenl services cnpahilily. The Sheriff's Office
is tile nnly law enforcement available Io lhe more Iban 12,000 permanent residents and
ll~o~lsands of annual visitors In Ibis island community.
All services provided by the Sheriff are cm~nly wid¢. and incorporatinn of a'
rm~nicipality is irrelevant lo lhe Sheriff's co~nly wide it~risrticlion and responsibility.
)-towever, Ihe law enfr;rcenlent capabililies of a mt~nicipality may impact levels of service
provirled. The CilynfMarcolslandhasno s~chcapabilityand, therefore, prcvidesno
impact In tho Sheriff's responsil')ility.
'l't'~e ,Sheriff's Nffir:n itl Ibis Co~lr'~l',,, is, and has been, fllnde(I primarily from two (2)
~;n~ ~r¢:n,.;: th~ ~ ~r~t,/(Leneral F~ ~nrl and a co~ ~nly wide ~nincnrpnraled Municipal Services
'l'a~in0 Ih~it (MS'I'I I) All cn~lnly laxpayers pay inln Ihn General Fund. All laxpayers living
i~ II~n ~r;~nnnrpnr,qtnd r~rnas pay into lhe cnt~nly wi(to ~nincorporated MSTU. Taxpayers
~r~ lhn Cily nf M,~m,~ Island, lhe Cily of Naples, and It~e Cily r~f Ever01ades do nol pay into
Ille cn~ ~nly wide ,~ir~nrpnralo(t MSTLI. Everglades City is not required by Ihe County lo
payr~ll~er tl~nir-,t~tt~r}Gc;neral Ft,nd 1-he City of Naples has ils own law enforcement
~rl i'~,~,s for law nnfnr~emnnl sn~icns prnvidod hy Ihe Sherif[ Ihro~10h Ihe General Fried.
The Cat,ely is allnmpl~no In rnrt~ire the Cily nf Moron Island In nnler inlo a contract for law
nnfnrcnmenl services The CilynfMarcn Island is heino st~hiecledlolhis inconsislonl
Ir~nl~nenl. The RC¢; ~s rlet]~nnrlin0 Ihat Ihe Sher~f[ v.,ilhrlr,qw services from Marco Island
u~ relnllnlinn [~r' tl~,~ f%lly'g rnl~sal In ~nr'dranl nr nlhnp.¥ise pay $1,853,100, the cost of
TI'~o ITtoar¢l nf Cminly Commissioners (aCC) has exercised no lawfu: options
av,qihqhle In il ~lnrlnr ils cn~ inly ,.vide pr~v.,ers In prnvirle paym~nl hy Marco Island Ralher,
lbo l'",r~arrl has sr',~oht tr~ re. qtlire Ihe. Cily In pay hy conlractt~al arran0ement with ll e
,qh¢..riff, (See Alt,'~¢lu~e¢lt 9) It is axiomatic. Ihal the Sheriff has no aulhorily lo lax or 1o
lnrce ll'~e Cily nf i',.,larr:.~ Islanrl inln a conlraclual a0reemenl for I~w enforcemenl services
as Ihe Roarrt of Co~.~nt'/Commissioners has desired of the Sheriff. The BCC has done
nnlhino la arranoe a cnnlrncl bel'ween lhe City and BCC (See Altachment 9), even in lhe
fane of II~e Cily's refusal lo contract with Ihe Sheriff. §125.0100, Ft..ST., specifically granls
to the Co~lnty stlr:.h contract atdhorily.
At the September 23, 1998 final public bud0et hearing (See Attachment 9,), lhe
Roard of Co~lnly Commissioners reduced Ihe Sheriff's budget by $1,053,100 which
represents~f Ihe palrol services Io Ihe Cily of Marco Island. The Board of County
Cnmmissioners has s~0Oesled Ihal lhe Cily of Marco Island make a conlraclual payment
far la,,,., enforcemenl services The City's posilion is thai Ihey are conlributin0
C,n~mlv General r:t~nrl and, therefore, are ~nder nn obli0alion to pay what they consider
","ldrhlinr'~al" fl~n,"ts far the SherifFs services The Cily fl~rlher states Ihal Ihere is no reason
In pay if ll'~e. C~ly I'~as nr',l been la×ed for lhe provided service...'. The I"]oard and lhe Cily
Ca, moil are al a slalemale nn ftmdin.rI for la;,,/enforcemenl services. The Sheriff has a
r'nnslih flinnal ehli.qalinn In lhe cilizens of Marco Island lo respond to calls for service and
v.,otdd he remiss in his rhdies if he provided Marco Island a disparate response lime as
s~hO.qefiled hy Ihe Rnard of Cmlnly Commissioners (See Altachmenl~
The Sherirl' I~as a non-rleleflnhle conslihdional responsihilily Io provide county
,.,.,~d~. law enforcer'nenl services These are services Iho RCC codifies are necessary for
Ih,~. la',:pa,,,ers nf Cnlli,~r Cm.~r'dy The RCC aoreerl to fllnrl seventeen (17') necessary,
~rirlilinnal pnsili¢~r'~s I',~f has slip~lalerl Ihnl law enf,~rcer'nenl services lo Marco Island
R~'~rle~l I'~y II'~n $1,N53,1Nfl shmdrl slap (Sen
The
lloard's
inaction
re,.'larrlin.r] Marco Island and the Marco Island l~llt'loe..I ilem rod~clion will affect all of Collier
Calmly (,See Altar. hment 7) The 13CC also reco.qnizos Ihat lhese funding issues involve
the flCC anti Ihe City Cntmcil and not the Sheriff (See Atlachments 9 & 14J. The Marco
!slanrl h~rt0el sil~mlinn places Ihe Sheriff in Ihe unacceplable and unlenable posilion ot' '
red, ming serviceJ~:ot cause the BCC did not exercise ils taxing authorily over
services in the General Fund, Marco Island wm~ld have been la×ed for law
m'ffnrcer'nent so. rvicns TILe.. Roar(I reftlsed Ibis nplinn
The Roard nf Cot~nly Cnmmissinners has had, in addition, several opportunilies and
nplinns available tn resolve, lhis binding isstm, inr:h,ling:
1
AIIncalino "excess revent~es" idenlified at the end of the 1998 fiscal year.
