Loading...
BCC Minutes 09/24/2015 B (Budget) BCC BUDGET MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24, 2015 September 24, 2015 TRANSCRIPT OF THE BUDGET MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, September 24, 2015 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: Tim Nance Donna Fiala (Absent) Tom Henning Georgia Hiller Penny Taylor ALSO PRESENT: Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Mark Isackson, Director of Corporate Financial Planning Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relation Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB) Airport Authority k. r atpwS0' r)1 \ AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 BUDGET SESSION September 24, 2015 5:05 PM Commissioner Tim Nance, District 5 —BCC Chair Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 —BCC Vice-Chair; CRA Chair (ABSENT) Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 — Community & Economic Dev. Chair Commissioner Tom Henning, District 3 — PSCC Vice-Chair Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 — TDC Chair; CRA Vice-Chair 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 PROCEEDING IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. Page 1 September 24,2015 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 DIVISION 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 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION. 1. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING— Collier County FY 2015-16 Budget A. Discussion of FY 2015-16 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. Resolution to Amend the Tentative Budgets E. 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. F. 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. G. 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. 2. Motion to Close the FY 2016 Budget Hearing 3. PowerPoint presentation given by Commissioner Henning regarding FY 2017 Budget Policy Guidance 4. Adjourn Page 2 September 24,2015 September 24, 2015 MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ladies and gentlemen, good evening. Welcome to the second public hearing of the Collier County Fiscal Year 2015-16 budget. At this time I would ask you to silence all cell phones and electronic devices so that we can have an orderly meeting, and please rise for the pledge. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) Item #1 MOTION ALLOWING COMMISSIONER FIALA TO PARTICIPATE VIA TELEPHONE — APPROVED CHAIRMAN NANCE: Our first order of business will be for the Board to consider the attendance of Commissioner Fiala via phone due to extraordinary circumstances if she wishes to call in and participate with us this evening. Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed? (No response.) Page 2 September 24, 2015 CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Commissioner Fiala may join us shortly at her opportunity. Mr. Ochs, would you like to begin carrying us through the agenda please, sir. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Item #1A DISCUSSION OF FY 2015-16 MILLAGE RATES AND INCREASES OVER THE ROLLED BACK MILLAGE RATES — DISCUSSED We'll move right through the agenda in order beginning with a discussion of the 2015-16 millage rates and increases over the rolled back millage rates. That's Item 1 A in your tab book, and Mr. Isackson will take you through that. MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Chairman, if I can, before -- let me just make some brief opening remarks so that I can comport with the TRIM statutes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, welcome to the final public budget hearing on the Collier County Government's Fiscal Year 2016 budget which begins October 1, 2015, and runs through September 30, 2016. This budget hearing must follow a specific format pursuant to truth and millage guidelines, and your agenda this evening contains a specific sequence of agenda items to be covered. Pursuant to Florida Statute Chapter 200, the required advertisement for this hearing was published in the Naples Daily News on Monday, September 21, 2015. This hearing date was also announced at the first public hearing on September 10, 2015, and was contained within Resolution 2015-147, approving the tentative millage Page 3 September 24, 2015 rates as the maximum millage rates passed by the Board on July 7, 2015. Agenda and speaker slips are available in the hallway. Anyone interested in addressing the Board regarding the county budget must complete a speaker slip. Mr. Troy Murray (sic) will collect those speaker slips. Following some introductory remarks regarding tax rates and changes to the tentative budget initially submitted to the Board on July 17, 2015, and subsequently amended at the first public budget hearing on September 10, 2015, there will be an opportunity, which is Agenda Item 1 C, for public comment, and speakers will be called by name. As County Manager Ochs indicated, the first substantive item to be discussed pursuant to state statute is a discussion of the millage rates in FY '16 and the increases over the rolled back millage rate. State law requires the first substantive issues to be discussed are, one, percentage increase in millage over the rolled back rate needed to fund the budget and, two, the reasons ad valorem tax revenues above the rolled back rate is calculated on the State's DR 420 forms are being increased. Rolled back rate is defined as that tax rate necessary to generate prior year tax revenues, and this tax rate is calculated not including taxable values associated with new construction, additions, deletions, and rehabilitative improvements. The board-adopted budget guidance for FY '16 included a millage neutral position -- the same tax rate as last year and, for that matter, since FY 2010 -- for the General Fund and Unincorporated Area General Fund, which together represents over 96 percent of the total aggregate taxes levied across all Collier County taxing authorities. Collier County's taxable value has increased over the past four fiscal years, and the increase for FY '16 is 8.61 percent and 8.83 percent within the General Fund and Unincorporated Area General Page 4 September 24, 2015 Fund respectively. Within an increasing taxable value environment, under millage neutral policy guidance, the rolled back rate will be lower than millage neutral. This event occurs in 2016. Collier County recorded its highest taxable value at FY 2008 at 82.5 billion. While taxable value has recovered nicely over the past four fiscal years, the tax base still has eroded some 12.4 billion since FY 2008. For six years, FY 2008 through 2013, the adopted millage rate was lower than the rolled back rate. Had the county levied the rolled back rate or higher millage rate as the adopted millage rate in Fiscal Years 2008 to 2013, an additional 89.7 million in ad valorem revenue could have been realized. Millage neutral rates in 2014 through 2016 under board-adopted budget guidance realizes an additional 30.5 million over the rolled back rate for the three-year period combined. As a pure factor of tax based loss since FY 2008, loss levy potential upon the current millage neutral rate is approximately 44 million. Likewise, during that same period since 2008, within the Unincorporated Area General Fund 7.3 million, in loss levy potential occurred by levying the adopted rate as opposed to the rolled back rate. Each year tax policy is visited by the sitting Board, and budget decisions are crafted around the enacted Board guidance. Referring to Exhibit 1 A, Page 1, millage rates for each Collier County taxing authority has been established pursuant to budget guidance. The roster of tax rates adopted by the Board on July 7, 2015, represents the maximum property tax rates that can be levied in Fiscal Year 2016. The cumulative aggregate rolled back rate for all Collier County taxing authorities exclusive of debt service totals 3.9074 per $1,000 of taxable value. The proposed aggregate tax rate for all Collier County taxing authorities exclusive of debt service totals 4.1501 per $1,000 of Page 5 September 24, 2015 taxable value. This represents an increase of 6.21 percent over the aggregate rolled back rate and by statute required a notice of proposed tax increase ad for TRIM purposes and not simple a budget summary ad. Commissioners, if there are no questions, I will proceed to 1 B, which is the discussion of the further amendments to the tentative budget. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Questions, Commissioners? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none. Item #1B DISCUSSION OF FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE TENTATIVE BUDGET MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Further amendments to the tentative budget approved on September 10, 2015, are contained within separate fund resolutions found under Agenda Item 1B, Pages 2 through 9. A summary of the changes is listed under Agenda Item 1B, Page 1. These changes encompass fund level adjustments covering public health and safety appropriations, other operating expense adjustments, as well as actions stemming from the board meeting of September 8th, and Board guidance from the first public budget hearing on September 10th. In total, gross budget changes from the September 10, 2015, tentative budget totaled $2,508,800. At a high level, these changes occurred in the following areas: Domestic Animal Services, the David Lawrence Center funding, the Sheriffs Orangetree substation project, close captioning ADA compliance electronic equipment, and the water/sewer revenue bond refunding. Page 6 September 24, 2015 Mr. Chairman, if there are no other comments from the Board on 1B, I would suggest you move to public comments and questions. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Questions, comments from commissioners? Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I would like to -- for the benefit of the public that is sitting in the audience today that had concerns about the air conditioning at the Humane Society, I just would like you-all to understand that what Mr. Isackson just read confirmed that the $100,000 necessary to repair the air conditioning and make sure that all buildings are properly cooled will be approved today and is in place. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just so you know. So if all of you wanted to come up and ask for it, you asked last time, and we heard you, and they are. And so say thank you to staff because they found money to get it done. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Ochs, it might also be appropriate, just for the public that can't see this document, if you would mention probably the two or three items that composed the two-and-a-half million dollars worth of changes, because I think they are all very worthy projects the public should recognize. You want to just mention those off Page -- 1B, Page 1? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir; I'd be happy to. Let's start first with an additional $230,800 to help support the David Lawrence Center in the contract that's a statutory requirement between the Board of County Commissioners and your local mental health provider. As the Board knows and the public may or may not know, for Page 7 September 24, 2015 many years we've participated in a program called the low-income program, which was a matching dollar program from the federal government. That funding was curtailed late this summer after we had had your original board workshops. We had planned for that again and, when we had discussions with David Lawrence, we felt it was important for the public health, safety, and welfare and the benefits that the David Lawrence Center provides to the county in many areas to fill that gap. And I'm meeting with Mr. Burgess next month to talk about other ways we can attack that going forward. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Very much needed. MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir. And that funding is coming from additional state shared revenues that came in above the forecast number. The next proposed change, as Commissioner Hiller just alluded to, we have $109,000 that we've dedicated to additional improvements into the air handling and ventilation systems at the DAS buildings, and we will continue to move forward on that very quickly to make those repairs as quickly as we can get them done. And as I've also mentioned to the Board members individually, we'll monitor that very closely. And if there's any need to augment that system with additional ventilation, we won't hesitate in coming back to the Board and making those recommendations. THE AUDIENCE: Thank you. MR. OCHS: You're welcome. We also, as was mentioned, have found a need to increase the capital budget that is dedicated to the completion of the Orangetree Sheriffs substation. The Sheriff, for many years, has been working out of a double-wide trailer while we worked with him through the recession to finish the plans and earmark the funds to complete that project. In the course of that, you-all know the tremendous growth that's Page 8 September 24, 2015 occurring in that Immokalee Road corridor and in and around Randall Boulevard where this facility will be located immediately adjacent to your existing EMS station. So we are suggesting not only to make it functional with respect to what the sheriff has requested now but, as importantly, to make sure that there's capacity for growth in that -- in that facility as we move forward. We've set aside $900,000 in a transfer to that capital project in FY '16. And, again, that money is revenue sharing and sales tax funding in FY '15 that's come in above forecast. So it's not money that's coming out of your reserve funds in any area. And then, finally, two other things. We mentioned the $100,000 that we've re-appropriated from another cost center to get at some of the ADA electronic equipment needs that we have. We'll finish the improvements in your television control room across the hall that will fully digitize our television capability and make it easier for us to add closed captioning as one of the ADA services on all of your public meetings that are broadcast throughout Collier County. And then, finally, as Commissioner -- excuse me -- as Mr. Isackson mentioned, there's a series of resolutions here that reflect the action that the Board took last Tuesday to finalize the refunding of some of your water and sewer bonds to take advantage of low interest rates. The bottom line is that reduces debt service by about $522,000 in FY '16. So those are the -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Good-news item. MR. OCHS: -- detail on the changes, sir. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you very much. Commissioner Taylor, then Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, that's fine. I wanted the County Manager to read that, so -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, thank you. Commissioner Hiller? Page 9 September 24, 2015 COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to mention a couple of things. The first is it's really outstanding that we're able to help David Lawrence again. They've been a great partner to the community. They're the agency that provides Baker beds when hospitals don't and no one else does, and that's extremely important. So, you know, maintaining adequate funding for them is very important. We go through these issues every year. Last year they were short changed 300,000, and we supplemented that. But they have also been outstanding partners, for example, with the Sheriffs Office and, in doing so, have brought in revenues to the county by way of grants. Last year we got the second largest social services grant in the state as a result of David Lawrence, and they were awarded $900,000 for a recidivism project that they were working on to help individuals from being re-incarcerated once they were ultimately released. So, outstanding work on the part of the county and David Lawrence in partnership. The substation is an absolute must. That's a project that's been, what, like 13 years in the making. And with the explosion of growth in your district, Commissioner Nance, and in eastern Collier, it is absolutely essential that we have that substation in place and at the level to deal with the growing population in that area. So I'm really delighted that we were able to find that funding to -- and, by the way, thank you to staff for actually doing the preliminary estimate of what that cost would be to build it correctly now so that we're going into this project knowing what's necessary and what the cost will be as opposed to down the road finding out, oh, we really need more, and we need to spend more. So good job on staff for, you know, catching that at the front end of that project. With respect to another issue which I brought up before, which is not part of this but is of concern to me, to the extent that we have not provided a CON to North Naples and to the extent that there is a high Page 10 September 24, 2015 probability that interlocal agreements are illegal and can't be entered into for ALS services, the question then becomes how will the county provide the ALS service if North Naples isn't able to, and if the other interlocal agreements with the other fire districts and cities are deemed to be invalid, how will ALS be provided to the county as a whole, and what potential budgetary impact will that have going forward? So I'm very, very concerned about that. I did have a question. We have -- one of the things that we talked about was -- or one of the things that we will be talking about is the approval of the budgets for the dependent districts. And we have two dependent fire districts right now. We have Ochopee and Isles of Capri, but Isles of Capri will be -- MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. We have a -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want to know because that's included here. But my understanding is that we're looking to move those into another fire district through a consolidation, a legislative consolidation process. MR. OCHS: You are absolutely correct. What the Board approved recently was essentially a two-year process. The first year is a management services agreement with the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue District. So you are still levying the same two mills that we will use to fund that management services agreement for FY '16 while they complete the merger process through the ballot in 2016, and then in 2017 we anticipate that that will be a merged department and you will no longer have this separate dependent district millage to deal with. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that will be true for Isles of Capri also -- I'm sorry -- Ochopee down the road; is that expected as well? MR. OCHS: Well, we don't know. The Board has asked us to continue to work with them and the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue Page 11 September 24, 2015 District. But as we sit here today, Ochopee is still your -- would be your remaining dependent district along with District 1. And, again, part of that service area through the contract with Greater Naples would be managed. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's for fire, for fire service? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so that's why they continue to be carried as dependent districts even though that consolidation process is underway? MR. OCHS: Right. Until the consolidation in Isles of Capri is formalized, they're still a dependent district and you need to -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: To do what we're doing. MR. OCHS: -- levy that at the assessment. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just wanted to clarify that because MR. OCHS: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I wasn't sure if anything was going to happen in the current year that would result in that going away, possibly, in two years. MR. OCHS: No, it would be FY '17. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. That was the first question I had with respect to that. The other question I had is with respect to -- hang on a second. Let me go back to that page. What is -- hold on a second. What is the -- what's Collier County Fire? I mean, I understand Isles of Capri and Ochopee Fire, but what is Collier County Fire? CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's the empty quarter, isn't it, sir? MR. OCHS: Yeah. Essentially, Collier County Fire District is the area that is unclaimed by any other dependent or independent district. So it's the remaining land sparsely occupied by structures, but still there's a levy that comes to the Board so that you can provide Page 12 September 24, 2015 service to that area, and historically how that's been done is through contracts to Ochopee, Isles of Capri, Greater Naples, and North Collier fire departments have each serviced a portion of that district. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not a -- it's about one half of the taxable value of Ochopee. So that relates to that leftover corridor, I guess, then. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nothing to do with EMS or anything like that? MR. OCHS: No. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, okay. I just wanted to clarify that to make sure my understanding was correct as we spoke further about these issues. Yeah, so thank you very much for making the changes that you did. I think all of the changes are what the public wants and needs. MR. OCHS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. If there are no other comments, we will move to public comment, Mr. Miller. Item #1C PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your first registered speaker is Brad Estes. He'll be followed by James Rich. MR. ESTES: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Brad Estes. I'm a volunteer with Volunteer Services for Animals. We're very appreciative of the consideration related to the ventilation system, especially when Mr. Ochs announces that they will continue to work on it until it meets standards and, you know, what those standards will be will be identified, but I appreciate that. That's important, because Page 13 September 24, 2015 our system there is very old. I do want to mention how appreciative also we are of the leadership at DAS. It started with Amanda Townsend in 2007. We started making substantial progress then and we've continued to. Darcy, under her leadership, we also continue to make continual progress regarding the outcome -- positive outcomes for animals. So we're -- and I think I express the views of the volunteers here as well. (Applause.) MR. ESTES: And let me just add that this extends down through the DAS staff, volunteer staff. They're engaged, they're committed, they're compassionate, and they work very hard under very adverse conditions at times, so thank you for your consideration. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is James Rich. He'll be followed by Marjorie Bloom. MR. RICH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. I will mimic what Brad said. I'm actually on the advisory board for Domestic Services. I was on six years ago for four years, retired for two years, and I've just come on again this year. And I also, too, want to thank you so much for approving the funding for something that is very much needed. And I, too -- one of the reasons I came back is because the new administration at the DAS has been just phenomenal, and they have made so many improvements since they've taken over, so I'm proud to be part of that organization again. So thank you again for everything. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: Your next speaker is Marjorie Bloom. She'll be followed by Dr. Joseph Doyle. MS. BLOOM: Thanks, Commissioners. I was going to pass and Page 14 September 24, 2015 give up my time, but I also just wanted to say thank you. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts and from the animals; thanks for listening to them. And I, too, want to commend the leadership at Domestic Animal Services. As Brad said, it started with the Amanda, but Darcy, when she stepped into the spot, has just gone leaps and bounds with it. And it's a great place to be. Thanks. And we invite you to come down. Thank you. Adopt, don't shop. MR. MILLER: Your final speaker today -- (Applause.) MR. MILLER: -- is Dr. Joseph Doyle, who has been ceded three additional minutes from Sandra Doyle. DR. DOYLE: Good evening, Commissioners. Dr. Joseph Doyle, Naples. I'm here, actually, on behalf of the entire budget just looking at the fact that a lot of these millage increases are higher than the rolled back rate, on average, 6 percent. And, you know, you have a lot of senior citizens in this county who got a 1.7 percent Consumer Price Index increase last year, and they're getting zero percent this year, all right. I'm also going to talk about Pelican Bay. But let's look at the larger population. They have to live within that zero percent that they're getting from Social Security this year. And I'm looking at a lot of these MSTBUs that are going up 6, 7 -- one is going up, I think, 15 percent, you know. These people have other things that are going up, too, like their medical costs, and we know that the CPI is funny money. Gasoline, luckily, has gone down, but food is going up. So when you're looking at your senior citizens and the basket of goods that they're going through with the CPI, they can't afford these millage increases. Page 15 September 24, 2015 All right. That being said, we, once again, object to the continued collection of the Pelican Bay Streetlighting Fund 778, which is -- which actually commenced in Fiscal Year 2012 as a 59 percent increase in the ad valorem millage at that year for the purposes of establishing the reserves for future construction of boulevard light fixtures in 2018, so that's three years from now, residential light fixtures in 2021 on the side streets, and boulevard polls in the year 2026. Now, the original plan was for a 2 percent growth rate. Those are the assumptions in 2012, and that was when Keith Dallas was the chairman and Mr. Levy was the budget subcommittee chairman. And over