(Seen Attachments 9. 11 and 1,1 as idenlified at lite Septemher 23, 1998. final
tu~d,.'Tnt hnarin.q and thrnu.oh corrnsponrlenne from the Sheriff.)
,qy t~rl.rlnl pnlir'.y, lhe. Rnarrl nf Cntmly Cnmmissinners could have
nl~l',rnprinlerl flmrls nnd negnlialerl wilh the City nf Marco Island for
rqlml~ IISfUIII;I*il II~rn~ i.rjh a nnrllr~]cll iai a(lreemerll
f'l~;: [1nard n[ Cn~ ,'~ly Cnr'nn'Ussinners cm Hrl have appropriated a combination
nf rn,.,er'u~es rer:eive..d sir'me Ihe September 23, 1998 hearings, i.e, the
~heriff's interest enrninos in e~ce..ss n[ h~lrl.r]el, Ihe Clerk of Ihe Co,iris' fees
ir~ n:.:c,h!;s nf ht irlOel' and pend,n.q FFMA (Ih~rricnr~n Ger')rgos) reimhursemenl
i'~u~¢t:; (.qon Allachme, nls 11 and
hlnnn nf Illn:;e nvnilnlfin nplinns ,.'.,ns e×nrciserl by ['ICC
Tl'm Rnnrrl nf f~n~ Ir'dy C. nmmissinners Innk no aclinn In resolve lhe revem~e issue
v.qlh lhn ~ily N[ M,nr~n Island and inslenrl chose In rerh~ce the Sheriff's budget
;~pprnprintinn '[l~r; rlnmsinn ,,vNs ~rhilrnry and caprion~s in view nf Ihe reco0nilinn thal
~1~,: fl~m¢hnO,.vas nrmnsr;nry for Nheriff's serviceln Marco Island. Tl~e BOO allempledto
,me It~r~ ,t/ilhrlravzM nj Sherilf's servmrm Ihrnt:oh a h~rlonl rerl~lclinn In force the City of
Marco Island In s~tmfil and pay an nmmml nnl Inxed hy Ihn ROC. The end resull ef Ihis
I!nnnl rler. i~;inn is tho1 lbo $1,8fi3, lO0 rerh~cli,lrl for Marco Islnnrl required semites forces
lt~n ,ql~r:rdf in rnrhmn r'.n~nly wide resm~rcn nllncnlinn, specifically sevenleen (17/ new
p(mdlnns, iN artier ~n cover lhe funding shorlfall.
The Bnarr, nf Coun,y Commissioners agreed until ,he final budget hearing on
~``~Z~ep~emher23~1~R~n~und~heSherifFsbud~etinfLd~incit.din~heCi~y~fMarc~'s~and
,~snrvices and seventeen (17) expanded positions in recognition of an ever growing
lhn ~narrl flint Ihe Ghnrifrs Office will he Jmderslafferl hundr~d~lwonty:four
hy.Dne
c~rtiflml~lm.. ~nf~rnm,]en,~ ~,,ic~rs in 1000. This c~lc,,l~,ion is b,sed ,.,pon the
:d,l~ly. lhecnn.,,,ltlnnlssllrveyedcnmparahlelawenfnrcementagencies. Oflheeiohl(8)
ref;pnnrhnO no,.nc ns. Ih(~ Sheriff's Office calls for service per officer exceeded the average
~r,~,,,v.,mklnacli~y 167%. The 109~ prnjeclertwnrklnRdof 186 cases per invesligator is
higher lt~an lhe average wnrldnad in lhe s~ffvey.
The RCC appears In recognize lbo need for addilir~nnl law enforcemenl officers
rifler hnvino approved sevenleen (17) ne,../posilinns Reducing Ihe Sheriff's Office b~Jdget
I%, .'T.I.NG3.1NN far hu'~rlinonf I'vlarnn Island rtepidios seems inconsislenl wilh Ibis
Al Ilia final lX4filc I'mnlino, Ihn Rnnrrt nf Cnl~nly Cnrr~n~issinnt';rs refused In fllnd
:!. 1 .RC~3, I~R far I~v., nnfnrcnmnnl pnlrnl smvlcns In Ihe CIly nf Marco Island becm~se no
,~(Irt~emnnl l/nfl h,~r:n rnnr:l~n(I I~nlv,,nnn ll~n R(~C NNrl Iht! Cily nf r, Amnn Island regarding law
The City of Marco Island does nol have law enforcemenl capabilities olher Ihan
lhnse prnvided by the Sheriff. Therefore, the Board'srefl~salln flsnd law enforcement
.services for Ihe City of Marco island jeopardizes Ihe safety and well heinO nf Marco Island
residenls and visilors. Fs~nrls in Ihe amount of $1,053,100 sho:dd he appropriated in Ihe
Sho. riff's h~dOe. I; Cm~nly revenue sources are nol Ihe respnnsihilily of Ihe Sheriff
Finally, failt~re 1o appropriale reserves in the h~sct0el of the Sherifl, by lhe same
prc~visions .r)overnino Ihose approprialed in Ihe Cnt~nly I'~tlrloel is conlrary to Florida
,Slahde. Reserves nf $2,9P, 2,188 shm~ld he approprialerl in the Sherifl"s hud0el