the last couple of years, we've gone beyond that 2 percent. In fact, the Pelican Bay Services Division Budget Subcommittee in February 2014 and March 2014, which was last year, admitted that the lighting fund has been accumulating monies faster than anticipated and that the millage should be reduced, but nobody did anything about it. No reductions occurred in Fiscal Year 2015 nor in this proposed Fiscal Year 2016 budget, rather there was a 3.5 percent increase from the rolled back rate last year, and now you're looking at a 6.86 percent increase from the rolled back rate for Fiscal Year 2016. And, again, the CPI went up 1.7 percent last year, and it's going up zero percent this year. Now, who pays for this? All right. You know, a lot of the -- when we look at a lot of the increases -- everyone's looking at something that may be a homesteaded property, but who's really paying for this? People that pay for this tax increase are people who have second homes with no homestead, people who live in rented homes, and your small businesses. And from what I understand, only about 40 percent of the properties in the county are homesteaded. So we're -- and if we're looking at bringing people into the county, businesses into the county, when people first move into the Page 16 September 24, 2015 county, they usually rent. So you're hitting the renters, you're hitting your small businesses, and you're hitting your people who are wealthy that have the second homes; either pre-retirees or retirees. So that's who's really paying this budget increase. So if we're looking at stimulating the economy, I think we really need to look seriously at these millage rates. We also further, specifically to Pelican Bay, take the philosophical position that those improvements that I've mentioned over the years through 2026 should be paid through an assessment of the residents who are living in Pelican Bay at that time. I don't know if my mother's going to be alive in 2026. She's a little old lady. She might, you know, but the thing is, is why should she be paying into a reserve right now for something that somebody else is going to get a future benefit? These funds also, in the current -- in current economic environment are at risk of being lost in the event of collapse of the banking system, which may happen, as we all know, and a much wider possible currency collapse, which could happen if the IMF does something by allowing the Chinese wan into the currency mix as early as this October. So these are very real probabilities. And we also know that the Dow is also in the midst of a correction. It's been dancing around the 16,000 mark the last two weeks, and the treasury had difficulty selling bonds at auction earlier this month and again today. So we're in the very precarious economic environment. And a lot of your retirees are depending on bond money, annuities, as also the stock market and obviously those are down, and we're having trouble with that. So, you know, we really need to look seriously at the budget. And I know, Commissioner Nance, you said quite a few times that we have a lot of deferred maintenance and this and that. I understand that. Page 17 September 24, 2015 But I think that maybe these sub-MSTBU budgets really need to be scrutinized as to what these committees are doing, because these advisory boards, some of these advisory boards, are dominated by free-spending liberals, and they may not be as conservative as you. And we are dependent on you, however, to scrutinize their recommendations. So, you know, with that being said, I think that, you know, this Republican-majority BCC needs to adhere to conservative principles finding the best value for the taxpayers and to reduce these non-ad valorem assessments as well as the ad valorem millage rates that we're discussing tonight for Pelican Bay as well as the other MSTBUs. Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, thank you. You know, I was surprised last week. I think it was last week. I received -- well, I think we all received an email, a letter of resignation from a member of the Pelican Bay Services District for exactly what you have been saying over the last two months, exact same thing. So it was reported that the majority of PBSD and residents are unhappy with the increase. All I can say is, you know, out of respect of the commissioner of the district -- but I do agree with your comments about these special MSTU advisory boards. The buck stops here with the Board of Commissioners. And over and over again I've heard from several, including people up here, well, these are the citizens' money. Well, there's mostly five people on these advisory boards making that decision for a mass majority of people, and it does need to be scrutinized. So thank you for your comments. DR. DOYLE: Thank you. MR. MILLER: That was your final speaker, sir. Sorry. Item #1D Page 18 September 24, 2015 RESOLUTION 2015-198: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE TENTATIVE BUDGETS — ADOPTED MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Chairman, if there is no other discussion on 1C, I would suggest moving to 1D, which is a resolution to amend the tentative budgets which were talked about under our Item 1B on your agenda. And the action and the motion would include all the resolutions contained under 1B, Pages 2 to 9, and the appropriate motion is to approve the resolution amending the tentative budgets. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So moved. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There is a motion and a second to approve the resolution to amend the tentative budgets. Is there any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Approval is unanimous. Item #1E PUBLIC READING OF THE TAXING AUTHORITY LEVYING MILLAGE, THE NAME OF THE TAXING AUTHORITY, THE Page 19 September 24, 2015 ROLLED-BACK RATE, PERCENTAGE INCREASE, AND THE MILLAGE RATE TO BE LEVIED — READ INTO THE RECORD BY MARK ISACKSON MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Chairman, Item 1 E is -- unfortunately, you have to hear me read all of the millage rates into the record, so without further delay, I'll simply begin. The General Fund, Fund 001, the rolled back millage rate, 3.3529; the proposed millage rate, 3.5645. That's a percent change from the rolled back rate of 6.31 percent. Water Pollution Control, Fund 114, rolled back millage rate, .0275; the proposed millage rate, .0293. Percent change from the rolled back rate, 6.55 percent. The Unincorporated Area General Fund, that's Fund 111, rolled back millage rate, .6759; the proposed millage rate, .7161. That's a percent change from the rolled back rate of 5.95 percent. Golden Gate Community Center, that's Fund 130, rolled back millage rate, .1756; proposed millage rate, .1862. That's a percent change from the rolled back rate of 6.04 percent. Victoria Park Drainage, Fund 134, rolled back millage rate, .0405; proposed millage rate, .0405. Percent change from the rolled back rate is zero. Naples Park Drainage, Fund 139, rolled back millage rate, .0073; the proposed millage rate, .0073. That's no change from the rolled back rate. The Vanderbilt Beach MSTU, Fund 143, the rolled back millage rate, .4679; the proposed millage rate, .5000. Percent change from the rolled back rate, 6.86 percent. The Isles of Capri, Fund 144, the rolled back millage rate, 2.1240; proposed millage rate, 2.0000. Percent change from the rolled back rate, minus 5.84 percent. Page 20 September 24, 2015 The Fiddler's Creek MSTU, 145, rolled back millage rate, 0.0000; proposed millage rate, 1.5000. No divisor from the rolled back rate. The Ochopee Fire Control, Fund 146, the rolled back millage rate, 3.8903; the proposed millage rate, 4.5000. Percent change from the rolled back rate, 15.67 percent. Collier County Fire, Fund 148, the rolled back millage rate, 1.9715; proposed millage rate, 2.0000. Percent change from the rolled back rate, 1.45 percent. The Goodland/Horr's Island Fire MSTU, Fund 149, rolled back millage rate, 1.2824; proposed millage rate, 1.2760. Percent change from the rolled back rate, .50 percent. The Sabal Palm Road MSTU, Fund 151, rolled back millage rate, .1020; proposed millage rate, .1000. Percent change from the rolled back rate, minus 1.96 percent. The Golden Gate Parkway Beautification MSTU, Fund 153, the rolled back millage rate, .4063; proposed millage rate, .4063. There is no change from the rolled back rate. The Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU, Fund 152, rolled back millage rate, 1.8665; proposed millage rate, 2.0000. Percent change from the rolled back rate is 7.15 percent. The Hawksridge Stormwater Pumping MSTU, Fund 154, the rolled back millage rate, .0435; proposed millage rate, .0435. No change from the rolled back rate. The Radio Road Beautification MSTU, Fund 158, the rolled back millage rate, .2911; the proposed millage rate, .2911. No change from the rolled back rate. Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU, Fund 159, the rolled back millage rate, 1.0131; the proposed millage rate, 1.1940. Percent change from the rolled back rate is 17.86 percent. The Immokalee Beautification MSTU, Fund 162, the rolled back millage rate, .8851; the proposed millage rate is 1.0000. The percent Page 21 September 24, 2015 change from the rolled back rate is 12.98 percent. The Bayshore/Avalon Beautification MSTU, Fund 163, the rolled back millage rate, 2.2618; the proposed millage rate, 2.3604. Percent change from the rolled back rate is 4.36 percent. The Haldeman Creek Dredging MSTU, it's Fund 164, the rolled back millage rate, .6682; the proposed millage rate, .7348. Percent change from the rolled back rate is 9.97 percent. The Rock Road MSTU, Fund 165, the rolled back millage rate is 2.8354; the proposed millage rate, 3.0000. The percent change from the rolled back rate is 5.81 percent. The Radio Road East MSTU, Fund 166, the rolled back millage rate, .2236; the proposed millage rate, .3311. Percent change from the rolled back rate is 48.08 percent. The Forest Lakes Debt Service, Fund 259, rolled back millage rate, 2.6637; the proposed millage, 2.8060. Percent change from the rolled back rate, 5.34 percent. Radio Road East Debt Service, Fund 266, rolled back millage rate, .2242; the proposed millage rate, .1689. Percent change from the rolled back rate, minus 24.67 percent. Collier County Lighting, Fund 760, rolled back millage rate, .1880; the proposed millage rate, .1880. There is no change from the rolled back rate. The Pelican Bay MSTBU, Fund 778, the rolled back millage rate, .0802; the proposed millage rate, .0857. That is a percent change from the rolled back rate of 6.86 percent. Finally, Commissioners, your aggregate millage rate, the aggregate rolled back rate, 3.9074; the aggregate proposed millage rate, 4.1501, and the aggregate percent change from the rolled back is 6.21 percent. Item #1F Page 22 September 24, 2015 RESOLUTION 2015-199: A RESOLUTION TO SET THE 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 — ADOPTED MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEPENDENT DISTRICT MILLAGE RATES — APPROVED COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve the resolution adopting millage rates to be levied for Fiscal Years 2015 through 2016. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second. I see a notation here that we need a separate motion for dependent districts and then a follow-up motion for the remaining ones; is that correct? MR. ISACKSON: That's correct, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for pointing that out. CHAIRMAN NANCE: So, Commissioner, you're -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's for dependent districts. CHAIRMAN NANCE: For the dependent districts. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? (No response.) Page 23 September 24, 2015 CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. The dependent district millage rates resolution is adopted unanimously. MOTION TO APPROVE THE REMAINING MILLAGE RATES — APPROVED COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve the remainder for the Fiscal Year 2015-2016. CHAIRMAN NANCE: I will second that. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. That resolution is, likewise, adopted unanimously. Item #1G RESOLUTION 2015-200: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING 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 — ADOPTED Page 24 September 24, 2015 MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Chairman, Item 1G is a resolution to adopt the final budget and, once again, a separate motion is required for the dependent district budgets, and a separate motion is required for the remaining budget. MOTION APPROVING THE DEPENDENT DISTRICT BUDGET — APPROVED COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to approve the final budget for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 for the dependent districts. CHAIRMAN NANCE: I will second that. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. That resolution is so adopted unanimously. MOTION APPROVING THE REMAINING BUDGETS — APPROVED COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve the remainder adopting the Fiscal Year 2015-2016 final budget. Page 25 September 24, 2015 CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, Commissioner Henning. I will second that. Discussion on that motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Opposed. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller -- the motion passes 4-1 with Commissioner Hiller in dissent. MR. OCHS: Three-one, sir? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Three-one. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, excuse me. Three-one with Commissioner Hiller in dissent. MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Chairman, unless there are other discussion items, that would conclude my comments, and then a motion would be required for adjournment of the FY 2016 public budget hearing. Item #2 MOTION TO CLOSE THE FY2016 BUDGET HEARING — APPROVED CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is there a motion to close the hearing? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've got one more item. CHAIRMAN NANCE: One more item. Commissioner Henning? Page 26 September 24, 2015 MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We could still do that on the agenda. We just wanted to close the public hearing first. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What about if there's a motion subsequent to my presentation? Are we still -- we can't do that? MR. ISACKSON: Well, you could -- MR. OCHS: Affecting the '16 budget, sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, '16-'17. MR. ISACKSON: Well, this is just FY '16, sir. I thought we were just dealing with the '17 budget, so that's why the suggestion was to close the hearing for '16. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But the hearing is still going on? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. My apologies. So moved. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second to close the hearings on the Fiscal Year '15-'16 budget. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: That is approved 4-0. Commissioner Henning? Item #3 Page 27 September 24, 2015 POWERPOINT PRESENTATION GIVEN BY COMMISSIONER HENNING REGARDING FY 2017 BUDGET POLICY GUIDANCE — PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I'm going to hand out my presentation. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, at the budget hearing -- no, I'm sorry. At the budget workshop of June your now Deputy County Manager came to you and gave you an overview on the shortfalls coming up for capital improvements for roads, stormwater and such, and I remember his comment was, we need to find a new funding source. You authorized me to work with the County Manager to come up with some alternatives. Press the arrows or enter? Oh, there we go. Wrong arrow. Okay. Just an overview of where the money goes, general operations, expenses since 2008 to this year that we're working with. It's down 10 percent. General Fund transfers into debt service, due to the great work that Mark Isackson has done in paying down debt, that is down. That's a good thing. General Fund capital transfers into -- from the General Fund is down 43 percent since 2008. Okay. This is not understood by all, but we provide to all the Constitutional Officers their building, equipment replacement. That comes out of the County Manager's budget. And we also provide the maintenance on those buildings. We've spent millions of dollars replacing the air conditioning on the jails and then again the voting machine replacement, Sheriffs records management, the renovations to Floor 5 and 7 of Building F for the Clerk of the Court. So I just want to capsulize what the comparable is from 2008, Page 28 September 24, 2015 which is the peak of collection of revenue from property taxes. And then the recession came. So where we are from 2008 to today, the transfer from the General Fund to the Sheriffs Department is pretty much equal. Same with the Clerk of Court; a little bit up. Now, the Supervisor of Elections, her budget, depending on the year, can be down or it can be a little bit up. She has to gear up for the elections. The County Manager's operations, or his budget that provides his operations and capital, is down 19 percent or approximately $42 million. Now, I don't think I'd be standing here if Leo had $42 million to spend for roads, stormwater, and alike, and I don't think that we would be having a workshop next month for landscaping that Commissioner Fiala's pushing. And, Commissioner Nance, I don't think there would be an issue with limerock roads. If we had this money reoccurring, I think everything can be addressed; however, we don't. So Nick scrubbed some numbers for me. These are very conservative numbers of the unfunded needs. In other words, there's a shortfall of funding for roads, stormwater, our bridges, and then the unfunded maintenance of the things that we have deferred over the last few years during the recession. So that's the thing that we need to tackle. So I want to provide to you -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, I think you should, for the listening public,just so they understand the magnitude of the new capital needs examples, what you've come up with -- and I think these are some staggering numbers. Stormwater capital, a shortfall of almost $11 million; roads, shortfall in capital for Fiscal Year '16 through '20, $130 million; and bridges -- and everybody knows that our bridges are failing -- Page 29 September 24, 2015 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- in addition to bridges that we need. So, I mean, there's 15 million there, and 40 -- over $41 million in unfunded capital maintenance. These are very daunting, daunting numbers. COMMISSIONER HENNING: For the next five years. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, for the next five. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So where do we go from here? Do we increase taxes? That's not what I'm recommending; however, if you read some articles that, you would think, without reading it close, that I was recommending a tax increase. I'm not recommending a tax increase. I'm recommending that we reformat our budget, work within our means. Or we could do nothing. So let me go into what I'm proposing. Well, just say we're using today -- today's budget. If we committed $5 million to replace the assets, maintenance, and replace the program shortfalls across the County Manager's agency beyond the current planning commitment of $8 million, it would tackle quite a bit. You start working on that $32 million. There's another commitment of short-term credit for new capital needs for re-appropriating existing capital transfers of the dollar, then -- and Mark was telling me if we take approximately 6 to $7 million of reoccurring revenue, get a short-term bond for -- Mark, you said 60 to $70 million, if I'm correct? MR. ISACKSON: Yeah. It's a little bit more complicated than that, but I'd be happy to elaborate after you're done, sir, if you'd like. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, if there's any questions on that. So what I'm proposing is, we have a percentage of growth every year. We have new residents move in here. Our staff monitors that and provides that. It's through the BEBR report. And if we take CPI, Page 30 September 24, 2015 which this year was 1.7 million -- or 1.7 percent. So if you had this year this working budget that we're working on right now, you have an increase, a total increase of property taxes of 7 and a half percent, you have a growth population of 1.9 percent, and a CPI of 1.7. That's approximately 3.3 -- together, 3.3, and use the rest of it for capital, 4 percent for capital. And what I would propose -- I just want to show you the five-year -- or the five-year growth model and CPI. So the proposal would be to direct the County Manager and the constitutional officers that are dependent upon the General Fund or property taxes not to exceed CPI and the growth for the upcoming fiscal year and use the rest of it for your Capital Improvement Plan. Now, I can tell you that I have talked to the constitutional officers, the ones that are dependent upon the property taxes. The Clerk of Court has no problem with it, okay, whatsoever, what I'm proposing. The Supervisor of Elections is different. How she budgets is when she doesn't have an election year -- and this is historical -- that it's down, and when there is an election year, it's up. I've got to get my water. I think we need to keep that the same. The Sheriff-- I talked to Kevin Rambosk, and he said, I want to work with the Board. I know that there's capital shortfalls out there; however, I have shortfalls, too. Kevin has vehicles that -- well, the Sheriff, I should say. Kevin Rambosk, the Sheriff, has a vehicle he needs to be replaced, he has computers, and just a whole gamut of stuff that he is -- has a two- to five-year window to replace that, and I think that we can work with the Sheriff and still provide guidance to reformat our budgeting policy and tell the County Manager and the constitutional officers to adhere to growth, plus CPI and work with the Sheriff on his capital needs on the upcoming years. So that would be my recommendations and what I came up with. Page 31 September 24, 2015 So any questions? CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. Commissioner Henning, thank you for, you know, taking the time to think about this and to explore numbers and to contemplate solutions. I think, you know, since this is for Fiscal Year '17, and '16 is already done, I think we should, through the course of this year, have more discussions and see if, you know, this is the right approach or maybe this and some other approach as a hybrid approach, you know, given the different situations that the various constitutionals face, might be the way to go. So, I mean, I think -- you know, it's hard to come to any conclusion immediately in light of the fact that we just got this document and haven't had the opportunity to review it, talk to you, talk to staff. But I think we should definitely spend this next year exploring all the facts that you've presented. Like, for example, the $130 million in capital needs over the next five years, we should explore what's on that list. We should see, you know, are these really needs. And maybe the needs are greater. You know, maybe we want to substitute one project for another that might result in savings. So I think this is a great starting point. I think you're absolutely right that we need to, as a board, consider this, and we need to start working on it right now. So thank you for doing it, and I think going forward it's something, you know, that we have to study. It's just impossible to make a decision right here, right now in light of all the variables of which, based on this document, there are a ton. So I think each has to be explored, discussed, and then reviewed for solutions, but thank you. Page 32 September 24, 2015 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think that the numbers that you saw in my presentation came from the AUIR -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would think so. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that the Board has already adopted. So they're not new numbers. And do they change? COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's what we need to -- and that's what we need to evaluate. We need to evaluate very carefully what our level-of-service standards are. And I saw that you cited the AUIR, and I understood that. But we have to evaluate more closely what our level-of-service standards are and what capital projects we really want to move forward in light of what we see as the growth. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, like I said, there's one option, is do nothing. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, the option to do nothing is not an option. The option that I'm presenting is that we take your document and we work on it throughout the year and come up with a solution so by the time it comes to budget guidance for the next fiscal year we have a presentation that makes sense. And what we've been doing in the past may not make sense going forward, and I think you raise a very good issue, you know, that -- you raise the question of how we should be preparing budget guidance and on what basis. I think it's a valuable exercise, and I think we should have -- you know, when we do the AUIR, I think we should have this document in hand at the same time and start applying, you know, some of the considerations, and we should talk to the various constitutionals and see -- you know, the Sheriff I can see, with the shortfalls they have had and with the increase in population and them being, like, 100 percent service driven, putting a cap on their operating, I think it will be very difficult. I can see that as a problem. And the variability of the Supervisor of Election, that also is Page 33 September 24, 2015 manageable but has to be adjusted from year to year, and that can be done. Like, we can have a cap for the supervisor that's a variable cap. That one year -- it shouldn't necessarily -- and that's one thing -- you know, you make a very good point. I have always been concerned about us applying the same standard to everybody, because there are certain -- for example, within our own departments, that don't need to increase at all in a particular year, and maybe the guidance for some divisions might be more and some divisions might be less. And we constantly apply this blanket rate to set the budget guidance. And while that's simple, I think it's simplistic and doesn't necessarily do the right thing for our budget. It can actually incentivize a division -- or I shouldn't say a division, but a department that doesn't need to increase their budget to increase their budget, because they have the opportunity to because that's the guidance. So that's where we can achieve savings, and then coupled with, you know, a potential cap where a cap can be applied, like you're suggesting, which is a good idea, I see the potential for savings and a reallocation to funds of where there are shortfalls that you've identified. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner Hiller, your budget director already does what you're suggesting, so, and -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: He's a superstar. I had no idea you were so good. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Any other questions? COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, I did. I knew you were good from the day I met you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor, then I'll make a few comments. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I really like what you did, Commissioner Henning. I'm not -- I'm not prepared at this point to move on it, but I can tell you this is going to be my loadstar. This is Page 34 September 24, 2015 going to be the guide here. And I, too, want to do a little more research, but I really, really like what you did, and you're to be commended on this. Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. Commissioner Henning, I think this is -- it will provide us a very good index system to use as a valuable comparison tool to see what we're doing with our budget. I will make a couple remarks about that, however. Our population growth -- and everybody realizes, I believe, if you scrutinize some of these discussions -- is very heavily dependent on ad valorem tax dollars based on primarily residential properties. People that have evaluated how services are provided tell us that for every dollar a resident pays in property taxes they typically receive over a dollar in services, and that is because in a fully balanced community, commercial and industrial and business taxes supplement residential. Unfortunately, in Collier County, we are on the opposite end of a very bad balance in that we have almost 85 percent of our revenues in ad valorem property tax dollars that are residential, so we need to look at that. So I think this is a wonderful tool. I believe we need to start taking some of our funding and dedicating it to capital infrastructure replacement. I would like to go back and look at some of the things that we've seen in the last couple years. We had some thoughtful presentations which did a forward-looking evaluation on some of our capital infrastructure that classified it, for example, as red, yellow, and green in terms of its need going forward. We've talked amongst ourselves for several years, and prior to my serving on this board, in that we needed to really get a grip on a capital asset management plan. And I'm uncertain we've completed to the level that we need to have. Page 35 September 24, 2015 COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree. CHAIRMAN NANCE: So I commend you for your initiative on it, I'm certainly supportive of it, and I'll look forward to what we can put together. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Mr. Chairman, I was hoping that we can pass a motion or a majority give guidance to the County Manager to format this type and bring back -- next year bring back the budget guidance using growth plus CPI. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think it's premature to do that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I know you do, Commissioner Hiller. There's no question about it. CHAIRMAN NANCE: I believe we -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, let me finish. I don't see that happening tonight, and I'm fine with that. 2016-2017 I'm not going to be here, okay. I'm trying to deliver something, an alternative to you, the County Manager, and the citizens to work on to fulfill that need. Now, if we base upon -- our service upon outcomes, I think we've done a great job on public safety. We hear the Sheriff over and over and over again that crime is down. I think the last time he said it's down -- crime is down to the 1970s or something like that, and that's great; however, what's going to happen when the police car can't get to a home for a call because the traffic is too much? You know, tell me what you want me to do. Do you want me to bring this back on a regular agenda, or you just want to -- we can just not do anything? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, no, we're going to do something. I know what you want; you want a framework. You want to know that this isn't going to sit on a shelf somewhere and then we're done with it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm just saying that Mark Page 36 September 24, 2015 Isackson is going to come back the beginning of the year with budget guidance, and right he's going to come back exactly what we've been doing over and over again. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What if-- and I'm asking, County Manager. What if we heard -- it seems like it's point, counterpoint, and I don't mean to put it like that. But what if we heard from the constitutional officers and from the staff, from you, the leadership, whether this is a doable -- what the cost is. You know, how does this change? Educate this commissioner on this. And I know -- I know your angst because you were here. You were here in 2000. You know what this county went through, and you know how much money had to be borrowed just to come back and keep up with the growth. And so I empathize with you totally, and I'm in your corner on this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I put it on a regular agenda, the constitutional officers have every right to comment on it, or you can ask them yourselves. You can ask your county manager what he thinks of it. I think that's what you said right then is, what do you think? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. Just to educate us on -- this commissioner on this side if we did this. MR. OCHS: No problem from me. I'm happy to do it. CHAIRMAN NANCE: I don't think -- I personally don't see any reason why we can't certainly come up with an index against from which to work. I think that's very, very easy to do. I would like staff to bring something back or, Commissioner Henning, if you would like to put it on a regular agenda. I would like to do it. I would like, however -- I think it would be very appropriate to allow Commissioner Fiala to weigh in on this since she's not here, and I know she hasn't been here for a couple of board meetings, but I would like to move this forward, but I would like to give everybody a Page 37 September 24, 2015 chance to chime in on this and then have a chance to really have a good meeting where everybody's in attendance and everybody can comment. Because I think we're -- I think we're going to have to do something substantial. In fact, I think that it's time we bundle some other initiatives that we've talked about to go to follow up this indexing. This indexing is fine, but we also have to have a way to move forward with authority on a number of other items that we've talked about, and I think it's time to do it. You know, we talked about capital equipment replacement. We talked about evaluating leasing versus buying and replacing. I didn't see anything come back with anything affirmative on that. We've talked about a lot of ways where we could change our budget flow on capital asset management, and it's time we come back with something. So if you're looking for a nod, Commissioner, you're getting a nod from me. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me just -- what I hear is, let me just work with the County Manager, bring something back on the agenda on the County Manager's side and, again, constitutional officers have -- they have the ability to talk right now. I mean, you have the Sheriffs budgeting team over here. That's fine. We'll bring it back. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah. Commissioner Hiller? I'm in favor of moving forward with something. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think, you know, you've presented one option. There are alternatives, and no other alternatives have been presented. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are those, Commissioner? Do nothing? COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, sir. And I find that your attitude and your attempt to pressure this and force this upon us when Page 38 September 24, 2015 you didn't even have the courtesy of giving this as a backup ahead of this meeting to allow us to review it, potentially, with the constitutionals or staff ahead of this discussion -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, again, I told you I went to the Constitutional Officers. COMMISSIONER HILLER: So excuse me. Let me go ahead and continue speaking. Commissioner Nance, the points you made are exactly correct. You can't begin to make a decision how to set budget guidance till you know the facts of what you are looking to fund. And so the threshold question is, we need that analysis that tells us what our actual needs will be for repairs and maintenance. We need a careful review of the AUIR to make a determination of how we need to adjust our level of service in light of the population growth that we're expected to face and in light of what the expected revenue streams are. At that point, once we have those facts, then we need to sit down and evaluate what is the proper guidance to get to where we need to go. And to use one methodology over another without knowing what exactly we are going to -- I understand what you believe the issues are, but I haven't confirmed it. I haven't verified that as of now and as of the information we expect to receive from the County Manager's Office from the fixed asset, the -- you know, the management software. MR. OCHS: Asset Management. COMMISSIONER HILLER: The Asset Management software, which we haven't received in full. That hasn't been completed. It hasn't been completed for Growth Management, and it's still a work in process (sic) for Utilities. So we need the facts in order to properly budget, and the time is now. And I agree with Commissioner Taylor. You're right. In the past that was not done, and then when there was rapid growth, there Page 39 September 24, 2015 were real problems. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: He lived that. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely. Well, we all lived it. We were all here at that time. We all experienced it. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But he was a lawmaker. He was on this commission. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, he was -- absolutely. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: He saw this. COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. There's no question. You are absolutely right, which is why I'm commending you on your observation. You are correct. So you're right, we do have to do something. But what we have to do has to be studied. I mean, I'd like to consider talking to Mark Isackson. There -- you know, budgeting for government is different than budgeting for private entities; very different. I've taken a number of classes on budgeting as well as -- governmental budgeting as well as governmental capital budgeting. So to come here and present a study to us that we haven't had the ability to evaluate to do our own independent research, to have the opportunity to work with staff, to have the opportunity to work with the constitutionals, I think it would be rash on our part to come to a conclusion tonight. Commissioner Henning, you can put anything you want on the agenda, and you don't need our permission, because every commissioner can put whatever they like on the agenda, as can any constitutional, as can the County Manager, for that matter. So if you want to put it on the agenda, that's fine. But, again, we have to have the opportunity to start with the proper facts, and we don't have all that information as of right now. So to come to the conclusion this is the right methodology under the circumstances, I think, would be impossible to conclude. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just talked to the County Page 40 September 24, 2015 Manager. He's going to put it on a future agenda. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, he's going to put the numbers on there, you know, the number that I got from staff. So if his numbers are different than mine, I'd be surprised, Commissioner Hiller. COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not the issue. The issue is once we start looking at these numbers, whether those are the numbers we want to live with -- CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- okay? And that's why we need the final asset management studies completed. We need to re-evaluate the AUIR in light of the projected population growth and projected revenue streams and, you know, the taxable -- our tax base, and make a decision accordingly. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we do the AUIR every year. COMMISSIONER HILLER: We do. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, thank you for bringing it forward. COMMISSIONER HENNING: My pleasure. CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think it is stimulating. I think it's time. I agree with you 100 percent. I think you have the nods here. Let's begin this conversation. We can get into it to the extent we need to, but I think it's thought provoking, timely, and I support it 100 percent. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I just hate to see you go down the road of tax increase and fail on it. CHAIRMAN NANCE: You're preaching to the converted if you're talking to me. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN NANCE: So nods? Nods? We'll start the Page 41 September 24, 2015 conversation. Let's have a good one. COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree. MR. OCHS: Sir, just so the Commission knows, as you do every year, you're scheduled to hear your Annual Update and Inventory Report at your November meeting, and a component of that will include the update to your asset management system and program. And I think after you hear that, you know, then we can bring back some ideas and concepts for you-all to consider. We do want to thank Commissioner Henning for his time at the staff level. We've enjoyed working with him on this, and I think he's got a very workable concept. We've certainly applied it on the board side for several years. We didn't have a hard formula, but as you know we've capped our operating expenses and then applied the delta from taxable value increases to our backlog capital. He's taken it to the next level and helped us look not only at how we attack the backlog but how we address the future capital needs from growth-related capital. So we appreciate it, Commissioner, and thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, likewise, and the Constitutional Officers, understanding their needs. It's -- it was a great exercise. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think it really is, Commissioner Henning. And you know what, our constitutional officers have had significant capital infrastructure needs in the last several years, millions and millions of dollars on things that, you know, you'd like some of those to be a little bit predictive and you'd like to try to get -- you know, get your head around what we're going to have over a period of time. I will tell you, since the Southwest Florida Regional Summit is coming up, that these sorts of strategies and thinking is going on in many other counties. Page 42 September 24, 2015 And I would ask, Mr. Ochs, I think we've got that coming up in October. I think it's going to be very timely, and I'm unaware if any of those such items or discussions are on that agenda. But if they are, we should bring those back to the Board and just let them know what others are thinking, because everybody's grappling with this dilemma. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. I see the end of the agenda unless, gentlemen, you have anything else for the benefit of the county. (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Motion and second to adjourn. Any comment? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN NANCE: We are in adjournment. Page 43 September 24, 2015 ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:20 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL re,ilattieee_ TIM NANCE, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK ktit Attest as to Chaff a 's „ nniv. These minutes approved by the Board on Mttirr l 3, tc , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 44